Defensive or offensive

Posted by: SANCHIN31

Defensive or offensive - 08/01/05 11:01 PM

Do you consider kata to be defensive or offensive? Everybody knows the quote 'in karate there is no first attack'. Does this mean you should let someone put their hands on you before reacting? I don't think so.
Thoughts?
Posted by: Christie

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/01/05 11:18 PM

I don't do Karate but our poomse follows a pretty steady pattern of block, counter attack,block, counter attack, some of the forms also simulate a "fight" against multiple attackers. So I think its both really.
Posted by: SANCHIN31

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/01/05 11:31 PM

Christie,
Sorry,but I'm going to have to completely disagree with your post.
Block then punch,well,I've addressed that several times in the forums.I don't do it or believe it and I think that's a watered down sport version of poor self defense that mma guys eat up.

Also fighting against multiple attackers.Who made that crap up? Does anyone really fight that way? In my opinion that's way off base and just plain wrong.In other words incorrect applications! Nobody has the superpowers it would take to fight multiple attackers that way.

To me many kata applications start defensive,but could be used preemptively. Starting defensive and then going offensive until your attacker is done.
Posted by: Kintama

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/02/05 01:25 AM

I always assume being surrounded by multiple attackers spaced at 45 degrees and equi-distant apart from each other...each one attacks sequentially with a single pre-disposed technique and all opponents are coordinated in a geometric symetrical pattern.

BWAHHAA...sorry couldn't keep a straight face.
seriously,
The punch-block block-punch whatever it was thing is taught in the beginning for things like mai, body positioning and just getting the general feel for it. It was designed for kids, but it does have value if the right things are pointed out during instruction. later, the interpretations will be different, more fluid and natural. The next question would be: why not just practice it this way from the beginning? given the right instructor, sure absolutely. The bigger the class (and/or younger), the harder it would be to teach...hence the reason why Japan added to the okinawan arts the notion of chopping the art into modules and spoon feeding the instruction. tack on the '-Do' give all the techniques nihongo names and the students rank and tada! now you have the Japanese art of Okinawan fighting. Many dojos kept this way as incorrectly believing it was 'traditional' to teach this way. some consciencly kept the way because they do in fact teach many kids.
Private instructors and surprizingly few commercial dojos nowadays tend to remove the Japanification out of the art and have you dig right into the meat of the system without screwing around with a tinfoil wrapper.

Then there are some Okinawan arts that have been innovated by Japanese but kept more of the science than the -Do.

The watered down part of karate is know as 'school-boy' karate. It's that part that mcdojos and bullshidojos like to promote because it makes their job easier. its also the part that the MMA/BJJ guys love to tease (with good basis) karate about.

Two ways to get thru the school-boy stuff...plow thru it and stick with it till you get into the traditional forms and gradually figure it out and don't look back...or...like I mentioned an instructor/dojo who has already stripped away the pretty wrapper.
but thats just my take on it so far. others might see it different and I may develop a new view in the future.
Posted by: naraebon

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/02/05 03:33 AM


Hi Sanchin,

I think this article on pre emptive striking was already posted elsewhere, I find it terrific, so here once more ..

http://www.ianabernethy.com/articles/article_2.asp

as well as this one, givine I.A.`s view on whether kata is offensive or defensive.

http://www.ianabernethy.com/articles/article_14.asp

Defensive because we avoid to fight. But if we have to ..



Nara Ebon



supporting you as you say "Nuts to cancer"
Posted by: shoshinkan

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/02/05 05:21 AM

In my mind kata is reactive to a threat, however preemptive striking i simply a reaction to a threat - be it verbal or whatever.

When you think of the opening move of say pinan shodan, it could easily be a simple backfist with guard (and set up of downward strike) to follow, or the reaction to a double grab for headbutt, or many many other things.
Posted by: kickcatcher

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/02/05 08:05 AM

The whole idea of teaching people via kata is offensive. Lol.

But seriously, kata is both offensive and defensive and neither. It is frankly whatever you want it to be within the limitations of the physical activity.

Outside karate (I assume this thread is equally about non-karate forms) the Hung Gar culture I’ve previously partaken in approaches forms as very loose seed-moves –inherently abstract from application. The applications showed little choreographic resemblance to the form. This approach contrasts greatly with mainstream attitudes to karate kata which contrive highly implausible self-defence/fighting situations to fit exactly the order, targets etc of the kata –in other words trying to fit reality to the kata rather than vice versa. Anyway, if you view each move in the form as abstract from the applications (rather than a literal story interpretation) then the resulting applications are free to be either defensive or offensive as the situation dictates…
Posted by: Kintama

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/02/05 08:41 AM

absolutely true. It might not become this until study after shodan, but it is there.
Posted by: shoshinkan

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/02/05 09:35 AM

single techniques taught are to simply understand principles, once you see the principle its then time to apply that to various attacks, and of course increase in varience of attack and intensity.

believe me kata is the base, its the application/training delivery that is commonly delivered that makes karate ineffectie live.
Posted by: Christie

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/02/05 01:34 PM

Quote:

I always assume being surrounded by multiple attackers spaced at 45 degrees and equi-distant apart from each other...each one attacks sequentially with a single pre-disposed technique and all opponents are coordinated in a geometric symetrical pattern.




Well of course!!! Haven't you ever watched movies. If you are heavily outnumbered in a fight involving martial arts, your opponents will wait patiently to attack you one by one by dancing around you in a threatening manner until you have defeated their predecessor.

I said what I've been taught, not whether or not I agreed with it. I don't see them as simulated fights because thats just silly and not probable.
Posted by: SANCHIN31

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/02/05 05:52 PM

Christie,
When I was doing TKD I was taught the same crude applications.Opponent would step in a long front stance and throw a reverse punch with the other hand chambered,defender would step forward and bloch the punch then counter.Terrible bunkai! The applications are there,but they have to be taught right.I would assume the instructor was holding back or truly didn't know them.
I covered some applications for blocks in the TKD forum.
Posted by: Christie

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/02/05 09:04 PM

I would go with that the instructor was holding them back. There is one instructor I have in Toronto who is absolutely amazing. His applications make sense, they aren't bogus.. but unfortunately I don't get taught by him as often as I would like. My usual instructor is Korean with an English vocabulary that definitely isn't complete. I'm sure he knows the applications but doesn't know the english to explain them. Amazing martial artist, but poor english.
Posted by: McSensei

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/03/05 05:39 PM

Karate is a form of civilian self defence. Therefore, kata is defensive.
Here is a quote that I like, "Attack is the secret of defence: defence is the planning of an attack." Sun Tzu
Never let anyone get their hands on you first. Learn to read the signals and fire first.
Now if I could only take a bit of my own advice.

Actually I like that quote so much I'm going to have it as my signature
Posted by: Gavin

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/04/05 05:03 AM

Quote:

"Attack is the secret of defence: defence is the planning of an attack." Sun Tzu





Fantastic quote!
Posted by: Neko456

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/10/05 01:51 PM

Sounds like words to live by. No wonder General Sun Tzu writtings are so well thought of, they make sense even today.
Posted by: McSensei

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/10/05 09:24 PM

I hear many quotes nowadays that are attributed to old MA masters when really they are the words of General Sun Tzu.
Posted by: hedkikr

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/12/05 02:21 AM

3 Points:

1) Kata was never meant to be a choreographed fight against multiple opponents. I've said this 264 times (a million seemed to be exagerating) . The idea is to pull individual pieces away from the kata & then train, train, train. If you do that, people may think you're doing Krav Maga.

2) A good Offence is the best Defense. (nuff said)

3) We need to get over the notion that a pre-emptive strike is an attack. Following our consciences to be the "honorable" ones, we can end up on the knuckle side of a right hook. I like to think in terms of 3 basic defensive maneuvers:
a) Go-no-sen: Block & attack
b) Sen-no-sen: Block w/ attack
c) Sen sen-no-sen: stolen timing (pre-emptive strike)

Most of us would do well to utilize Go-no-sen in an actual SD scenario. Some may manage the next higher level of SD, Sen-no-sen, to change the course of the aggression. A very few who aren't hobbled by nerves, inexperience or surprize could possible deal w/ an attacker via Sen sen-no-sen.

This highest level has a nearly "psychic" quality that we all strive to acquire through years of training. This is what Funakoshi was referring to.

Now if you approached that guy in line who was "looking @ you funny" & kicked him in the marbles, don't look to me to back-up your Sen sen-no-sen arguement. Not the same thing.

owari
Posted by: SANCHIN31

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/12/05 11:18 AM

Quote:

1) Kata was never meant to be a choreographed fight against multiple opponents. I've said this 264 times (a million seemed to be exagerating) . The idea is to pull individual pieces away from the kata & then train, train, train. If you do that, people may think you're doing Krav Maga.





I've agreed with you 1 million times! Krav Maga *snicker,snicker*

I'm a Sen sen-no-sen kinda guy.

Great post!
Posted by: BulldogTKD

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/13/05 01:36 PM

Kata is a teaching or learning tool. Think about it.
Posted by: pathfinder7195

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/13/05 07:23 PM

Kickcatcher,thanks for not for forgetting about us gung fu people. You are right about the differences how gung gu people look at forms and how karate people look at forms.

Kevin
Posted by: malanr116

Re: Defensive or offensive - 08/20/05 02:15 PM

If only there was a book that stated what exactly what use the kata (form in my art) really served. I think everyone is both right and wrong about this.

My sensi, TKD for those wondering, does not believe that what the MCdojo calls a Block, is a block. We study every move as a strike.

Our reasoning behind this, even a soccer mom at a game can block an attack from a supurbly kicked soccer ball. Blocking is a natural response, no need to practice block.

As for defensive or offensive, lets think about this.
It is correct to say that kata is a grouping of attacks on one person, or a sequence of attacks on multiple people. We study our kata(forms) and can apply each series to fighting on person or two or three.

Another "rule" we have is the 4 concepts of an attack.

1. Nutralize the attack (block, which we say strike to pressure points)
2. Strike (sometimes 1 and 2 are together)
3. Grapple (after the strike, you should be able to grab a finger or wrist or foot and perform a joint manipulation)
4. Control (this part is from the LAW Enforcment side, for cuffing, or controling where the opponent will go)

A good defensive action is nutralizing the attack, striking the attacker, grappling (not wrestling), and controlling the attacker. This should happen in one second.

Quote:

3 Points:

1) Kata was never meant to be a choreographed fight against multiple opponents. I've said this 264 times (a million seemed to be exagerating) . The idea is to pull individual pieces away from the kata & then train, train, train. If you do that, people may think you're doing Krav Maga.

2) A good Offence is the best Defense. (nuff said)

3) We need to get over the notion that a pre-emptive strike is an attack. Following our consciences to be the "honorable" ones, we can end up on the knuckle side of a right hook. I like to think in terms of 3 basic defensive maneuvers:
a) Go-no-sen: Block & attack
b) Sen-no-sen: Block w/ attack
c) Sen sen-no-sen: stolen timing (pre-emptive strike)

Most of us would do well to utilize Go-no-sen in an actual SD scenario. Some may manage the next higher level of SD, Sen-no-sen, to change the course of the aggression. A very few who aren't hobbled by nerves, inexperience or surprize could possible deal w/ an attacker via Sen sen-no-sen.

This highest level has a nearly "psychic" quality that we all strive to acquire through years of training. This is what Funakoshi was referring to.

Now if you approached that guy in line who was "looking @ you funny" & kicked him in the marbles, don't look to me to back-up your Sen sen-no-sen arguement. Not the same thing.

owari