Many Kata or Few Kata...?

My friend and I have been having the long debate about the styles we do. I have done Goju Ryu and Shito Ryu. Knowing what I do of these arts, I total about 30 kata that is "know" [not that I could ever truly know them]. I hold a Nidan in Okiawan Karate.

He studies Pangai Noon Uechi Ryu, thus having like 5-6 kata throughout the entire system. He only knows 2, and he is of an upper kyu grade.

His arguement is that you only need a few moves known very very well , and you are as readily prepared as anyone can be for combat.

I agree that one needs a good, stable core, but I also see parts of my combat in unique sparring situations come from the more eclectic kata I know. Some of the more out-there bunkai are seen at times. I feel that knowing as many kata [with bunkai, of course] as you can within reason, so that you learn as many combative shapes as one can is a better idea.

What are your views on it?

Many Kata, or Few Kata?

I personally prefer fewer kata,but it depends on your reason for learning the kata and the training you put into each.

I think fewer kata is a better method personally, but of course it does depend on your motivations for training.

I feel a deeper, more drilled understanding will serve me better if I need to use my karate as self defense again. I also prefer ths method of learning/teaching as I think it has more value, there is so much in each kata to keep us busy!

The style I practice is a merged style. So, we have Shotokan, Kenpo (Nick Cerio) and a few other kata. At Nidan, I have about 30. I think that is too much. On the other hand, I think 5 is too few. I agree that it depends on why you are studying kata. That will change according to your age, purpose, and skill.

For young students, more kata is better! They typically hate doing basics drills and so kata, which they will practice, helps get the basics in there. It also helps build proprioception in a variety of situations and can be useful.

For older students interested in bunkai, and energy work, they need fewer kata but timing is important. They need a kata when they actually need it, regardless of the timing in the curriculum. Right now, for example, I want to learn Sanchin. It is not one of my school kata but I am very interested in the things that I believe Sanchin will teach me so the pregnant teaching opportunity is now. And this comes on the heels of saying I know too many. I am ready and motivated to learn Sanchin. Bunches of other kata that I'm not sure why they were given to me, other than that they "came next" were given to me when I had no real "need" to know them.

Different people have different capacity for volume of kata and the study of them.

Personally I think for me around a dozen kata should be more than enough for the next good few years, Im working around 10 right now so im nearly done.........

However what is most important is my actual study focus at any given time and that is nearly always on a maximum of 2 kata - which right now is Naihanchi (still!!!!) and Seisan. I seriously see that i could work those 2 kata for the next three years and still have much to do with them after that...............

A few kata learned completely is better than many kata learned incompletely. Learning a kata consists of more than just knowing the sequence of moves, and a few applications. Really learning a kata is exploring every aspect of it, understanding the principles which allow you to transcend the form and make it your own. If kata are not being taught in this way (delving deep into its principles and all aspects of application), it would be better to know as many as you can, I think. This way you can be exposed to many ideas, and with practice decide which suits you best. Perhaps you will seek out instruction that delves deep into a particular kata or style so you can really learn it.

Fewer learned completely is better than many learned partially. But many learned partially is better than few learned partially.

Hello MikeRekLaw:

Dig one hole DEEPLT rather than many shallow...

There is nothing wrong with exposure to different ideas, different presentations. But to really understand anything well/deeply ridicilous amounts of time are needed to get at the subtleties, the nuances, the whispers...

What does a single kata say or whisper about a ballistic attack? What does it say/whisper about being grabbed? Grappled? Many have layers I don't find NOT because they are not there but because I haven't spent enough time to see that strata... more often than not. Do something enough times and you trip accross strange problems... and then work to find those answers...



One for me please...
J

The kenpo system I study incorporates the shotokan kata. I went through a period of time where I was learning as many of them as I could but I felt empty inside. i felt that I could comfortably do all the kata from beginning to end but they had no substance. I was only "performing " a kata. About a year ago I decided to only do one kata. I have been studying KankuDai since then and my knowledge of that kata has expanded tremendously. I feel connected to this kata. I feel i am making the kata a part of me and I am seeing more and more applications every time I go through it. Yes I agree that every kata may or maynot have something the other does not, but I think to truly understand the essence you really need to focus on a few.

I come strongly down on the side you can't learn enough about anything. My experience suggests there are a number of different learning situations that are being sidetracked in this discussion.

I think it's unfair to just frame this as either tons of kata or just a few. We all actually use many types of different learning abilities, and of course any system can be comprised any way somebody wishes, such as Shito Ryu's 50+ kata or Uechi's original 3.

But I've traned with people who've mastered dozens and with those who've studied between 200-300 chinese forms that make karate look like kindergarden.

Among the different learning abilities we possess are:

1. Learning how to learn (short term memory vs long term memory) and then retain that knowledge (which superceeds the other forms of learning)
2. Learning how to move (movement education)
3. Learning how energy is generated (dynamics of movement education for increasing efficency)
4. Learning how technique appication works

There's nothing that suggests restricting these basic types of learning is better or worse for us in the long run, or that by just pursuing one you can't also pursue others at the same time.

The question is how are you evaluating what period learning must cover. Must the results be in the immediate future (say 3 years), must the results be in the intermediate future (say 10 years), must the results be long term study (say 20+ years).

The focus of these discussions seems to indicate short term, focus on one or two kata in intense detail is the answer.

While everyone has vastly different abilites, I don't accept that paradigm. I tend to focus on all three ranges at the same time.

Take prepartion from beginner to sho-dan (adult 4 or so years of trainig. In my program you will have studied at least 14 kata, but from a movement flow perspective I'm only looking at intense ability on the first 5, the rest being the movement groundwork for much longer study. There will constant exposure to what kata application potential represents, but those same applications will not be studied because the students overall abilities are being developed prior to those studies, instead specific techniques, wazza, two person sets in a variety of arts are working on those abilites developing.

After Sho-dan for the next 15-20 years you begin te study of 11 different kobudo kata studies, and have the opportunity to touch various kata from a pool of another 20 kata. But you also begin a much deeper inquiry into kata application that becomes endless, by starting with 6 months on just the opening section of Seisan Kata.

BTWw study doesn't mean you are spending time working out how a movement is applied, rather a complete course of instruction on everything you've been taught. The issue in such long times isn't that it can't be shown to anyone, but until they really have the aibility and faith in that ability to do it, it makes little sense to spend time on it, when there are other things too keep working on.

I understand a desire to get fully involved in a kata, but without a wider range of study it's really shortening undestanding how the other studies relate back to the one too.

There is no complete answer. All of the answers inter-relate. The goal is to push yourself to further paths.

So eventually you both press the bubble as to what you've been exposed to, and at the same time become an expert in a focused set of training.

What if the optimal response is a movement section from Seisan followed by a movement potential from the empty hand use of say Bando's short stick form? If you only study the one, the other may not be available.

Thre are many directions that are opposed to each other yet still create great learning.

Consider,

As always Victor you make alot of sense and I appriciate your expierience and methods,

I am happy to admit that my 'mind set' is a short term one, ie what am I doing right now..........in my training, im sure as time goes by my attitude will broaden and mellow, and this will be led by my expierience as a practioner and teacher.

But, many dojos teach the kata outline and never delve deeper, therefore leaving students with a whole bunch of kata with little understanding/drilling of the actual applications of said kata - for me this is very wrong, within the framework of my understanding of kata study, and of course what I want to get out of it.

You are right, putting a number on it is to rigid, we are all different and require different things.

Of course what demolishes my belief that a few kata is best is your expierience of some Chinese martial artists! argh need to think about that one!

However I do tend to focus on the Okinawan expierience/history/teachers that are avalaible to me, and that suggests that fewer kata studied for a longer period is more correct, I study Okinawan karate and therefore go with that for now!

I guess alot has to do with the instructor and how they present the system. Nobody really ever gave me any choices, they just taught and I practiced. Today if a student questions the usage I can show it, have them try it and explain what additional training will occur before they're ready to do it. So their focus is on learning, and eventually learning how to choose a more optimal response, not trying to see if something can be used.

As for the Chinese systems, it's not just the number and length of forms in some of their systems. My instructor tells me what they do is when they move on to a new form they discontinue practice of the older forms in part. Their rational if they've developed those earlier forms basics correctly they're using them in the new form. And in that case only instructors have to do all, setting a far different standard for instructor.

Which shows the difference between say northern shaolin training and okinawan karate. Those schools that use pinan tend to keep practicing them (or lusting after them in todays discussions) instead of leaving them behind and moving full time into the wider world of more advanced forms.

There can be logic for both choices, but on the whole I think if beginning forms are used they should be passed at some point.

On the other end a system like Isshinryu, which did not include beginning forms, is structured on each form being a complete system of study (such as the Goju kata after the beginning Geseki kata) remains.

That doesn't mean beginning forms aren't tools you can use later, it's just there is little need to focus on them when you step up, because those movements are still there.

Different perspectives of course. On the whole my answer is for the first 20 or so years your instructor ought to have enough material to keep you engaged totally, and the system is irrelevant in those cases.

For me, the question asking “how many kata” is incomplete. The real issue is the optimal rate of kata introduction and how this relates to the goals of one’s training.

There are many reasons for training in the arts. I am not sure of any good surveys that would help us to better understand why people train, but it is my experience that many people begin primarily to learn how to defend themselves.

So the real question concerns the optimal rate of kata introduction for new students, those with little or just a few years training who want to learn good self defense. I think it highly beneficial to look back in time to see how kata was introduced to beginners.

Many sources describe how karate was practiced 100+ years ago. On the Goju side, both Higaonna and Miyagi taught just a few kata. (3-4). Funakoshi describes the norm of 10 years of study just to learn the three Naihanchi under Itosu.

One must also consider that the norm for practice many years ago was likely quite different from how beginners practice today. Itosu wrote in his ten principles that one must practice 2-3 hours every day. Many beginners have difficulty training that much in a week. Finally, it is likely that kata practice made up a greater portion of practice 100 years ago than it does today. Some of the old masters talk of nothing other than kata practice when discussing their early training. In many dojos today, during an hour and a half class, kata may make up, on average 15 minutes.

100 years ago, Funakoshi likely practiced Naihanchi 20, 30 or 50 times during a typical training period under Itosu. He probably performed that kata 5 to 10 thousand times in a single year, maybe as many as 20 thousand over the course of 3 years. Then he was ready for the next kata.

Now we have students practicing 10, 15, 20 kata prior to black belt. Each of these might be performed at best a few hundred times over the course of a year. And as they transition to new kata required for belt rank, they must leave some behind.

I have been in many traditional dojos that emphasize kata. The norm is to “go through your kata”. In the 15-20 minutes reserved for kata practice, that translates into each kata being practiced 2 or 3 times. That translates into a few hundred reps per year per kata.

If the goal is self-defense, this kind of repetition is probably not optimal. It certainly is not the way the masters of 100 years ago trained. It is my experience that beginner students that practice kata this way develop little competence in kata application because they have not had near the repetition necessary.

On the other hand, for students with many years under their belts, the practice of many kata can be of great benefit. Once they develop competence in a core set of self defense applications, there is little risk of practicing a broad spectrum of new movements.

-Kakushite

I understand everyone's point, and readily agree with them. I have my core kata, the 7 Goju kata I know, plus Naihanchi and Rohai. I train these so much I can feel my muscles doing them while I lay still, falling asleep at night, as if my energy is still doing that kata. It is actually a rather fun feeling.

I also see the point of learning several other supplemental kata that teach how to do different things different ways. It, for me, helps to complete the circle. I train these pieces, usually unique bunkai, a lot more than I train the supplementary kata...but I do train the kata, and all its standard bunkai still. I do this so that perhaps, in time, I come to learn the kata more fully, like my core.

Sorry if I am confusing. Reading over this post, my words even confuse me. But, eh, it works.

Kakushite,

The question that I see in your discussion of the past, was that really a good way to train students? Extreme repetition of the same kata for years. I can accept the oral history as accurate, but personally I don't accept that's a better way to train.

For one thing I wasn't trained that way, nor have any of the schools or styles I've trained in ever used such an approach. To begin to accept it I think I'd actually have to see students trained that way for say 10 years as compared to what I do for my part time students over the same period of time. At such point I would accept it possible to make an informed decision.

What I have found is my part time students who train in a small group over 10 years have equal ablities of those tradition schools offering full time training (for larger groups of students) over the same amount of time.

Of course there are individual differences as always, and I make no claim my students have been prepared to drop into a war zone becasue of their training, but those schools I use for my comparisons students, even with more training, are not so trained either.

I can understand the appeal to the 'old' way of things, but was that really the full 'old' way? Were there perhaps many 'old' ways, that differed as much then as today? Was an effort to try and determine the maximum best path really done, or is it just looking at the old histoires?

I do know in today's world, world wide, there are fewer and fewer who can offer themselves to such training, or to teach at such a pace.

And even if a documented case can be made for those levels of training, does that make all the rest lesser, or just different, meeting different needs?

I don't have a simple answer, as I just do what I do for many different reasons.

I do feel the question is worthy, were such past practices really good karate?

Regarding old masters 'comments' on early training, expierience has shown me that things can be told a little 'romantically' for the sake of making a point

This is inregards to the question.

I believe the number of Kata you know is now a mute point, its like having a several volumes of encycopedias, numerous refers to a volume of information and study info but only one life to study it all. I believe the base katas are the heart of a most systems. In saying this I go back to the old adage of is it wiser to know of 1000 of techniques, or is it better master a few good techniques.

Now these times have past, but it use to be when styles were dominate each had it own feel and perferred movement. Learning their kata gave you insight on how they might fight or move. Now day everybody does everything when they spar so learning kata for this is not as important (to me) as it was when sparring other system was as important to me. Now learning other forms just gives us insight on how or why another system may do the same or slightly different move, imo.

Too much redunancy (like learning Tekki and Naihanchi, basically the same kata) can waste your time IMO, if you want diversity. But forms that gives you a totally different view/feel of various situation are like learning another language.

How about the number of people that know a large number of kata, but little or no bunkai? In my dojo as each piece of kata is taught, a basic bunkai is taught along with it. That way you not only learn the movements, you also have a base of very simple bunkai to go along with it. I feel it helps immensley(sp) in my retention of the kata. any others also take this approach?

Yours,
John

I agree there are a lot of people that do kata and have no bunkai in one of the system I was trained in each kata had a bunkia application and a kiso-kumite. Most of the others had bits and pieces of bunkia application that demo certain parts of the kata. And I've seen some dojos that say kata has nothing to very little to do with real applications, sparring will get you there. I believe both will help but its good to have an idea of difference in intentions along with proper techniques application.

I'm interested neko... I know you've probably done them all, but which kata specifically do you currently train with? and would you say it's too many or too few or just the right amount?

THANKS ED FOR THE VOTE OF confidence but I'm not as big on doing all the katas of a system anymore, in my own personal workout. I just do the core forms Miyagis Sanchin, Tensho, Hagashionna Saifa-Superempi, Bushi's Paisai and TSD Bassai. Bil-Jee, Silat short forms. My personal training I hardly do any of the basic forms of any system unless in class at that level.

All I can say is that I know nothing and what I do know could fit in the eye of a needle, but I'm glad that studied with a man .....

Really you know 3 versions or more of Seisan now thats impressive, what a quest for knowledge. I like the comparison from real movement in a kata to stylized movement. See this is what makes this forum great not bickery over brass presentations.

Whats right for me may not be right for another. I'm still at the teen-adult stage I'm still pulling out applications from these forms or it just feels good doing them. Just kata can keep you fit. Not fighting fit but fit.

Whats your personal workout consists of kata wise? How many is too many for you??

ummmm...o...k...? I would almost take that as an attempted insult if I could understand it. maybe you meant to post in the seisan thread? or perhaps that was intended to be a PM? not sure...I'm confused.

anyway, on topic: many or few? you only need a few, but you need many to know which few.

Quote:

---

I know. Some of the more out-there bunkai are seen at times. I feel that knowing as many kata [with bunkai, of course] as you can within reason, so that you learn as many combative shapes as one can is a better idea.

---

Don't get me wrong,As i believe if kata is done correctly & repititously,Then of course practicing kata can be beneficial for the karate ka,However,More traing with more kata's does not equate more bunkai.











Cheers!