Nicely put kenposan!

[QUOTE]kenposan wrote...
Why don't we just do the technique? Afterall, jujitsu doesn't do kata (not in the karate sense anyway), they just practice the techniques.
[/QUOTE]

In some styles of jujitsu, there are 2 person katas, for the more difficult/dangerous throws.

Solo kata is good for learning basic foot, hand, body movements. Paired kata is good for timing, resistance, and body positioning.

Then you get into things like jujitsu and aikido and a range in between varying degrees of choreographed movement.

The way I see it, kata is one end of the spectrum of learning movement, and "aikido"-like movements at the other end of the spectrum.

All martials arts fit somewhere in between those two ends of the spectrum, depending on the level of the participants, and the emphasis of the style.

I am not saying that kata is "basic" - everything is "basic", when you look at it. It's just YATM (yet another training method).

That being said, IMO, kata is an excellent method of teaching, of solo practice, and for preserving the transmission of knowledge, but it is only ONE of many training methods.


FWIW,

Ignatius

Sanchin,

I wrestled with this concept for awhile. And I will state that this is only coming from my experience and is only an opinion. Though I have preceding experience, of late I have studied mostly a Kyokushin derived style of Karate (last 15 years)...heavy emphasis on the contact side....light on the kata side. Most of the upper ranks had some boxing experience or were amateur boxers themselves. I also study or have studied concurrently some other MA arts that are distinguished by the lack of what you might consider traditional kata (BJJ, Judo, and Aikido).

The karate kata I am mostly conversant with are not the older style ones but were developed by the head instructor and are meant to simulate flow from one opponent to the next and techniques depending upon distance. Nothing implied, very explicit...no bunkai. Each of the kata can be broken down to its 10 parts and practiced with a partner stationed at each of the 10 points of the kata. Think shadow boxing, but as counters to real techniques thrown by your partner. Useful...but that's it.

I have had previous experience where the styles were heavily ladened with kata and the utility became suspect...because the lack of "contact"....live resistance as JKogas has mentioned. Perhaps the instructor was bad or the conceptual stuff just wasn't presented in a way that I understood.

However, having experienced previously a style that changed kata in midstream when they had joined another governing organization, having seen kata in different manifestations presented by similar styles, and noting the multitude of kata...I came to ask...why kata if it is this malleable? If there was one extreme kata that enveloped all the fighting abilities that some folks have dropped at it's doorstep...why do all these different orgainzations have differing kata and differing takes on the kata? Unlimited bunkai can be a detriment.

Personally, I feel more comfortable learning shadow boxing/kicking drills and punching/kicking a bag, than I would learning the ultra orthodox, and sometimes, to my undescerning eye, archaic moves within kata without the validating evidence that these techniques work. Now some would argue shadow boxing/kicking drills are kata...but then why not adopt these instead of the orthodox katas?

Again this is just my mumbling speculation, but if I took two people without training and told one to practice kata and worked with another on pad drills and after two months had them spar...my thoughts would be the guy doing the pad drills would win. Just a guess and conjecture coming from me.

With warmest and most humble regards,

-B

butterfly,
You have much more experience than me and it seems you're wiser also.
I don't think having a whole barrage of kata are useful and it can be just too much.
Think having a handful of kata is more suitable.(five years one kata [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/wink.gif[/IMG] )
If all you're looking for is fighting you don't need kata to do that.
Kata has many purposes for me and only one is self-defense.

Sanchin,

Wiser is not what my wife tells me. But your answer is acceptable and sufficient....if you like, you buy it..and enjoy it. That's good enough. [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

Regards,

-B

Kata?
What is that?
Is that something you can eat?
[IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

I got KO once doing kata against friends in the dojo, so i beleive it can be used as a self defence technique.
Beacuse after that mistake i never got KO so easily again. And that is self-defense for me.

I got KO once doing kata against friends in the dojo

You don't do kata to someone.Did you even bother to read the thread before posting?

yes sanchin I bothered to read.
My english is not so good so maybe sometimes I write somethings that are dificult to understand.

In my dojo we do katas on our partner.
Once my partner atacked fast and I didnt get out of the way on time and he KO me.

SO it was a very good school for me.
P.S.
Why did you think that I didnt read the topic?

Maybe my post is a little of topic, but did it really deserve such a reaction from you?

And yes, I do beleive that katas are an excelent way of learning important things in MA (like basic techniques, movements, strikes and such).
And when you train on your own katas are the easiest way to stay on course.

Satter -

I was under the impression that ninpo taijutsu did not have kata in the traditional Okinawan/Japanese sense.

Are you refering to prescribed self defense technique practice? We did a lot of that in American kenpo, and yes, injuries were common.

I do not really consider those kata in tha manner being thought of in this thread, though.