FightingArts Estore
Pressure Points
From a medical professional, straight facts on where and how to hit that can save your life.
Stretching
Limber or not, anyone can add height and speed to their kicks with this method.
Calligraphy
For yourself or as a gift, calligraphy is special, unique and lasting.
Karate Uniforms
Look your best. Max snap. low cost & superior crafted: “Peak Performance Gold” 16 oz uniforms.

MOTOBU
Classic book translation. Hard to find. Not in stores.
Who's Online
0 registered (), 41 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
mohdnabeel, sunny, swordy, jerrybarry24, SenseiGregT
22915 Registered Users
Top Posters (30 Days)
AndyLA 3
futsaowingchun 3
Matakiant 3
kolslaw 1
Bartfast 1
September
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30
New Topics
Tan,Bong,Fuk & Wu Sao
by futsaowingchun
09/30/14 12:10 AM
Living a full life violence free...
by GojuRyuboy13
09/25/14 08:50 AM
Wing Chun-internal training
by futsaowingchun
09/23/14 09:01 PM
Martial News
by Matakiant
09/23/14 06:42 AM
STX Kickboxing Seminar
by Marcus Charles
09/09/14 06:57 PM
Biu Tzu- 1st section applications
by futsaowingchun
09/05/14 10:56 PM
2014 World Championships Chelyabinsk: The Gallery
by ergees
09/01/14 03:51 AM
An open letter to bunkai researchers...
by Bartfast
08/05/14 04:18 PM
The Karate punch
by Matakiant
10/30/13 07:41 AM
mindfullness meditation
by
01/06/09 11:27 AM
Recent Posts
Tan,Bong,Fuk & Wu Sao
by futsaowingchun
09/30/14 12:10 AM
An open letter to bunkai researchers...
by Victor Smith
09/28/14 07:11 PM
Living a full life violence free...
by GojuRyuboy13
09/25/14 08:50 AM
Wing Chun-internal training
by futsaowingchun
09/23/14 09:01 PM
Martial News
by Matakiant
09/23/14 06:42 AM
attacked from behind
by AndyLA
09/19/14 09:05 AM
The Karate punch
by Matakiant
09/18/14 06:07 AM
** Introduce Yourself! **
by Zombie Zero
09/16/14 04:43 PM
Eugue Ryu
by kolslaw
09/12/14 03:35 PM
Biu Tzu- 1st section applications
by futsaowingchun
09/05/14 10:56 PM
Forum Stats
22915 Members
36 Forums
35579 Topics
432500 Posts

Max Online: 424 @ 09/24/13 10:38 PM
Page 22 of 25 < 1 2 ... 20 21 22 23 24 25 >
Topic Options
#410834 - 11/19/08 12:13 PM Re: Who has the best strikes Karate or Boxing? [Re: Neko456]
Shonuff Offline
Enthusiast

Registered: 11/03/04
Posts: 603
Loc: London, UK
Quote:

Shonuff is Shonuff




LOL, What's that supposed to mean?
_________________________
It's Shotokan not Shoto-can't!!!

Top
#410835 - 11/19/08 12:22 PM Re: Who has the best strikes Karate or Boxing? [Re: Shonuff]
Neko456 Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 01/18/05
Posts: 3260
Loc: Midwest City, Ok, USA
Shonuff from my part of the woods means you are right. As in Shonuff right.

You Brits don't know nothing about broken English do you. Jolly good show mate.


Edited by Neko456 (11/19/08 12:29 PM)
_________________________
DBAckerson

Top
#410836 - 11/19/08 01:00 PM Re: Who has the best strikes Karate or Boxing? [Re: Shonuff]
Ames Offline
Veteran

Registered: 05/29/05
Posts: 1117
Quote:

your mind seems to be closed to anything that doesn't fit with your pre-conceptions.




I'm sorry you feel that way. I wouldn't participate in these forums if I didn't want to learn.

Quote:

The simple fact is that the surface of Karate is the vaguest fraction of the art.





Fair enough. But I'm not only looking at the surface. I'm looking at the actual 'product' of the training. Although I can't say, and haven't, what the actual process of kata learning is in the upper levels of karate, I can make an informed judgement on the result of that training when viewed through the lens of my prior experiance in other TMA, video evidence, my sparring experiance with Karateka and so on. If being a master was needed to adquetly judge an art then I dare say that this forum would cease to exist.

Quote:

The form is just a way of conditioning the body to efficiently move and generate power, much of which is later discarded as structures and movements are internalised and techniques become more natural and fluid. As this happens one starts to see where seemingly different movements are actually the same. At this stage Kata act as a guide for strategy, offering examples that the individual is supposed to understand how to apply and build upon and as an understanding of combat grows the Karateka learns to combine and recombine movements to fit his own personal way and the situation he finds himself in. Beyond this is understanding the potential of parts of movements and applying power in different angles and using varying degrees of tension or relaxedness in movements, all of which starts in simple macroscopic movements of the kihon and kata and at each stage requires a total re-examination of the art you have in front of you.





Yes, I understand this. It is similar to other JMA. Forinstance in Aikijujutsu there is the actual technique and then there is henka based on that technique.

That being said, I still don't think you have made a case that the entire art of boxing is intrinsically hidden within the kata, nor that it is present within the art of karate. That is my main point of disagreement with you. Not on the overall validity of kata.

Quote:

Shotokan as an entity had it's growth stunted by a number of factors. It is going to be very hard to find a video on the net of Shotokan karateka who have taken their training beyond the very basic in terms of combative application.





My question then, is did those who took their "training beyond the very basic in terms of combative application" do so only by studying Shotokan?

I often hear the argument that 'this is isn't the real xyz'. And that might be true. That is why I watched every single Shotokan video on youtube, rather than just culling those videos that might be a poor representation of your art. The fact is that most of the videos looked like the one I posted, and therefore one can make an informed judgement that the majority of Shotokan is trained like that. Now if you are saying that there is some that is not, I encourage you to post such video. I would be (and I'm not trying to be a jerk, I'm being honest) interested in how those kata I saw contain the entire art of boxing.

The reason why I posted that Shotokan video in the first place was because it seemed that I was having a difficult time getting across in words alone, what I was saying about a fundemental difference in boxing technique and Shotokan.

Quote:

I've stated why I feel karate has better strikes and the grounds I've used to come to that conclusion.




Yes, because, according to you, "karate is boxing + xyz". Essientially, you're argument comes down to your belief that:

a) karate (namely Shotokan) contains all the techniques and footwork of boxing.

b) Plus (+) more striking technique (such as kicks).

Is that right?

Quote:

You have still not managed to give a reason why it is incorrect other than to say that boxing has better training methods than karate, as if you know how all Karate schools train or how effective non-boxing based methods actually are.





First, do you, or does anyone else on earth know how "all Karate schools train". Must one know this in order to discuss karate, or any other art for that matter. One can only weigh the evidence. You are doing to same. This is what I meant by your extreme relatavism. If we were to think of, say, any scienctific field in your terms, then there would be no science today.

Next, your point regarding my unknowingness of the "effectiveness of non-boxing based methods". I don't know what this means exactly. But, let me say that the vast amount of my martial life has been in the TMA's. I have practiced aikido, karate, aikijujutsu,koryu jujutsu, private lessons in mainland wing chun. Have I studied all these arts in significant depth. Absolutely not. I'm not arrogant to make that claim. But I can make the claim regarding how these arts are trained. How many times does the sun need to rise before we can guess that sun will rise again tommorow?

And I have given a reason as to why I beleive (in general!) boxing is better suited to acquistion of striking ability than karate. More on that as I go through your post.

Quote:

You are blindly insistent that you know and understand Karate movement and techniques and that you have a full grasp of karate training such that you are comfortable defining Karate and stating that it does or does not do X Y and Z.





'Blindly insistent" implies that I am making uneducated guesses, when I think, if you read my posts, you'll find that it would be difficult to accuse me of such.

Next, I would be interested to know how long you trained boxing? Because is my eyes, as someone who has practiced boxing for ten years, it strikes me as odd that someone who has practiced both boxing and karate would claim, time and again, that karate has EVERYTHING that boxing has.

The only "x y z" I am saying karate does not have is those techniques which have thier origins in boxing. Again, I'll say, that boxing should be given it's due. Rather than accuse me of "blindly insisting", perhaps you would do well to show at least one instance of boxing technique within karate (again, uninfluenced by boxing). I took your point seriously enough to watch several videos of the kata you said had these techniques and I saw nothing that, beyond the slightest connotation, resembled the boxing techniques you claimed they represented.

Your counterpoint to this has been that I do not have enough of an understanding to realize that nature of kata decoding. The issue I have with this is that the abstract, arbitrary scheme you suggest for the interpretation of kata renders the possiblities implied techniques limitless. In other words, you could see whatever you wanted to see.

The issue with this, is that I could turn around and say that boxing also contains the implication of all karate kata. Of course, this point seems ridiculous. Yet, the interpretation methods you seem to propose could, in effect, be used to show this. I could say that the footwork of a boxers jab, implies a front kick, for example. Or a low guard implies grappling. Now, although this seems an assinine statment, actually boxing did at one time contain all these techniques, so perhaps it is not so far from the truth.

But again, such a statement, that boxing implies all the kata of karate, is ridiculous. Perhaps you should think as to why that is, and by doing so you will better understand why I find your point in this regard equally not valid.

Quote:

It is clear that you do not know at all, but you are unwilling to even accept that Karate may be slightly different to how you perceive it.




I am absolutely willing to beleive that it may be diffirent than I am suggesting. I only ask for evidence in this regard. You have yet to provide anything more than vague responses that I don't know the karate enough to make a comment. Yet, the very fact that you can provide no other counterpoint to my statements, suggests that neither do you.

Quote:

You make claims about what evidence there is or is not as if you've read all the books and interviews and articles that have ever been published.




Now you seem to be purposly constructing strawman arguments. Would it suprise you to know that in fact I have read every book on East Asian martial arts, and karate in particular availible in the library system at the largest university in Canada?

Quote:

Yet if you had read a faractiob of the books in my modest collection (such as the one's from which I gave accounts of boxing-similar movements earlier) your opinion would be different, or at least not so closed.





Again, your extreme relatavism rears its head. First, you are a making an assumption that I have not throughly researched this topic (wrong). And, no my opinion probably wouldn't be diffirent, as my argument is an educated one, based on my own research in this field.

As for the accounts you gave, they did nothing to provide evidence that "karate is boxing + x yz" (karate contains the entire art of boxing). I'm sorry but a source that says Funakoshi ducked a punch, or Shoshin Nagamine declaring that "the only difference between boxing and karate was of karates use of kicks", does in no way, shape, or form, even help proving your argument. With what depth did Shoshin Nagamine train boxing to make such a statement? Did he train it at all. Often times, when comments like this are made, they are based on a complete lack of experiance. Which is the very thing you are attempting to use to devalidate my points.

Regarding Funakoshi ducking a punch: certainly I'm not stupid enough to think that one has to train boxing in order to duck a punch. However, this doesn't help your argument that karate contains boxing style bobing and weaving, as ducking a punch is a very natural response to punch coming your way. Again, karata has its own methods of tai sabaki. Why isn't that enough for you? Why do you feel the need to take away the unique features of other arts in an attempt to prove yours in the best?

Quote:

You feel unable to discuss a punch without considering the training that goes into developing it as well as the strategies and footwork that go into applying it.




I could certainly discuss a punch without the training. My point all along has been that to divorce boxing from its training is to not really be talking about boxing at all.

In terms of the strategy and footwork, yes, absolutely these things must be discussed when we are talking about a punch, at least when we are talking about a boxing punch. The footwork and the punch are one. Your attempt to reduce a boxing punch to arm movement alone is simply wrong. The arm movement is, obviously, only a fraction of a proper boxing punch. If I was to just stand in front of a heavy bag throwing hooking arm movements at it, my boxing coach would tell me to use footwork, so that my waist in involved in the strike, and I am able to generate more power. A boxing punch cannot, in any way, or by any stretch of the imagination, by divorced from the accompanying footwork. To do so would make it not a 'boxing punch'. Again, the arm movement is really, in boxing terms, the last thing you need to worry about. It should be clear to anyone who has boxed for any length of time that the form and the physics of the boxing punch is dictated by the footwork, at least as much, perhaps more, than the arm.

So, I have a very good reason to be unwilling to disscuss a BOXING PUNCH without the "training that goes into developing it as well as the strategies and footwork that go into applying it."

To be honest, I can't comprehend how, or why, one would not. Especially when they have implied that they already know all there is to know of boxing, because it is already contained in the art they study.

Quote:

On this point we are fundamentally opposed.




If you are opposed to looking at a punch in its totality rather then by its (dependent) factors, then, yes, I guess we are oppossed.

Quote:

In addition you are fixed on the notion that training defines an art, which while one cold conceivably apply this to boxing simply dosn't work for any other MA because the moment someone decides to vary the training practice the art would be something else, a point you neatly sidestepped.





The point you are sidestepping here, my friend, is that training methodogy defining an art is pretty much a given when it comes to boxing. Ask any boxer, if you take away
1. The condioning
2. The sport specific exercises (heavy bag, focus mitts)
3. The light, and full sparring
Ask them if that could possibly be considered 'boxing'. No, it absolutely could not. These things are intrinsic to boxing. If you feel they are not as intrinsic to karate, then that's great. But this is discussion of karate AND BOXING striking methods. So, excuse me if I want boxing to be accurately portrayed for what it is, rather than the biased way you want to portray it.

Regarding, "the moment someone decides to vary the training practice the art would be something else", the issue is more complex than that. For example, in terms of karate, condioning practices may vary, but the majority of karateka feel that in order to study karate, kata, bunkai are needed. To take away these aspects of the training methodology would, for many, mean that the art of karate has lost itself. For a more specific example, look at Goju Ryu, it contains not only these aspects, but also hojo undo,and perhaps kakie, now I'm sure some don't practice this aspect of the art, but again, the majority would say that it is a key part of what makes Goju Ryu, Goju Ryu. Take away kata, bunkai, hojo undo from Goju Ryu, and what are you left with? Surely something diffirent. Kata, bunkai,hojo undo are therefore the training methodology that defines the art. This line of think is actually true for most arts that I can think of. Chi sao, wing chun; 'knee walking', aikido; push hands, tai chi; pummeling, wrestling; sword suburi; kendo etc, etc, all of these are fundemental pieces of the art, and all are a part of the overall training methodology.

--Chris
_________________________
"Seek not to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought."
--Basho

Top
#410837 - 11/19/08 01:27 PM Re: Who has the best strikes Karate or Boxing? [Re: Ames]
medulanet Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 09/03/03
Posts: 2142
Loc: Phoenix, Arizona USA
Ames, you will see very few karateka on youtube training their art to the level of boxing that guys like Roy Jones Jr. have. To make such comparisions is silly. Maybe guys like Higoanna of Goju, Kise of Matsumura Seito, or Oyata or Okinawan Kenpo. However, these are old men and few train today like these men did. Did you research the full contact matches held in Chosin Chibana's dojo with no gear and no holds barred? What about modern weight lifting methods? What about usage of striking pads utilized in addition to makiwara training? How about free form kata utilized much the same way a boxer's shadow boxing is? What if I start a McDojo version of boxing and it becomes the most popular form of boxing in the world. Can I then make claims that what I teach is norm for boxing so others can disparage boxing as a fighting art due to the ineffective practices I created? In essense it seems like your comparison of karate you have seen is like saying kick boxing is ineffective because of all of the soccer moms and children who practice tae bo. And even though others say that tae bo is not real kick boxing, because things such as cardio kick boxing are so widespread their statements are obviously untrue. There are so many pages I don't have the time to look through all of the posts. My question to you Ames is what training practices or techniques do you feel karate lacks which makes its striking less effective then boxing. And if you simply post a world class boxer against a part timer karate guy then I already know your answer.
_________________________
Dulaney Dojo

Top
#410838 - 11/19/08 02:00 PM Re: Who has the best strikes Karate or Boxing? [Re: medulanet]
Ames Offline
Veteran

Registered: 05/29/05
Posts: 1117
Quote:

Ames, you will see very few karateka on youtube training their art to the level of boxing that guys like Roy Jones Jr. have. To make such comparisions is silly.




That is true. Let me also say that Roy Jones Jr. was also not meant to speak for the level of the average boxer, obviously he has gone above and beyond. I used that clip to illustrate what I was talking about regarding footwork, because it is a good example of boxing footwork.

Quote:

However, these are old men and few train today like these men did. Did you research the full contact matches held in Chosin Chibana's dojo with no gear and no holds barred?




I know a little about this, yes. But as you say, this type of training is in the minority, not the majority, and, therefore, doesn't speak for karate as generally practiced. It certainly suggests the potential for the art though (if more resistence was added, and more sparring).

Quote:

What about modern weight lifting methods? What about usage of striking pads utilized in addition to makiwara training? How about free form kata utilized much the same way a boxer's shadow boxing is?




I don't get where you are going with this, really. Yes, personally, I think those are good things to introduce into any TMA to make it more functional. Certainly, though, all of these things (except perhaps 'free form kata', which to me just sounds like shadow boxing, but I don't really know anything about that) were do to an influence of boxing, and were not present in tradional karate.

Quote:

What if I start a McDojo version of boxing and it becomes the most popular form of boxing in the world. Can I then make claims that what I teach is norm for boxing so others can disparage boxing as a fighting art due to the ineffective practices I created?




Absolutely. If the majority of boxers trained in the way you suggest, then that would be, for better or worse, what boxing 'is'.

Boxing at one time had grappling, kicking, knife fighting and fighting with clubs as part of it's early ring fighting. Surely though, these aspects don't stand for boxing as it is practiced today.

Quote:

In essense it seems like your comparison of karate you have seen is like saying kick boxing is ineffective because of all of the soccer moms and children who practice tae bo.




No. 'Kickboxing' and 'tae bo' are two obviously seperate things.

Quote:

And even though others say that tae bo is not real kick boxing, because things such as cardio kick boxing are so widespread their statements are obviously untrue.




Again, I don't understand how this speaks to anything I've been saying. Tae bo, cardio kickboxing, are all diffirent than 'kickboxing' and as such are known by a diffirent name.

Quote:

There are so many pages I don't have the time to look through all of the posts. My question to you Ames is what training practices or techniques do you feel karate lacks which makes its striking less effective then boxing. And if you simply post a world class boxer against a part timer karate guy then I already know your answer.




Although I feel for your lack of time situation, I can't be expected to constantly rewrite posts in answer to things I have already stated.

But to quickly restate, it depends on what 'karate' we are talking about. I've been, until my last few posts, talking about tradional Okinawan karate.

Tradional Okinawan karate lacked (and in many cases the more conservative dojos still lack) the following: heavy bag training, focus mitt training, modern weight training, interval training, skipping rope, heavy reliance on sparring to 'test' skill, boxing style footwork (not that it is necessarily better, just that it wasn't there), gloves, and I think that is about it.

More modern karate has, to a greater or lesser degree, seen the value of boxing training methodology and begun to incorporate it into the systems.

Which is why I said, in one of the past posts, that something like Enshin or Ashihara karate would maybe be a better standing style to study than boxing, simply because it 'functionally' teaches a greater variety of strikes, and have largely adopted boxing hands into their curriculum. Unfortunately, karate taught like this is in the minority. Personally, I hope that that changes, not just for karate, but all TMA's, so that when we speak of them in the future a more functional art will be the general rule.
--Chris


Edited by Ames (11/19/08 02:03 PM)
_________________________
"Seek not to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought."
--Basho

Top
#410839 - 11/19/08 03:36 PM Re: Who has the best strikes Karate or Boxing? [Re: Neko456]
Ames Offline
Veteran

Registered: 05/29/05
Posts: 1117
Neko, I missed your post.

Quote:

You never did, remember you think everything came from gloved Western Boxing




Nope never said that. I did say that alot of arts currently pracice boxing hands. You, yourself, list a few examples:

Quote:

Savate, Thai, Kicking boxing, SanShou, MMA and BJJ




Quote:

These guys were warriors they were Marines, Army men from all over the world ect.. that fought in wars and killed people so you believe they wanted to learn how to dance??How can U trick a person that seen effective fighting on the real? Now this is only an assuption maybe Marines/warriors like dancing.




No, we can be pretty sure that sparring wasn't a part of Okinawan karate based on the physical evidence that exists. Aside from kooky conspiracy theories (not only that they didn't teach Marines the real karate, but also all of their texts are purposely misleading, and TO THIS DAY they continue to midlead Westerners) the evidence is all we have to go on.

Your opinion is your own. But if you want to state a hypothesis, it should have SOME evidence to back it up.

I agree that probably many Okinawans didn't teach the Marines a full karate curriculum (for a variety of reasons), this doesn't change the fact that the Okinawans didn't practice sparring as part of karate.

Quote:

You are right again they aren't delievered the same way, boxing isn't the only way is it, we are learning. I didn't say it was the same I said it served the same purpose to come over or under the guards or hit opening over or under.




That's great. But in the general context of my prior posts, it's meaningless. The form of the punches are diffirent. That was my point.

Different = not the same

Now if you say that karate and boxing share SOME similar principles, fine. But as you say, karate uses these techniques diffirently:

Quote:

Of course its not the same when have you seen a boxer sweep a guy off feet and throw a upper cut while the guys falling or trying to catch his balance. Or use these punches while the guys covering from being stomped on the ground. Of course its not the same.




Quote:

One is taught to really fight and the other spars alot.





Funny. Go tell a professional boxer he "can't fight". Film it. I could use a good laugh.

Go look at video of streetfights. Take a notebook and mark down how often they end with kick or a joint lock or an eyegouge. You'll find not so often. What you will find is that they usually begin and end with a punch.

Here are two examples that prove that boxing, and boxing only, can be useful in a street situation, versue multiple attackers:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iDlzL7zrNU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGAzeYM9G-0

Now show me two with karate being used.

Quote:

Ridiculous maybe to you but really boxing is so simple (which is it's strength) that almost every art that I have studied have simlar basic skill sets, punches and some movement.





Well that's one thing that makes it unique then, isn't it?

Quote:

How many other arts have you studied?





Enough to make informed opinions, thank you.

Quote:

like movement but it's not Pure boxing because ducking and reckless bob and weaving bring you closer to knees and elbows or takedowns.




So let me get this straight. You are telling me that its fine to say that kata contains all these techniques (that may or may not ever be practiced) and that karate constantly adapts to changing cicumstances but the minute boxing is done in a diffirent context it's not "Pure boxing". Give me a break!

Why would a boxer use "reckless" bobbing and weaving anyway?

You are assuming that a boxer can't adapt to diffirent situations. WRONG!

The very fact that it can be used in so many diffirent venues speaks to the adaptive nature of boxing.

Quote:

So boxing is not unique it is simple and easy to apply.




This statement literally hurts my brain. If boxing is not 'unique' then why the hell is it chosen, time and time again, for a variety of diffirent arts to improve both teachning methodology and hand skill?

Quote:

It's only apart of most of the above mentioned ring sports bc it's limited by range.




If by this comment you mean 'It's only a part of most of the above mentioned right sports because it's been limited by range and therefore more time has been spent refining handskills to the point where no other art can match it (in terms of hands) then, sure, I agree.

Quote:

So what else have we learned that ridiculous only seems that way when we are closed minded.





Tell me who is more closed minded. Myself, who has giving karate it's due, or you who say:
Quote:

"So boxing is not unique" or (my favorite)

"One is taught to really fight and the other spars alot."





Give me a break!

Quote:

For your overall lack of knowledge (you seem to know well what boxing is to you) you also debate well,




Neko, do me a favor and don't insult me, okay? Tell me, where am I so "lacking in knowledge" that I can't make an informed decision.

How about you make a point that isn't completly subjective and 'proven' only be hearsay and personal anecdote and insult?
--Chris


Edited by Ames (11/19/08 03:39 PM)
_________________________
"Seek not to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought."
--Basho

Top
#410840 - 11/19/08 04:38 PM Re: Who has the best strikes Karate or Boxing? [Re: Ames]
medulanet Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 09/03/03
Posts: 2142
Loc: Phoenix, Arizona USA
Chris the problem with your statements are that the okinawans did utilize different types of focus mitt/kick shield, conditioning drills, and sparring training independent of boxing's influence. The only boxing influence was the advent of protective equipment.
_________________________
Dulaney Dojo

Top
#410841 - 11/19/08 05:46 PM Re: Who has the best strikes Karate or Boxing? [Re: medulanet]
Ames Offline
Veteran

Registered: 05/29/05
Posts: 1117
Interesting. What is your source for all this? It's not that I don't believe you, but everything I've read and been told by practioners of Okinawan karate directly cotradicts that.

--Chris


Edited by Ames (11/19/08 05:48 PM)
_________________________
"Seek not to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought."
--Basho

Top
#410842 - 11/19/08 06:23 PM Re: Who has the best strikes Karate or Boxing? [Re: Ames]
Shonuff Offline
Enthusiast

Registered: 11/03/04
Posts: 603
Loc: London, UK
Quote:

If being a master was needed to adquetly judge an art then I dare say that this forum would cease to exist.




Why do you need to judge an art at all? Judge a class that you are thinking of training in but leave generalisations at the door.

Quote:

That being said, I still don't think you have made a case that the entire art of boxing is intrinsically hidden within the kata, nor that it is present within the art of karate.




Remember the thing I wrote about putting the various strategies and techniques from different parts of the art together.

If you take the all of the purely percussive elements, those parts that deal only with punching and associated strategy you will find enough boxing that the differences between the boxer and the "stripped down" karate fighter are nearly negligible. Yes there are technical details and perhaps even some strategic details which are not going to be present in the karateka's arsenal, but to me this is a triviality more than anything else.

The reason that the strategies are so spread out is simply that Karate evolved very differently and using different rules as it's guide.

Quote:

My question then, is did those who took their "training beyond the very basic in terms of combative application" do so only by studying Shotokan?




No I don't think they did.

Some of the best Karateka I have trained with are on Youtube. Not one of them displays anything more than the most basic traditional elements or tournament sparring, and yet they know so much more. Your arguments are mostly good, well constructed arguments, but unless you get out there and train with people and do the work yourself you won't see where I'm coming from.

I cannot argue the numbers, no matter how anecdotal. By all accounts the majority of Karate training is lacking a lot of effective developmental fighting training. If you are happy defining karate by the Youtube majority then fine. I define Karate by my training in it and my study of it. It is worth restating here that my original contention were about "the karate I have learned and the boxing I have learned".

Quote:

I took your point seriously enough to watch several videos of the kata you said had these techniques and I saw nothing that, beyond the slightest connotation, resembled the boxing techniques you claimed they represented.




And yet you accepted that the surface of the art is not the whole art, and also that there is a developmental process involved in moving from performance of the movements of karate to actually fighting that has the surface structure discarded.
If you can accept these two points then you must be able to see that no movement you ever see in a kata will look like anything other than kata.

Quote:

The issue I have with this is that the abstract, arbitrary scheme you suggest for the interpretation of kata renders the possiblities implied techniques limitless. In other words, you could see whatever you wanted to see.




Yes, absolutely!

You may not like the idea but this is karate. A great many karateka have decided exactly this and come up with all sorts of rubbish as kata applications. And yet this is a fundamental part of karate. Explaining this to any real depth is a whole 'nother thread, but what I will say is that there are many sides to this discussion. Personally I fall on the side of strictly limiting interpretations into systematic fighting styles derived from individual or groups of kata. Then once that level is attained further study lets you take the movements wherever they will go. Victor describes it as training potential releases of energy, or something similar.

Spend some time trawling the archives of these forums for discussions about kata and application.

We are touching on why I feel your position is insufficiently researched. There are many big questions that long time Karateka have battled with for years in this debate. Most of them you plonk down an answer because it seems logical to you and that's it as far as you're concerned, when those whose physical, historical and theoretical studies of karate have lasted many years don't find the answers nearly so simple.

You want evidence for things. The closest I can give you to evidence at this time is a detailed structured and logical analysis likely to have textual supporting references. Ask something specific and if I have time I may PM you. This I know is not real evidence, but it is what I have.

Quote:

If I was to just stand in front of a heavy bag throwing hooking arm movements at it, my boxing coach would tell me to use footwork, so that my waist in involved in the strike, and I am able to generate more power. A boxing punch cannot, in any way, or by any stretch of the imagination, by divorced from the accompanying footwork.




Here I think we have a simple miscommunication.

When I speak of footwork I think of movement. Movement falls for me under strategy. The component of a punch that involves the feet and the rest of the body to me falls under technique, specifically the mechanics of a punch.
I agree you can't talk about a punch without a discussion of the accompanying mechanics, unless you are talking about it in a purely strategic sense.

Mechanically there are some small differences between boxing technique and karate, but for me small differences are like the eccentricities of an individual. What matters is speed damage accuracy and strategy. Different varieties of technique while favoured by individuals all usually seem to work just fine, suggesting to me that minutia in technique is often more hot air than real fight relevant discussion.

My point about karate containing boxing was on a strategic not mechanical level, although again I see little of significance in the differences.

Quote:

look at Goju Ryu, it contains not only these aspects, but also hojo undo,and perhaps kakie, now I'm sure some don't practice this aspect of the art, but again, the majority would say that it is a key part of what makes Goju Ryu, Goju Ryu. Take away kata, bunkai, hojo undo from Goju Ryu, and what are you left with? Surely something diffirent. Kata, bunkai,hojo undo are therefore the training methodology that defines the art.




A very good argument.

However, I stated earlier that I agree training can Identify an art, but not define it.

To me what you describe in your example is identifying Goju. To define goju by those practices you limit goju to just those practices IMO. Goju is those things, but it can also be much more.

I would ask what training methods you feel define Karate, maybe even just Shotokan?

Lastly (GF is about to kick my ass), what I have read leads me to believe that there was much fighting practice of Karate but only at higher levels than any Japanese reached in Funakoshi's time, and most of the other things that you don't think were present in original Okinawan training were from what I have gathered, very much present in one form or another.
_________________________
It's Shotokan not Shoto-can't!!!

Top
#410843 - 11/19/08 06:24 PM Re: Who has the best strikes Karate or Boxing? [Re: Neko456]
Shonuff Offline
Enthusiast

Registered: 11/03/04
Posts: 603
Loc: London, UK
Bravo old chap!
_________________________
It's Shotokan not Shoto-can't!!!

Top
Page 22 of 25 < 1 2 ... 20 21 22 23 24 25 >


Moderator:  Ames, Cord, MattJ, Reiki, Ronin1966 




Action Ads
1.5 Million Plus Page Views
Monthly
Only $89
Details

Fight Videos
Night club fight footage and street fights captured with the world's first bouncer spy cam

How to Matrix!
Learn ten times faster with new training method. Learn entire arts for as little as $10 per disk.

Self Defense
Stun guns, pepper spray, Mace and self defense products. Alarms for personal and home use.

TASER MC26C
Stop An Urban Gorilla: Get 2 FREE TASER M26C Replacement Air Cartridges With Each New TASER M26C!

 

Unbreakable Unbrella

krav maga