[QUOTE=crappler;2408331]Our Western predecessors did not invent forms because they believed, correctly, that the best form of training was practicing the actual techniques while using proper posture and body positioning. They are a relic of an era past, more historical curiosity than useful tool.[/QUOTE]
Both solo and partner forms were used in combat swordplay and even in boxing for hundreds of years.
my assumption is that things like forms (and breaking) were training methods used before modern medical science and training equipment, and aren’t really relevant today.
[QUOTE=Dsimon3387;2408363]So sorry that someone has forced you to engage in this thread… Hope they let you off the hook for the sake of us both as I could live without your ignorance and hostility
edit by the way you study goju yes? would you care to elaborate on where one can see the differnce between Goju and Sho ran Ryu? Might it be in the katas?[/QUOTE]
Awwww, do you need Mommy to change yer dirty diaper? Go shove an enema bag in your nose, you twat-faced cum dumpster.
Anyway, difference between Goju and Shorin-ryu, eh? (I’m gonna assume you meant Shorin-ryu here.)
Yeah, it’s certainly easy to see a differentiation in the styles through kata. Goju has 12 and is similar to Uechi by putting lots of emphasis on Sanchin, Seisan, and Sanseiru. (Of course, it still depends on the school, but those are across the board more in-depth with analysis.)
Shorin has 21 and has stuff like the Taikyoku set and Naihanchi, etc.
However, Shorin comes from Shuri-te which is closer to Shotokan than Goju which comes from Naha-te. It’s a little bit softer, a little bit more linear.
I’ve also never seen a Shorin guy use neko-ashi-dachi in kumite.
[quote=helmutlvx;2408371]Awwww, do you need Mommy to change yer dirty diaper? Go shove an enema bag in your nose, you twat-faced cum dumpster.
Anyway, difference between Goju and Shorin-ryu, eh? (I’m gonna assume you meant Shorin-ryu here.)
Yeah, it’s certainly easy to see a differentiation in the styles through kata. Goju has 12 and is similar to Uechi by putting lots of emphasis on Sanchin, Seisan, and Sanseiru. (Of course, it still depends on the school, but those are across the board more in-depth with analysis.)
Shorin has 21 and has stuff like the Taikyoku set and Naihanchi, etc.
However, Shorin comes from Shuri-te which is closer to Shotokan than Goju which comes from Naha-te. It’s a little bit softer, a little bit more linear.
I’ve also never seen a Shorin guy use neko-ashi-dachi in kumite.[/quote]
So then if a teacher wanted to teach each system in order to understand the theory each system uses in the Kumite that teacher might learn such information in the…kata
And listen loser your own issues about forms aside which put your ignorance on display like a neon sign, why don’t you take a nice long walk off a short peir and get fucked on the way down.
Ps I take that back as your your sense of karate history is fucked up… I may be talking to a kid after all…Ok junior go back to school ok? Sho Ran Ryu and Goju are very similar styles and neither is as similar to Shotokan as each other, historically or stylistically… so back to school kid. Let the adults talk now please. :adios:
But why the chambered hand, mommy?
Just because I decided to walk into a loaded question doesn’t make me ignorant.
Buying into t3h anci3nt d34dly is the more revealing sign of ignorance. Kata are created, changed, and thrown out all the time.
The human capability for error is also possible in the transmission of kata. Small changes create new “meaning” to the movements and after so many “hundreds” of years, I doubt TMAers in the modern era perform kata exactly like how they were done back then.
You are a shithead for making this thread and beating the fuck out of a long dead horse. Your opinions are metaphysical New Age horseshit.
Ok guys:
According to my argument there would not be a direct relationship between forms and fighting I do want that to be understood. You would no more be using a form to fight with than you would pick up a book on boxing to defend against a left hook.
You stated you don’t think kata are/should be used for fighting AND THEN assert that kata contain fighting strategy and accurate psychological responses!
Where and how is this possible? Can you give us any examples?
edit: And before you make a call to the WAAAAAHMBULANCE, I’m doing exactly what you say in your OP. I’m being skeptical. (The juvenile insults are just how I have fun.)
[quote=helmutlvx;2408382]Just because I decided to walk into a loaded question doesn’t make me ignorant.
Buying into t3h anci3nt d34dly is the more revealing sign of ignorance. Kata are created, changed, and thrown out all the time.
The human capability for error is also possible in the transmission of kata. Small changes create new “meaning” to the movements and after so many “hundreds” of years, I doubt TMAers in the modern era perform kata exactly like how they were done back then.
You are a shithead for making this thread and beating the fuck out of a long dead horse. Your opinions are metaphysical New Age horseshit.[/quote]
no… YOU have hostility and issues about forms. My argument is anything but the conventional understanding of forms… Do you even understand my point?
When did I say that Forms never change? Do books change? does it make books invauable and less immutable that they change?
When did I say that forms are a matter in any way that guarantee less foibles?
You are projecting your own hostility about the subject on my argument.
I know my posts are long but read the fucking argument if you want to respond to it ok?
and, nothing personal but please learn that Shotokan was invented by someone and in fight, in form, and in theory for that matter, it is a departure from Okinawan Karate which is what Yamagushi did… just saying sheesh! I would hope you would understand this. Goju ryu is a style of Shuri te as is Sho Ran Ryu, the differences between the two (such as the backfist as it is applied in fighting) are on some basic issues more than substantive issues.
[QUOTE=Dsimon3387;2408343]and so the screed goes.
Guys look… Look at the issue for a moment from the perspective of the teacher and before we go there… can you name any Japanese are with no forms? I don’t think that Aikido or AIkijutsu has forms. But even Kano, quite the Western nfluenced one, quite the intellectual giant, quite th innovator, thought it prudent to incorporate forms into Judo… WHY?
[/QUOTE]
Because he fucking didn’t, that’s why.
The “kata” in Judo are a wholly different animal than the kata in Karate in or the tao lu in Chinese martial arts.
Goju-ryu is a derivative of Naha-te taught by Highashionna Kanryo, you idiot.
Gichin Funakoshi, who is accredited with inventing Shotokan studied Goju-ryu, Shorin-ryu, and Shorei-ryu. Shotokan is influenced largely by the latter two.
It is indeed different from the Okinawan style of karate in the modern era, but these differences were once not as obvious.
I am hostile because you have all kinds of holes in your arguments and try to cover them up with inaccuracy and redaction. “Conventional Understanding”? Says who!
I demand peer-reviewed proof for such claims to substantiate your opinions.
[quote=helmutlvx;2408386]You stated you don’t think kata are/should be used for fighting AND THEN assert that kata contain fighting strategy and accurate psychological responses!
Where and how is this possible? Can you give us any examples?
edit: And before you make a call to the WAAAAAHMBULANCE, I’m doing exactly what you say in your OP. I’m being skeptical. (The juvenile insults are just how I have fun.)[/quote]
Kata contain the set ups the subtlities and the idiocyncracies of the art. For example, in shotokan one punch one kill and never strike first, are psychological elements and strategic elements… certainly they are related to fighting, but no not directly When Machada uses a linear attack that has the hallmarks of shotokan what is the relationship of this to the kata?
The kata is more related to the transmission of the are imo. This has to consider not just the fighters but the teachers, the method by which the art is transmitted, etc.
So you can see that I am talking about an indirect relationship here… Machada might learn through the katas what to emphasize that makes a shotokan punch distinct from a Goju punch. He may learn how to condition his body to make this punch happen and he might learn how to set up that punch.
Does this make sense?
[quote=TheMightyMcClaw;2408390]Because he fucking didn’t, that’s why.
The “kata” in Judo are a wholly different animal than the kata in Karate in or the tao lu in Chinese martial arts.[/quote]
you should elaborate… yes BTW they are and we should ask why that is… Kano was among other things of gifted intellect.
So why did he choose to incorporate these forms Bearclaw? to what end sir?
In general, I see “forms” are more of an encyclopedic approach of summarizing the basic moments of a system in a method than can be transmitted via repetition. But it suffers from the same problems in some ways that the “telephone” game does – variations and interpretations in transmissions. I see nothing wrong with forms (even as a part of training, even if it is for more historical reasons), other than don’t try to read too much into them, and they are not combat techniques.
Even goju was started with a basis the eight forms brought over from China, so helmut, it’s a part of the history your system. You are getting to strung up and pissy, so go change your tampon and come back and try for a more civil discussion.
@Dsimon3387
Could you give specific examples of said subtleties and set-ups?
Did you read that big long thread about how Machida’s striking is also influenced by Muay Thai and boxing?
There is no such things as a “Goju punch” or a “Shotokan punch”. There is a type of punching that starts from the hiki-te position that has become associate with the term “karate punch”.
Karateka don’t always punch like that.
“Might, might might” don’t make right. If you’re going to make absolute statements, make absolute supplmentary rebuttals.
Oh wait. You’re saying Machida learned how to fight from the Shotokan kata his dad taught him.
I thought you said kata AREN’T SUPPOSED TO BE USED FOR FIGHTING.
edit: Your style field is empty. What do you train in and what rank do you hold?
[QUOTE=TheDingo;2408420]In general, I see “forms” are more of an encyclopedic approach of summarizing the basic moments of a system in a method than can be transmitted via repetition. But it suffers from the same problems in some ways that the “telephone” game does – variations and interpretations in transmissions. I see nothing wrong with forms (even as a part of training, even if it is for more historical reasons), other than don’t try to read too much into them, and they are not combat techniques.
Even goju was started with a basis the eight forms brought over from China, so helmut, it’s a part of the history your system. You are getting to strung up and pissy, so go change your tampon and come back and try for a more civil discussion.[/QUOTE]
I don’t have to be civil in a dead horse thread.
[quote=helmutlvx;2408392]Goju-ryu is a derivative of Naha-te taught by Highashionna Kanryo, you idiot.
Gichin Funakoshi, who is accredited with inventing Shotokan studied Goju-ryu, Shorin-ryu, and Shorei-ryu. Shotokan is influenced largely by the latter two.
It is indeed different from the Okinawan style of karate in the modern era, but these differences were once not as obvious.
I am hostile because you have all kinds of holes in your arguments and try to cover them up with inaccuracy and redaction. “Conventional Understanding”? Says who!
I demand peer-reviewed proof for such claims to substantiate your opinions.[/quote]
Naha-Te Shuri-Te are Okinawan forms of karate… Shotokan is a Japanese form of karate. It has A DIFFERENT PHILOSPHY OF ENGAGEMENT a different physical orientation, etc. One strike one kill, block before attacking where do you hear that in Okinawan karate? These are not little differences… I know who invented Goju I studied Okinawan karate for over 14 years in a fighting kumite based club, your teacher would know my teacher I guarantee it. So watch it with the idiot talk, you are embarrasing yourself, not me.
it does not matter that Funakoshi studied Okinawan karate because he changed the style, as much as Kano changed Ju Jutsu.
These differences were obvious once Shotokan became itself and not Funakoshi studying karate as a student…ask your teacher if you do not believe me.
You’re one post behind on my responses, so I’ll wait for you to catch up.
I agree 100% you certainly don’t however:
a) would you speak to me like that if I was in front of you? I can honestly say to you that I never speak in a manner that I would not speak to a person standing in front of me.
b) You show some real lack of knowledge in your understanding of your style, As Dingo said, like a good deal of Okinawan te there are pronounced Chinese influences on the system in addition to indigenous and. forms are a part of that tradition.
c) Honestly you don’t know how stupid it sounds when you are foul typed and aggressive like that.
[QUOTE=Dsimon3387;2408429]I agree 100% you certainly don’t however:
a) would you speak to me like that if I was in front of you? I can honestly say to you that I never speak in a manner that I would not speak to a person standing in front of me.
b) You show some real lack of knowledge in your understanding of your style, As Dingo said, like a good deal of Okinawan te there are pronounced Chinese influences on the system in addition to indigenous and. forms are a part of that tradition.
c) Honestly you don’t know how stupid it sounds when you are foul typed and aggressive like that.[/QUOTE]
A. Yeah. I would. Many of my insults are in jest, but my questions and requests for substantiating evidence are exactly how I would conduct myself face to face. If even an inch is given to historical and technical inaccuracies in karate, it could go the way of taijutsu.
B. I actively practice the kata attributed to my school. That’s not my argument. I am pointing out specific contradictions and flaws in your statements, my own training is irrelevant to the discussion. The exception to that is if you’re calling my rank into question.
C. Fuck you. Vulgarity and stupidity are not endemic to each other.
I reiterate. What style do you practice and what is your rank?