Karate

[Asia]

Archangel,

I know of the Seidokaikian (kyokushin offshot) founded by Kazuyoshi Ishii (aka Mr. K1 himself) but I don't know Andy Hug. I do highly recommend Ishii's book "Katsu Tame no Karate" (Winning Karate) it is a good book on kumite.


Naf and others,


Blumming is well know as a good man in Kyokushin circles. However alot of so called "truth" came out AFTER Oyama died. Pple flocked left and right to tell the TRUE story of Oyama, each with their own twist. (Blumming mentions that Oyama knew nothing of throw, ne waza, etc BUT in several of his books <Japanese version the english ones have much taken out of it> it shows nage waza and ne waza see what I mean) I take all legends with a grain of salt. From MY experience I have found Kyokushin a VERY good form of karate. I have become very FORMINABLE in th system, but then again I have dominate every system I under took. What I got from Oyama. He was a showman I will glady endorse that he LOVED to play up the GODHAND name he went by but he WAS TOUGH I don't think ANY karate man could stand up to him in his prime.As for the Bull thing, like I said he almost died fighting one in mexico, the reason I think he didn't fight many bulls in THEIR prime, I got confirmation for good sources tha Oyama was hospitalized there for a gore wound so if he NEVER fough bulls out of Japan where did the wound come form?????? Take every thing with a grain of salt.

[Shaolindynasty]

I heard Oyama used to wrestle the bull then chop the back of the horn which is supposed to be weaker. Still a very impressive feat, how many of us could wrestle bulls of any age? Kind of reminds me of Ku Yu Chueng's iron palm killing the circus horse.

Didn't Oyama go live alone in the mountains for like 3 years with nothing but training? No matter what "stage tricks" he used I still respect him as a highly dedicated martial artist.

I don't listen to what people say after someone dies, especially if they never said it when the person was alive.

I remeber going to the sheidokan(sp?) in chicago back in 2000, That was a very intertaining tournament. I think (if i remeber right)every fight was a knockout. Effective stuff

I just watched my sabaki challenge tape. Good stuff

I don't think the training in either of these is well suited for the weekend warrior.

Real Karate and real kungfu are equally as powerful.

[Chinwoo-er]

I think there are several problems in MA nowdays.

(1) When we attempt to "judge" a certain style through a certain person, we can never be sure he is doing that style correctly.
(2) How do we know that he was even taught correctly
(3) How do we know his master understood the style correctly ?
(4) How do we know we are understanding it correctly.

Just an analogy. I hear people say that karate has little grappling moves. And they justify it by saying it is of no use. why graple when you could bring them down with one move ? ( which is the essence of karate, I give them credit for that ). But the idea that karate has little grappling moves is not true. It has a D**n lot. It is just that nowdays, the "sportification" of karate has made masters placed so much emphsise of the striking part that the grappling and wrestling are played down. They hardly ever teach it anymore. let alone focuss on it enough for the students to know how to use it in real life

[rogue]

"what's basic usually works best. But I find the more a teacher or style breaks things down, more people think it is advanced. "

Interesting idea. My TKD master will correct your technique but he rarely ever breaks it down. I see him do things that others make a big deal about such as triangulation, but he just kind of shows you and that's it. Works the same either way. A good example is in this months BB. In the article 10 Laws of the Fist includes almost the same things we are taught but without being called Laws. Page 83, in the section on "No Block", it states that this technique of getting out of the way is reserved for brown belts and higher but we're taught that from day one, but Kenpo is seen as a more advanced art.

[Shaolindynasty]

rogue- I have noticed that to. Especially in the internal vs. external arguements. Allot of time the external guys do the same things that the internal guys do but internal is condidered advanced because all the rules/mechanics/principles are talked about in detail. Where allot of external guys do the same thing without realiseing it was special. It's kinda funny actually

[rogue]

SD,
At the risk of getting flamed an example is the difference between Wing Chun and karate. Wing Chun practitioners know their concepts, have great drills and can talk a blue street about exactly what they'd do against any technique thrown against them(a trait shared with TKD people whose response is always "kick 'em!"). WC a very cool art and one I consider a "higher" art.

Karateka rarely talk about concepts except in the broadest terms, has various kumite which can be robotic and looks primitive against Chi Sao and so far very few karateka that I've talked to can tell you what they'd do against any technique except to say "I'd block it, or get out of the way or hit the guy". But somehow when you spar with them the techniques are there anyway.

DISCLAIMER:
Now this is just an example from my experience with karateka and wing chun players that I've met or know and shouldn't be read as a blanket statement about WC or any style of karate.

[Merryprankster]

So if the techniques are there anyway, what's the problem? They don't talk about it enough?

[rogue]

No problem to me, just a differen approach. Don't forget I'm in the Karate/TKD camp.

[red_fists]

Ponders.

What is better discussing a technique or training a technique.

[rogue]

I'd go with training, but it was just a point about the differences between a higher more detailed arts like WC or Kempo and karate which sometimes is a strange mix of the vague and direct.

[red_fists]

rogue.

I am with you.

Even though I study an internal Art, we don't go that much into details.

Still seem to get similar results though.

Sometimes I think that there is to much discusion going on in IMA, just trying to mail down one term in a way that makes everybody happy.

[rogue]

Cool RF, also the Kempo I was talking about was the American kind, I'd just read an article in Black Belt by a Kempo person so it was a fresh example.

[Merryprankster]

I guess that doesn't really clear the air any about "higher and lower" level MA's.

I personally think it's a useless, stupid categorization made by people who want to feel secure that they are the "best," because they are a "higher level" MA than some other style.

It's a pretty arbitrary and useless concept.

[SevenStar]

I'm with you MP. While I was training with WaterDragon, we were talking about techniques in our respective styles. Many of the principles we used in MT, he used in taiji and vice versa. The karate guy I mentioned earlier uses the same principles. I think that in the end it really doesn't matter. They are just different means to the same end.

[neito]

the only thing i dont like about karate is the "corkskrew punch" found in many karate/tkd styles. it feels like my elbows going to break or something and my wrist is very uncomfortable. of course some styles only half corkscrew or use a verticle punch like isshin ryu. they also seem to do huge overly powerful blocks in practise which seem unecessary, but i noticed when they actually fight their block are neat and snappy. anyway, i'm generally impressed with karate