Here is an interesting question for a discussion. There are two major concepts that practitioners constantly argue on:
The practitioners of Chinese martial artists saying that Karate only consist of basic techniques and lack the high level, more complex or harder to understand techniques. The students of the Chinese styles refer to someone as being high level or master by having knowledge of the high level or ‘smarter’ - often held as secret - techniques. I’ve even heard Bruce Lee saying this during an interview: karate is ONLY the basics - the word ‘only’ is emphasized here. I also heard other masters saying the same.
In most Karate styles on the other hand, you learn nearly all techniques there is in your first year and you spend the rest of your time perfecting these. This concept can also be seen in the original instructions for samurais which required them to practice a technique a thousand times a day rather than learning new techniques every week. Most practitioners of Japanese styles argue: “You don’t need to know a lot, just know it well”. They practice and perfect only these few basic techniques and refine them as they progress to their master levels.
Who is right and who is wrong? What is your opinion on this?
it is my humble opinion that on one level when compared to the learning process of CMA, Karate is pretty simplistic. But that doesn’t make ineffective. it truly is never the style of martial arts you practice that will make you a good fighter, it is and will always be the “individual”. the question is, can you make karate work for you?
I think some will agree, because at least it has happened for me, that as far as i’ve come i have returned to the basics to reinforce them. because when it all comes down to it is a punch is a punch, a block is a block and a kick is a kick. we all have those in all systems no matter if it is karate, CMA, MMA, etc. basics are very important. I used to hear people talking about “GOING BACK TO BASICS” my whole career, and at first i was like why go back to the beginning? until i reached that level of understanding, it was like a window opening up and then i returned to my basics.
anyone who tells you their style is better doesn’t possess the correct understanding of Martial arts. the same thing goes for the person who says my teacher is better than yours. They truly just don’t know.
now Karate has a way of putting down CMA because according to them we are a soft style, therefore not as effective as Karate and the power they use. But they can’t speak on CMA if they have never really learned our stuff, same goes the other way around.
Finishing, all styles are good as long as you make it work for you.
I know when i first learned five wheel horse, the first set we learn in our clf school, I thought it was boring, but later looked back and went…sheet, this is all infighting and elbows and arm breaks..pretty advanced or at least you have to understand how to position your self to do it, but when its fist taught i was just told…“do for da chi, da wais powar da foot werk..”
I agree with you HSKWarrior, I had the same opinion as well. It is not the style but the individual talent and experiences that determines the outcome of a fight, not the style.
The truth is that for me the issue came up in my kung fu where my instructor would constantly critisize karate for consisting only basic techniques and lacking the ‘high level’ of the art. His true belief was they were not as effective as kung fu because of this reason. As I also mentined Bruce Lee himself has also said this in one of his interviews: “Karate ONLY consist of the basics therefore not as highly developed” - or something of that nature. Being in karate for a few years before taking up CMA it always dissapointed me that my instructor lacked the true understanding behind the power of basics, or hard vs soft, or yin and yang creating the whole.
Sounds like you had the opposite side experienced where karate practioners looked down on the chinese arts for being soft but those people are also inexperienced, not realizing soft is the opposite of hard, and only the one side of the truth.
I’m glad I studied both the Japanese and Chinese arts therefore just ignore these kind of crtitisizm even when it comes from my own teacher’s mouth. Not being able to recognize that only yin and yang together creates the whole is a sign of being a bit narrow sighted.
Thanks for all answers, if anyone has any more comments, experiences, please add to this subject.
ever notice that the higher level the technique is, the simpler it is? Rather than block or deflect a strike and counter, position yourself so that your strikes ‘slides’ in between the space in his attack. Karate has the exact same thing. Karate also has softer deflections,simultaneous block/strike as well. In every “blocking” movement in Karate, there is that ‘loading’ position, which is the technique in itself. In later stages,the"block" is often the movement that follows and is actually a strike. There is no difference. Just in the way it has been taught in the past few generations, just as in Kung-Fu. Those that say there is, have not actually studied Karate, in a traditional school,and were taught, or even witnessed their higher levels.
If you look at Ninomiya’s book on Shotokan, you will see some of this. He studied directly under Funakoshi I believe. Nishiyama’s Best Karate series is also very good.
Yes, I myself regarded those not very knowledgeable and a bit blinded who criticized other forms of arts. I also do know that mastering any styles takes time and when you do you’ll arrive to the same concepts: execute your moves without thinking, disable your attacker/opponent the shortest, the least resisting way, while spending the least amount of energy possible.
I also do not understand the constant battle especially between Karate and Kung-Fu, I know the masters have a lot of historical influences when they comment on each other’s art. For example my kung-fu master fought against the Japanese in China and I always considered this when he criticized Karate as only consisting the basics and not being of high levels - he did this in front of the classes. I do know that especially these two countries have been rivals many times in history and the effects of it is still influencing their way of thinking.
I like to stand in between and learn and discover the secrets of both. I believe no matter which way you go, you’ll have a great art in your possession, one that you can use effectively anytime and that you can deepen your knowledge in for a lifetime.
-X-
PS: your website tentigers.com returns a ‘Forbidden access to server’ message. Do you have a live website? Is it only accessible for members? Thanks!
HSK
As far as the application of two different styles against eachother, i agree that it is more about the individuals than anything else. Lack of fear, strength and speed are probably the most important factors…maybe in that order (maybe not), but i dont agree that a punch is just a punch when comparing two different styles or that one teacher is not better than another. This i know for a fact from personal experience.
well, break it down for me. Please, go a little deeper into what you mean.
I’m going to stand on my position unless you can convince me other wise.
Now, remember, i was only speaking about basics, just the basics. aside from animal styles since they have no hands to technically punch with, all techniques have very simple beginnings. it is what you do with them in the long run that matters most.
so, before i go into my own thing, i’ll wait for your answer, and we can just go from there.
oh, and speaking about one teacher being better than the other, it’s something that my sifu has always taught me. basically, it’s “don’t talk ****” about another teacher. Yeah there are people you find yourself having more knowledge, or even skill than, but the key is to not perpetuate that.
(And yes, i know, i have blasted mainly one sifu here on this forum, but try to keep it to a minimum)
See, i chose my sifu, not because he was better than so and so, but because he was a fighter himself and could relate to my personal needs. Please understand one thing about me, i do not approach martial arts in any esoteric manner whatsoever. I am very practical, and maybe a little too aggressive with my approaches, but it is my opinion it is better to be ready, than not.
HSK
For example, look at how wing chun punches as opposed to say karate…totally different( im talking about the theory of behind the movement also). The basiscs of the punch are different, just as the basics (even a simple punch) for me are totally different than when I practiced mantis. of course it all comes down to basics…its quality not quantity, and with that being said, more techs are not necessarily better, and may even be detrimental in that it gets a little too watered down. a great example is western boxing, maybe 5 different punches, but they practice them over and over, and they get heavy and fast. Im also standing on my position, as it is gained from experience, the best way to learn.
Now, let’s not turn this into an argument (did i spell that right HMMMM-i think an e is missing?)
Anyhow, I don’t like to work off of theories when it comes to self protection. As i’ve read in your post you mentioned “technicalities” of a system. Who’s speaking about technicalities? I’m speaking about a “punch”!
Whether it is wc’s chain punching, yum chop, chop choy, right &left cross, corkscrew…if it is coming from a ****ed position and is launched then it is a punch. The shape of the fist, its angle, trajectory,direction, velocity comes in after we agree that once you launch your fists from a ****ed position,it’s what? its who? its how? its huh? what? a punch! therefore, a punch is a punch regardless of the theory behind whatever you are about to unleash.
Now, remember, i said “punch” not swing! let’s not get those two mixed up. or we would be at this all **** day! We can do this if you’re down to buy me a beer! cuz i’ll need a drink after this. LMAo
Also would like to add a couple of things to this. HSK is right, mantis - the animal - NEVER punches, yet humans ‘deformed’ their movements to fit to them as a fighting art. For humans, punching is an effective way of disabling an oppononent, the mantis only grabs and wrestles it’s prey.
Now also let’s compare the basic Wing Chun punch that comes from the chest with the basic karate punch that starts from the hip and is delivered in a straight line: Wing Chun practitioners belive their punch is better because it’s only starts in front of the body, therefore travels a shorter distance, harder for the opponent to see it. Karate punches, on the other hand, take up a larger distance, therefore they are easier to see for the opponent, but by nature because the path is longer, more energy is built up by the time it arrives to it’s target. If the punch correctly connects with the target, it has more devastating effects on the body.
So again, it comes down to who is better as a person, who practices that punch more, not which type of punch is the better one. Nature made sure you ALWAYS sacrifice one thing if you want to gain another!
generally, the better or the more virtuous the person the worse they are at fighting. there have been some notable exceptions. but it takes an a55hole to want to f4ck someone up. whomever wants to win more wins. generally, it’s the jerk.
nature does not care if you have one technique or one thousand techniques. i have over 29 basic techniques and around 750 versions of them. i didn’t sacrifice a thing to get them…perrhaps you could be more specific…?
its the balance of the cosmos…one side of the scale goes up while the other goes down. Movement in one area constitutes movement in another…thats why one needs to learn to flow with change, without that you will never be able to achieve greatness.
I sure can. Once again, quality vs. quantity here. While you spend the time on practicing each of the 750 variations of a technique, you can only spend a short amout of time on each if you want to get through all of them. By the time you went through all of the 750, your day is over and you only spent, let’s say 5 minutes on each version.
If you had only practiced just your 29 basic techniques, you could have spent 30 minutes on each, therefore the quality of your 29 techniques would far pass the quality of your 750. Therefore nature DOES care what you chose. Again, you have to sacrifice something for another, quality for quantity or vice versa.
Once again it comes down to what you prefer: a few good techniques or a lot of not so perfect ones. And this was my point when I started this thread, the Japanese styles tend to have a lot fewer techniques but they practice them a thousand times a day, CMA styles tend to create more variations of the basics, but if you spend the same time training in both, the end result should be in the same ballpark.
