Kata training guide

Nick,

in the past and also in the old GT forum you have frequently given bits of advice on proper training of kata for self-defense purposes. You often seem to mention that kata is a good tool to train for multiple opponents (that is the way I understand you).

I believe that you do not teach kata anymore but let's assume that you would.

- How would you design a training programme to ensure that all aspects
you find relevant are covered in kata training?

- How would you evaluate if a student has "got" your material, is able to
apply it?

- a final question: would you concentrate on one or few katas or do you
see value in learning for example 20 katas for your black belt exam?

Looking forward to your reply

Boris

Boris,

Good questions...

Yes, I was shown kata in a way that made them both interesting and incredibly practical. My understanding is that most schools either teach them as a "dance routine" to be memorized to past your next test, or, if they do show applications, they show either basic or impractical ones.

Bob Jones, the man I credit with showing me most of my practical stuff back in Oz, was huge on kata breakdown and he and the blackbelts would spend hours and hours on one form tearing it apart and teaching all the applications within.

The next big difference was that when we practiced them as a group they had to be in perfect harmony with one another. Again, I've seen schools where everybody tools along at their own pace and no one cares who finishes first, last or in the middle. By forcing everyone to keep together you develop a lot of spatial awareness, awareness of your surroundings and develop other senses that are applicable in multiple situations. I.e. if I'm the guy out front I have to be able to pick up when the guys behind me are moving next, obviously I can't look so I'm using hearing, sensing, peripheral vision and so on to know when it's time to go.

To answer your questions specifically...

I wouldn't design a kata program. The kata that are out there already have most of the answers.

The students "get it" when they "come out of the dance." It's hard to put your finger on but you can tell when someone is just going through the motions and someone truly understands what he's doing. When I see a student who's "got it" do a form I can "see" the same attackers he's seeing. PS: He'll also rip the fuck out of multiple attackers...something that all the zen do kai guys seemed to be good at.

I wouldn't do as many as I did in the day which was 26 for black belt because a lot are variations of themselves. However I wouldn't only do one. Kata were very much the dvd of their day. Just as nowadays you go to a seminar on leg locks and the teacher will sell a dvd of leg locks to act as an aide memoire, a kata is usually about certain aspects of fighting.

My mate Gavin Mulholland is very into which ones are for what but the humble Na Han sin for example is a collection of techniques designed to fight with your back to a wall. (I used to teach it first because we felt it was easier for someone with minimal training to survive a multiple attack if he could get his back to something and thus cut down 180 degrees of attack space) Later ones are designed to teach throwing, use of bodyweight, stand up clinching/grappling techniques and so on.

If you practice them with the correct visualization process as far as your sub-conscious is concerned, you're really in a fight. By practicing all the possible variations of all the different applications (initially with a compliant partner and later with a resisting one) you reach a point in a fight where you're reacting with exactly the right moves at the right time without even realizing why you're doing it.

On the night I had the big brawl in Camden Town I wasn't thinking about what I was doing - conscious thought in a fight of that magnitude is too slow - but rather reacting. I have absolutely zero doubt that if I hadn't done kata work to the extent we did with zen do kai and Bob that I'd have had my arse kicked that night.

Nick

Nick,

thank you very much for your detailed answer.

As I was refering to a "kata programme" I didn't mean a set of katas that you would put together but more in which way would you examine / breakdown a kata. This was a bit unclear on my part.

So - how would you start to break down a kata? Would you start with "white belt bunkai", e.g. soto-uke vs. oi-zuki chudan (kihon karate techniques vs. kihon karate techniques) or would you start with real world applications, e.g. against a haymaker, a tackle, etc.? When would you introduce the idea of fighting multiple attackers?

I'm after the way you progress through a kata.

Personally, I find this a to be a very difficult progress, since certain kata movements have several applications and secondly how can one know what a kata was really meant to be for.

Boris

Hey mate...no problems, that's what we're here for.

I've never really had any set way of doing it. Total beginners I'd be more inclined to just have them learn the form in general.

As they progress through the ranks the forms get more intricate and so then do the explanations of the various techniques. I'll break more applications out to black belts for example than lower ranks because they'll understand it better. Giving something to a white belt that is going to go over his head for example is just wasting his time and mine.

Re the actual applications...no, almost always against real world applications. I've mentioned before I don't think those guys were so dumb as to try and teach circular blocks against linear strikes. When you consider the shortest distance between two points is a straight line (unless you're in outer space which we're clearly not) and that the punch goes first, how can something circular pick it up?

Re the multiples question a lot of the techniques are against multiple attackers already - such as kansetsu geri, the low side kick to the knee ostensibly - and so is the kata itself so it's all one and the same to me.

Absolutely right that certain moves have more than one application...why not? You can pronounce the letter "A" multiple ways and the word bow can be pronounced as the way you tie your shoe lace and the noise a dog makes when barking. Same word, different applications.

Re who's to say what they're for? Well in some cases we have evidence found in manuscripts and art work etc., in other cases my instructor told me and in other situations we can reverse engineer it. To do that we're back to my example of the circular block - chudan uke v chudan tsuki. We know if we analyze it, it can't possible work that way but the move is still in the forms, ergo, it must be for something else...but what...and then the fun begins trying to figure out exactly what.

Nick

This brings back memories of my old karate days when we trained in Kata. I'm pleased that we were doing something right back then. My old karate school advocated training kata at the same speed up and down up and down until we were all sick. Also we broke it down into applications, though I wasn't keen on some of the applications for no other reason than I suspect a few people there made assumptions more than educated opinions, but again may be that was just me.

All this makes me want to go into karate again

Nick,

thank you for your time to give such detailed answers. I really appreciate it. This forum is a great place to be.

Boris

P.S.: Beware of those combative weirdos - they don't get the true meaning of kata

Nick, I just wondered if you still do any Katas of the old traditional weapons and what value you see in them?

Incidently, I'm moving house at the moment and just found an old bag of Ju jitsu stuff, I've not picked up a pair of Sai or nunchucks for a few years but I could still remember the Katas pretty much perfectly.

I remember you saying you used nunchucks a few times in fights in the past. Just for my own curiosity if you had the choice of nunchucks or your ASP when it kicked off, which would you pick?

Every now and then...on rare occassions I'll bust out one of the weapons kata. Usually one with the sai, occasionally one with the Jo.

Re the nunchaku v baton question...man, that's a toughie.

Nunchaku are incredibly versatile - most of the techniques don't involve hitting at all - but rather locking and strangles etc. They also generate phenomenal hitting power and have a psychological effect when they're being spun by someone who knows what they're doing. One other benefit is that it's hard for someone to use them against you should they fall into the enemy's hands...unlike a straight baton/Asp etc.

The stick wouldn't have been my first choice in the old days because I never really trained in one...now, having dabbled in FMA though, I'd be inclined to grab the straight stick...not least of which is the reason that, should you end up in court later wielding a stick will draw less attention than wielding nunchakus.

Nick

Hi Nick,

I'm happy to see somebody talking positivly about Karate again. It's taken such bad press recently.

I now practice Kenpo and FMA, but my roots and foundation will always be Wado Ryu.

All the best

Dave
www.wildgeesema.com

Mate,

No problem...I think we all finally agreed over on Geoff's old forum that karate is not the problem at all...it's the McDojos that have watered the stuff down to the extent that they have so people think what they see there is "karate" It's not. The real stuff works just fine.

Nick