Karate Useless?

[Forbidden Fury]

I'm currently looking into a few martial arts, trying to narrow down what I'd like to take. My main focus on self-defense. However, most people have been telling me that if I want REAL, effective self-defense, I should stay away from any type of karate. Part of this might be sparring style, if it's a little light on contact. But other than that, I can't figure out why so many people are against it for defense. Can anyone explain this to me?

[aseepish]

Not all karate styles are "useless" for self-defense. Kyokushin is a good example of a style that spars full-contact.

I took three months of Shito-ryu karate many years ago. I didn't like it because I disliked the training methods - standing in rows and doing kihon (basic kicks, punches and blocks), one-step sparring (A does a reverse punch and freezes, B counters), and kata kata kata. We did a little non-contact point sparring, to score your technique had to be perfect (even if the definition of a perfect technique left you wide open).

The sensei said time and again "Karate is not for fighting. It's about making yourself a better person."

That's for starters...

[KDH]

In a way, a martial art shouldn't be about fighting. It should be about protecting yourself and others. People have this wrong idea about MA these days and it could largely be due to fight/MMA tournaments.

Martial arts weren't created so people could step into an octagon and beat the shit out of each other. That isn't the true martial way anyway.

So anyway, Karate is not useless. Even the not-so-respected Shotokan is good when trained right. There is no useless style, only useless practitioners and teachers.

Lot of UFC fanatics respond to that by saying, "Losers who can't fight say that to make themselves feel better".

That = pure ignorance and stupidity.

[jubaji]

now its come to this

So anyway, Karate is not useless. Even the not-so-respected Shotokan is good when trained right. There is no useless style, only useless practitioners and teachers.

Lot of UFC fanatics respond to that by saying, "Losers who can't fight say that to make themselves feel better".

That = pure ignorance and stupidity.

Now you've cut out the middle-man and are arguing with yourself!

[KDH]

you should be a scholar

[jubaji]

you should be a scholar

And you should be quiet.

[KDH]

and if i don't???

[jubaji]

and if i don't???

That's up to you. How's it working out so far?

[Aikiguy]

Well, you have a choice. You can go to the "traditional martial arts" schools, which have a more philosophical spin and are focused on your training as a way of life in which self defense can be considered a by product. Then you also have the "fighting arts" schools, which seem to eschew the philosophy and teach you how to fight. Period.

There is overlap, of course, but as others have said in this thread, the method of training is paramount. A karate school could work out just fine for your goals if they focus on how their techniques work against resisting opponents in non-choreographed, high pressure situations. However, if you see a class where they spend more time hitting the air than pads and each other (in a controlled setting of course!) then I am not sure it's what you want.

As always, this is based on my experience ... others are different, I'm sure.

[Mastah]

Self defense a by product in Traditional MA..... I am finding it very hard to believe that. You seem to be very experienced. Please. Tell us of these magical modern martial arts that teach people how to "fight".

[Aikiguy]

Self defense a by product in Traditional MA..... I am finding it very hard to believe that. You seem to be very experienced. Please. Tell us of these magical modern martial arts that teach people how to "fight".

How much experience do you need in order to understand that the only way to learn how to swim is to get into the water? If any school - traditional or modern - spends more time meditating, doing standup drills in the air, talking philosophy, and considers sparring "optional" (or point oriented like aseepish's experience), what do you think the results are going to be compared to a school that focuses on sparring against resisting opponents? Sure, nothing's going to compare to a real fight, but some methods of training are closer to it than others.

As a side note - if the goal of a traditional MA is to "make you a better person", as some schools profess, and the school uses meditation, philosophy, conflict resolution, forms, sparring, and heck, even community service ... then yes, self defense can be considered one of the by-products of that training. It's one of the things you develop while working towards "becoming a better person".

[aseepish]

A JKD perspective

Throwing punches in the air while someone counts to ten in Chinese/Japanese/Korean is "dead" training.

Shadowboxing, moving around, visualizing an opponent is "alive".

Pulling off a "move" against an opponent who has thrown an attack and then freezes (even if it was a full speed, full power attack) is dead.

Pulling off a move against a moving, semi-resisting opponent is alive, especially if you gradually reduce the controlled aspects of the drill until it is sparring.

Katas - dead.

Working combinations against a trainer using focus mits/pads - alive (if done properly)

Notice - I said NOTHING about BJJ, MT, the UFC, or MMA.
If you train with aliveness, it doesn't matter what style you practice, you can be effective. The problem is that the rigidity inherent in many TMAs doesn't permit altering of training methods. That's why they are called traditional. Another problem is that arts such as Aikido, Hapkido, and traditional Jujutsu have techniques that are TOO DANGEROUS to practice safely against a fully resisting opponent. How can you safely practice a full-force eye-jab against a resisting opponent? And if you can't practice it, how can you be sure of it working in a self-defense situation?

[Toudiyama[NL]]

[QUOTE=aseepish]Throwing punches in the air while someone counts to ten in Chinese/Japanese/Korean is "dead" training.[/QUOOTE]

That's what you start with, in some styles even standing in ready stance ( shoulderwidth), I would very often skip this and the traditional walking up and down and in stead do something like:

Shadowboxing, moving around, visualizing an opponent is "alive".

But that's porobably because I also did Savate and MT/Kickboxing(dutch style)

Pulling off a "move" against an opponent who has thrown an attack and then freezes (even if it was a full speed, full power attack) is dead.

Pulling off a move against a moving, semi-resisting opponent is alive, especially if you gradually reduce the controlled aspects of the drill until it is sparring.

I see it as the first step that continues with semi resisting to end up with full resisting.
Problem is a lot of trad karate schools get stuck at the first level and see that as a goal in itself ( exams) and not as a means to, as a step towards another goal

Katas - dead.

Working combinations against a trainer using focus mits/pads - alive (if done properly)

Kata in itself is dead, kata as an acompaniment to bunkai and ohyo is far from dead, problem here is for most japanese styles there were only the Kata, the bunkai has been made up after that, in some Okinawan Karate, the original meaning of the combinations in the KAta weren't lost and in fact the forms are only a way of being able to train the combos on your own
These combos, though pre-arranged, when done against a semi or full ressistive opponents, can be "nearly" alive

Notice - I said NOTHING about BJJ, MT, the UFC, or MMA.
If you train with aliveness, it doesn't matter what style you practice, you can be effective. The problem is that the rigidity inherent in many TMAs doesn't permit altering of training methods. That's why they are called traditional. Another problem is that arts such as Aikido, Hapkido, and traditional Jujutsu have techniques that are TOO DANGEROUS to practice safely against a fully resisting opponent. How can you safely practice a full-force eye-jab against a resisting opponent? And if you can't practice it, how can you be sure of it working in a self-defense situation?

A bit contradictive here, you agree a eye-jab is dangerous but if some-one pulls it 2 inch in front of your eyes, you don't know if it would have hurt you in a real situation?
As long as you don't rely soley on eye-jab like techniques, it should not be much of a problem
Think of this if they are difficult to pull off, why are they prohibited in MMA?

As for people always mentioning Kyokushin, I'm sorry people but besides full contact sparring, they do the rest as mentioned above, standing basics, pre-arranged kumite with non resistive opponents, kata with rediculous reverse enginered bunkai, the works
Some Okinawan styles might not do FC sparring but the rest the do as I described ( marching up and down the Dojo is a japanese thing) so in my opinion these would be better suited for SD

PS I have done japanes Wado Karate so am not trying to promote my style

[medic06]

Karate is not useless. The biggest problem with Karate is that most people do not train hard enough.

[medic06]

Another problem is that arts such as Aikido, Hapkido, and traditional Jujutsu have techniques that are TOO DANGEROUS to practice safely against a fully resisting opponent. How can you safely practice a full-force eye-jab against a resisting opponent? And if you can't practice it, how can you be sure of it working in a self-defense situation?

That's like saying guns and knives are totally useless because you can't go around shooting and stabing people