Those who can, spar. Those who can't, do kata - Part III

A few weeks ago, I commented on an attack on a quote by my primary instructor, Soke Takayuki Kubota, posted by Martial Arts Masters Magazine on their Facebook page. The quote said “Kata is kumite and kumite is kata”. I commented that I had learned how to put kime (focused, penetrating power at the point of contact) into my oizuki (lunge punch) from doing Tekki/Naihanchi Shodan. Someone responded that I obviously knew nothing about kata, that it was never designed for use against another trained man, that a lunge punch had no place in real self defense, that a real opponent on the street would ram an ashtray into my mouth and smash my head into his knee, etc.

My response was to ask him what he would do in the following scenario: He’s in a heated argument with a guy who stands just outside arm or foot reach. The guy angrily thrusts his hand into his coat, as if reaching for a pistol. He’s too far away to elbow, headbutt, knee, apply kyusho or tuite, etc. What would he do?

It’s a medium or long range situation, not a close range one, requiring a medium or long range technique. A fast lunge punch would cover that distance easily, but he’s clearly missing that tool in his combative toolbox. (I’m not sure how he replied as the thread had been completely removed when I checked the next day.)

(French Philosopher Voltaire said “If you wish to converse with me, define your terms”. So I should point out that what many call a lunge punch, I call a step punch. What I call a lunge punch is a much faster accelerating technique that requires different footwork and can cover a fair amount of distance in a split second.)

In his book, Hidden Karate, Gennosuke Higaki claims that, prior to coming to mainland Japan, the top Okinawan instructors (including Gichin Funakoshi) made a secret pact not to teach the mainlanders either the true kata or its bunkai. He claims they intentionally taught them what he termed “useless kata”. He bases this on statements made by his instructor, Shozan Kubota, who was reportedly one of Funakoshi Sensei’s most senior students in the early days.

A good friend, who is very informed and well connected with most of the top Okinawan masters (including past connections with some who would have been around when such a decision was made), doesn’t believe Higaki’s claim. He thought the entire premise ridiculous. Plus, Sensei Funakoshi reportedly taught both Okinawan kata and bunkai to his early mainland students, even by Higaki’s own admission (if I remember right).

But it’s not just Japanese kata some hold as useless. They also include its defensive techniques, its longer fighting distance, and its focus on competition.

If you were a general about to engage in a major war, would you want infantry, aircraft, tanks, or artillery? Or would you want them all? A wise general would surely want all the tools he could get. And the same applies here. Why would a martial artist choose to become skilled only in close fighting techniques rather than techniques for all ranges?

Great fighters always create and maintain an optimal fighting distance when given the option. (It’s one of the things that makes them so successful and sets them apart from their less skilled and less successful cohorts.) This distance is just outside the reach of an opponent’s longest weapon. (We briefly discussed the subject of distance control in an earlier post.) Such a distance prevents an opponent from reaching out with a quick kick or punch, or slash of a knife, and hitting you before you can react. Proper distance control forces an opponent to take a step before he can reach you, making it at least a two beat action, which buys you what could be critically important time – to block, sidestep, move out of range, or hit him before he can land his technique.

Granted, establishing such a distance is not always possible. But, for a skilled, defensively-aware martial artist, it’s a viable option more times than not. When a potential attacker is allowed to get too close, it’s usually due to a failure on the defender’s part. Plus, I don’t know any decent karateka who isn’t proficient in close fighting techniques. He may not be able to name the location of Triple Warmer 17, but he knows where and how to use his elbows, knees, headbutts, eye and throat attacks, etc.

I think anyone who believes competitive training and longer distance fighting made Japanese trained karateka pushovers on the street would have a very rude awakening if they faced a large number of such karateka – Mikio Yahara, Frank Smith, Ray Dalke, Tonny Tulleners, etc.

My old dojomates, John Gehlsen and Tulleners, were cops who had many occasions to apply what they learned in the dojo on the toughest streets in LA. Both fought very successfully on the U.S. team at the World Karate Championships. (John won the Tamashii Award and Tonny placed 3^rd in 1970. And Tonny beat Chuck Norris 3 out of 3 times.) Neither ever lost a fight on the street, and arguably against some of the toughest, most motivated opponents – convicted felons who were trying to avoid going back to prison.

I agree that the bunkai for Japanese versions of Okinawan kata were stripped of much of their close fighting techniques – kyusho and tuite. Sensei Mikami personally confirmed that fact to me. But I wouldn’t agree that what the Japanese ended up teaching was useless. It may have led to a different set of qualities and skills in a practitioner than those intended in the original versions of Okinawan kata. But those qualities and skills were anything but useless. (I’ll identify what these are next time.)

I don’t see any of this as an either/or situation – either you learn close fighting techniques or you learn medium and long range ones. As with the smart general, I’ve chosen to cover myself (and my students) as broadly and deeply as possible, including all fighting ranges.

All this, of course, is just my opinion. And as Philosopher Will Durand once said “An intelligent man always harbors in his heart the thought he may be incorrect.” My mind is open and I’m learning new things and changing my position on old things every day. In philosophy, they’d say what I relayed in this post is my position at T1 (Time One). It could very well, with the right persuasion, be different at T2. The only ones, in my humble opinion, who never change are the stupid and the dead.

I’m trying to keep my posts shorter, rather than longer so the amount of print doesn’t make them look so formidable. So I’ll stop here for now. Next time, I’ll look at more of the reasons I don’t consider Japanese kata useless. In fact, they’re uniquely able to instill some very valuable qualities and skills badly needed today and found nowhere else. And I’ll also look at what I consider the value of the original Okinawan kata and their kyusho and tuite.

Again, thanks for reading the ramblings of a simple old man.

Photos and Content Copyright©2010 by Jim Mather. All Worldwide Rights Reserved!