Topic: How Many Opponents and When To Change ?

[JimmyTheHoover]

If you accept that each Kata is meant to portray a battle against a number of "imaginary" opponents then how many do you think each Kata encompases defence against and at which point does the opponent change ?

[Moley]

Can of worms Jimmy..

My personal belief is that if you look at the kata as a whole from the perspective of Bunkai then the effective Bunkai becomes meaningless. I believe that a sequence from a kata ( to be effective Bunkai) is
a) Slightly different to the actual move/moves in the kata in terms of direction, target and follow up moves.
and b) Totally different and separate from the preceeding and following moves in the kata.
I also believe that most of the other moves are just surplus packing to "fill out the kata"

So to me it's a way of learning a specific technique or Bunkai against ONE attacker and not a sort of mass brawl. Of course there may be several of these ONE attackers in a kata

However... as a whole... to me a Kata is a Kata... and a very useful thing it is too.

[JimmyTheHoover]

Can of worms Jimmy..   

Ah Moley - even a humble worm needs someone to rip off the lid to let them see the light of day every now and again 

My personal belief is that if you look at the kata as a whole from the perspective of Bunkai then the effective Bunkai becomes meaningless.   

I tend to agree that it's "more likely2 that the original intent of each Kata was NOT one long combat sequence against a preset group of opponents that you would work through in order - after all they wouldn't wait in line now would they ? (Unless in a McDojo perhaps.....)

It's much more likely IMO that each Kata is built up from/built around imparting sequneces of techniques/appropriate responses to  a "set" of defined "Defense Situations" (if you get my meaning...)

I believe that a sequence from a kata ( to be effective Bunkai) is
a) Slightly different to the actual move/moves in the kata in terms of direction, target and follow up moves.
and b) Totally different and separate from the preceeding and following moves in the kata.     

a) I agree entirely that the Karateka is/should be allowed a "certain leeway" in their interpretation on the most appropriate Bunkai response to the Defence Situation

b) I think this follows on ( I basically agree) from the concept of  Kata being comprised of sets of defence drills - as opposed to a single attack scenario with multiple opponents etc....

I also believe that most of the other moves are just surplus packing to "fill out the kata"   

Well Now..... I'm not so sure about this one...... My "doubts" (around your Sanity Moley - LOL) probably depend on YOUR definition of  "the other moves".......

What I mean by this is that I certainly think that sometimes Kata contain "repeats" of a Defence Combo on/in other directions (left right - back forward angles etc.) to either balance the look of the Kta Embusen and also to perhaps train both sides of the body.....

I don't necessarily agree that things like Yoi and Yame Opening/Closing movements are "filler".....

So to me it's a way of learning a specific technique or Bunkai against ONE attacker and not a sort of mass brawl. Of course there may be several of these ONE attackers in a kata   

Absolutley !

However... as a whole... to me a Kata is a Kata... and a very useful thing it is too. 

Anyone for "Spirit of Karate" here ? LOL - Definitely Agree - I'f I absolutely HAD to choose one of the three K's it would have to be Kata

[Huw]

I only ever see one attacker in kata.

[JimmyTheHoover]

I only ever see one attacker in kata.

During the whole Kata ?

....assuming that this is what you mean Huw - why do you reckon that it takes you 65 moves in Kanku-Dai (for example - hope that's correct ) to "put that attacker down" and not even at a Kiai Point..... ?
 

BTW - as usual - not being confrontational just trying to provoke discussion 

[Lloydie]

I've never been a fan of the "multiple attackers" theory.  Always smacked of the "one-finger deadly blow/chop sock fuey" to me.  I think that this idea has caused some karateka to interpret moves in a (sometimes) ludicrous way.  e.g. some of the John Van Wheenan kata stuff is frankly, bizarre. 

I think that there is no "One" opponent.  Kata are encyclopedias of possible moves, welded to a template.  You learn the template - properly - then you can deviate and experiment, adapting moves to different scenarios. 

This is the essence of learning, you learn the theory then you apply that knowledge to different "real world" practical problems.

 

[JimmyTheHoover]

I only ever see one attacker in kata.

.....perhaps Huw meant "at a time".....

[JimmyTheHoover]

I've never been a fan of the "multiple attackers" theory.  Always smacked of the "one-finger deadly blow/chop sock fuey" to me.  I think that this idea has caused some karateka to interpret moves in a (sometimes) ludicrous way.  e.g. some of the John Van Wheenan kata stuff is frankly, bizarre. 

I think that there is no "One" opponent.  Kata are encyclopedias of possible moves, welded to a template.  You learn the template - properly - then you can deviate and experiment, adapting moves to different scenarios. 

This is the essence of learning, you learn the theory then you apply that knowledge to different "real world" practical problems.

 

Dave - I think that much of what you say makes sense - and echoes some of Moley's comments (the bit's I agreed with at least )

....However (and you just KNEW that was coming) if you subscribe to the "defence module theory" at which points do you think that an opponent is finished and you move on.....

....also interested in your views on "filler moves" and "yoi" etc. 

[Lloydie]

at which points do you think that an opponent is finished and you move on.....

ahh...that's the bit that I contend Jim. You see, I don't think that there is a "move on" event in the application of kata.  I think that each move is effective in its own right, I think the kata suggest that the moves escalate in violence.  As an example, start off midway in any kata (maybe leave Tekki out at the mo) and you can see an escalation of violent moves, also think of all preceding moves as "set ups " or "kamae".  Gave me a whole new perspective that I'm still struggling to sort out 

[JimmyTheHoover]

at which points do you think that an opponent is finished and you move on.....

ahh...that's the bit that I contend Jim. You see, I don't think that there is a "move on" event in the application of kata.  I think that each move is effective in its own right, I think the kata suggest that the moves escalate in violence.  As an example, start off midway in any kata (maybe leave Tekki out at the mo) and you can see an escalation of violent moves, also think of all preceding moves as "set ups " or "kamae".  Gave me a whole new perspective that I'm still struggling to sort out 

I agree entirely Dave - we might be just quibling over semantics (not like me I know.....) - I think that each "defence combat section" in a kata is a steadily escalating response sequence to a particular "HAOV" not stopping until the opponent is subdued/incapacitated - I accept that some sequences contain "potential" continuation sequences in case the preceding combos don't result in "Todai".

However - I still feel that at certain points in each Kata you MUST be "finished" with a particular threat and be prepared "kamae/zanshin" to respond to the next scenario......
 

[Lloydie]

However - I still feel that at certain points in each Kata you MUST be "finished" with a particular threat and be prepared "kamae/zanshin" to respond to the next scenario......

Yep - would go with that Jim.  I think that there are many Kamae/zanshin points - in fact I think that they are available at any given point.  I am really interested in the HOAV and how kata relate to these, after all bare handed fighting seems to me to have not changed much in the last 1000 years    I think that this is were karate & especially kata morphs into the self defence bit - don't tell Susan though 

[JimmyTheHoover]

However - I still feel that at certain points in each Kata you MUST be "finished" with a particular threat and be prepared "kamae/zanshin" to respond to the next scenario......

Yep - would go with that Jim.  I think that there are many Kamae/zanshin points - in fact I think that they are available at any given point.  I am really interested in the HOAV and how kata relate to these, after all bare handed fighting seems to me to have not changed much in the last 1000 years    I think that this is were karate & especially kata morphs into the self defence bit - don't tell Susan though 

Oss !

...that's possibly what i meant about the "potential continuation sequences" if it's worked they can be skipped/treated as kamai points

...RE: Susan - don't worry we haven't mentioned "gobbing" yet so I think we're relatively safe