How do I assess the effectivness of my Dojo?

[Fish Of Doom]

Why do Shotokan? Because it's a great art and you enjoy the training. Because shotokan will give you great technique, which if you are not in a hurry, will shape everything else you practice and make you that much better as a martial artist. Because you will learn great balance and stability and hopefully how to use your whole body to power your movements. Because striving for correct technique is a challenge to the self, because studying the art challenges the mind and encourages learning that goes beyond the little box of your school.

What he said ^^^

I do shito-ryu, with cross-training in other arts, at the moment tai chi chuan and northern shaolin kung fu, but I have some experience in shotokan (about two years of training in a SKIF dojo, they made me start as 3rd kyu, got to test for 1st, afaik passed, but left due to personal issues before getting the certificate), and I can safely say I would not have the leg dexterity I have or the understanding of body movement I have if I hadn't taken the time to train in shotokan and later to play around and experiment with it, seeing what I could figure out and what I could combine with what I knew. If there's one thing you will get enormously out of properly trained shotokan, it's the ability to generate massive power with your legs, and not just for long range: the same leg drive can be combined with a lot of other methods; add the stamping slides of xing-yi and you won't even need your arms to generate power; add the body posture of goju-ryu and you will have a structure that is nigh-indestructible; add the explosive fa-jing of tai chi and your attack speed and explosiveness will sky-rocket; hell, even the leg drive from boxing will benefit from it, if done right. That in itself (and by itself), if you've got the time, is a good enough reason to study good shotokan.

[bobby66]

Your confused because you have too many incorrect preconceived notions about martial arts. That's not a criticism, just true of most people.

I would be the first one to admit that.

MMA is not self defence. A real fight between two trained people is not the same as a ring fight. Ever see pro boxers break into a scuffle before a fight? It's never the same as when they are in the ring. Real fighting is adrenaline fuelled and emotionally charged and completely rule free. Mma still has rules. Including grappling for self defence is a totally different animal from learning bjj for the ring: In self defence the ground is where the opponent should be, for you it could mean death. Also self defence is not about squaring off with people, that kind of thing is for kids.

I hear this argument a lot that SD is very different from an mma fight or sparring and that people fight dirty and that your life is in danger etc etc.

I don't quite agree with this premise. I agree that there are not rules and that you absolutely can get into a dirty fight against one person with weapons or multiple attackers . BUT the majority of fights between two males are not like that. I belive that when two adult men figh, over the usual such as , parking spots, power, women or whatever it is they fight fairly. Most people don't try to stab you or to kill or mame you , or to fishhook you. Men usually swing at each other , wrestle and might devlier one more punch when the other guy is on the ground. I believe that represents 80% of the scenarios. The situations you speak of will not protect someone using any form of SD or scenario training.

Self defence is about responding to real world situations, that includes legal ramifications to fighting, avoiding conflict and de-escalating situations, coping with stress responses, using and being aware of weapons, avoiding the ground, finding avenues of escape especially when facing multiple opponents and the list goes on. None of this has anything to do with ring craft, tournament sparring or cage matches.

I partially agree with this point, but I fail to see how training a scenario with a cooperating partner is better suited to help you in that situation vs doing full contact sparring against a resisting opponent.

I personally am not saying that karate is ineffective. Training is what counts, not the art. Even within traditionalist dojo there are schools that train in an effective way using the modern shotokan style to fight with a realistic level of contact.

And that the kind of school I am after.

You sound like you are actually more interested in dueling than actual self defence, i.e squaring off and fighting in a match. Any art will work for that, but mma schools are the safest bet.

Not true. I am only interested in realistic dueling because I find it the closest thing you can find to self defense then any other form.

Why do Shotokan? Because it's a great art and you enjoy the training. Because shotokan will give you great technique, which if you are not in a hurry, will shape everything else you practice and make you that much better as a martial artist. Because you will learn great balance and stability and hopefully how to use your whole body to power your movements. Because striving for correct technique is a challenge to the self, because studying the art challenges the mind and encourages learning that goes beyond the little box of your school. Because there are other benefits to martial arts outside of fighting skill. Most people I've encountered with mma backgrounds have told me that the best fighters they know have traditional ma backgrounds.

I fully agree. I am not a proponent of mma myself. The thing is shotokan intrigues me. I have said it before, I find it poetic and a true aestatic art. When I see Machida knock out most typical mma meatheads with such beatiful movement, being the least hit fighter in the ufc, it gives me hope that it is a good art.

Hope you understand that these are buyers questions.

[RenegadeMonk]

I hear this argument a lot that SD is very different from an mma fight or sparring and that people fight dirty and that your life is in danger etc etc.

I don't quite agree with this premise. I agree that there are not rules and that you absolutely can get into a dirty fight against one person with weapons or multiple attackers . BUT the majority of fights between two males are not like that. I belive that when two adult men figh, over the usual such as , parking spots, power, women or whatever it is they fight fairly. Most people don't try to stab you or to kill or mame you , or to fishhook you. Men usually swing at each other , wrestle and might devlier one more punch when the other guy is on the ground. I believe that represents 80% of the scenarios. The situations you speak of will not protect someone using any form of SD or scenario training.

This would be one of those misconceptions. As far as my knowledge and experience go almost everything in that paragraph is incorrect. You might be right, after all I only have one man's experience, but if you know already why ask?

I fail to see how training a scenario with a cooperating partner is better suited to help you in that situation vs doing full contact sparring against a resisting opponent.

This would be one of those preconceived ideas I mentioned. Nobody, least of all I, have said anything about excluding firm contact sparring or using compliant partners in training drills.

I am only interested in realistic dueling because I find it the closest thing you can find to self defense then any other form.

Again I think unless you plan on trying to fight when you don't have to, which is against the ethos of self defence instruction, then you are a little off the mark. If you are planning on fighting over nonsense like parking spaces as opposed to de-escalating or walking away then you might well be better off with a full contact martial art or martial sport that has no real self defence element.

Sparring is very important in self defence training; it is the only way to practice applying your techniques in a completely dynamic environment. But the problem is that sparring becomes a game where you learn tricks for out-manoeuvring a trained opponent. These don't cross over into real fights. Nor do real fights begin with people bowing and squaring off at a distance from one another. Rather people get in each others faces, they make themselves big and chest butt, they shove and clinch and swing. No guard, no feints or testing jabs. Just aggression. Self defence training teaches you that and how to cope with it within the requirements of the law, and how to avoid it in the first place. Most martial arts schools don't. In self defence based schools what you should be doing is open ended drills that may start in a fixed manner, say someone approaches and asks the time before taking a swing, the aim initially might be to practice a cover and counter shot before escaping. Later how you respond is up to you, and the drill has no end such that if you don't successfully win or escape in time then you are fighting. This is still different to sparring because fighting to emulate reality excludes ring techniques like double jabs or head height round-house kicks.

Sparring needs to be seen in context of a learning progression. Start with fixed compliant drills to learn technique and moving on to gradually more and more free and resistive drills to develop application ability and supporting skills.

If you think that dojo sparring is the same as real fighting on the street and that it is all you need for effective self defence then we are coming from completely different knowledge bases and you should disregard everything I've written. If your questions really are those of a beginner, or "buyer", then be prepared to let go of some of your ideas. Most important though is that you dive in and learn for yourself by doing. Ultimately picking a school has to be about liking the teacher, the training and the students. Effectiveness comes much down the line so where you start is less important than one might think. If you like shotokan and want to train in it then the thing to do is to start and worry about the details later.

[bobby66]

I hear this argument a lot that SD is very different from an mma fight or sparring and that people fight dirty and that your life is in danger etc etc.

I don't quite agree with this premise. I agree that there are not rules and that you absolutely can get into a dirty fight against one person with weapons or multiple attackers . BUT the majority of fights between two males are not like that. I belive that when two adult men figh, over the usual such as , parking spots, power, women or whatever it is they fight fairly. Most people don't try to stab you or to kill or mame you , or to fishhook you. Men usually swing at each other , wrestle and might devlier one more punch when the other guy is on the ground. I believe that represents 80% of the scenarios. The situations you speak of will not protect someone using any form of SD or scenario training.

This would be one of those misconceptions. As far as my knowledge and experience go almost everything in that paragraph is incorrect. You might be right, after all I only have one man's experience, but if you know already why ask?

I fail to see how training a scenario with a cooperating partner is better suited to help you in that situation vs doing full contact sparring against a resisting opponent.

This would be one of those preconceived ideas I mentioned. Nobody, least of all I, have said anything about excluding firm contact sparring or using compliant partners in training drills.

I am only interested in realistic dueling because I find it the closest thing you can find to self defense then any other form.

Again I think unless you plan on trying to fight when you don't have to, which is against the ethos of self defence instruction, then you are a little off the mark. If you are planning on fighting over nonsense like parking spaces as opposed to de-escalating or walking away then you might well be better off with a full contact martial art or martial sport that has no real self defence element.

Sparring is very important in self defence training; it is the only way to practice applying your techniques in a completely dynamic environment. But the problem is that sparring becomes a game where you learn tricks for out-manoeuvring a trained opponent. These don't cross over into real fights. Nor do real fights begin with people bowing and squaring off at a distance from one another. Rather people get in each others faces, they make themselves big and chest butt, they shove and clinch and swing. No guard, no feints or testing jabs. Just aggression. Self defence training teaches you that and how to cope with it within the requirements of the law, and how to avoid it in the first place. Most martial arts schools don't. In self defence based schools what you should be doing is open ended drills that may start in a fixed manner, say someone approaches and asks the time before taking a swing, the aim initially might be to practice a cover and counter shot before escaping. Later how you respond is up to you, and the drill has no end such that if you don't successfully win or escape in time then you are fighting. This is still different to sparring because fighting to emulate reality excludes ring techniques like double jabs or head height round-house kicks.

Sparring needs to be seen in context of a learning progression. Start with fixed compliant drills to learn technique and moving on to gradually more and more free and resistive drills to develop application ability and supporting skills.

If you think that dojo sparring is the same as real fighting on the street and that it is all you need for effective self defence then we are coming from completely different knowledge bases and you should disregard everything I've written. If your questions really are those of a beginner, or "buyer", then be prepared to let go of some of your ideas. Most important though is that you dive in and learn for yourself by doing. Ultimately picking a school has to be about liking the teacher, the training and the students. Effectiveness comes much down the line so where you start is less important than one might think. If you like shotokan and want to train in it then the thing to do is to start and worry about the details later.

You seem to have a few misconceptions of your own.

I came here to ask about assesing effectivness of dojos not how real life fights play out. In my world, in the middle class suburbs of north america , this is how I have seen fights go down. So I should defintely have qualified my statements.

I also never said I am out looking for fights, I merely stated why fights usually breakout ; again in my world.


I don't have any real firm ideas, that's why I have the questions. I also never said that dojo sparring is the same as a real fight , I only asserted that I see is still as more relasitic than rehearsed partner drills. But it looks like you do believe in sparring as well, only a different kind of it. And I am trying to understand how different it would be.

But let me ask you a specific question:

Do you consider the tough JKA training of 40-50 years ago at the university clubs and the jka honbu adquate enough for self defense?

[RenegadeMonk]

Adequate for self defence depends entirely on the situation and the individual. I'm sure for some it would have been all they ever needed. For others different training may have served then better. Furthermore I wasn't there and don't know a lot about the period so I can't really comment Beyond loose guess work.

By reputation that training produced very tough, very fit individuals many of whom had very strong techniques. This would. surely be of benefit if one needed to defend themselves. That being said, my understanding is that useful details like how to fall, how to get out of a head lock or how to restrain someone you don't want to knock unconscious, would not have been taught.

[nathanso]

... my understanding is that useful details like how to fall, how to get out of a head lock or how to restrain someone you don't want to knock unconscious, would not have been taught.

Yes, but most of them would have taken judo as young children before starting karate, usually in college.

They would also have had the advantage that unlike most dojos today, hard contact was frequently made and they actually had a lot of experience hitting things. Furthermore, if they went through the university systems, they would have had an very high number of training hours and should have been at an extremely high level of fitness.

[RenegadeMonk]

I think you hit on a very vital point. How much time are you willing to put in. The level of dedication will decide much of this discussions answers.

[bobby66]

Well that would have been my point as well. Maybe if ones takes judo and finds a dojo that trains 1970 jka style you are set.

Of course I know it is nearly impossible to find that though I think I lucked out with high grade ex-jka japanese instructor I found here in vancouver.

I keep telling him to train me like they do in japan , but he hasn't punched me in the face yet .

He doesn't have many students and I think he is worried to loose the small number that he has, so I am not sure he will ever implment the hard university club style here.

So I don't know how much time, I just want it to be time well spent.

I just continue on my journey hoping that it leads me to answers I am seeking.

Cheers.

[RenegadeMonk]

So what your saying is, if your sensei starts teaching you in a different way to how he currently does, you will be training in a dojo that teaches your personal idea of effective self defence?

So since it seems you have a school already let me ask you something: What is your teachers current training like and do you feel it will impart effective self defence skills, and is that your main aim in training?

[bobby66]

So what your saying is, if your sensei starts teaching you in a different way to how he currently does, you will be training in a dojo that teaches your personal idea of effective self defence?

Not quite. I am saying if he teaches me the way he was taught in the jka style of the 70s, which by your admission produced very capable karateka, supplmented by a serious grappling art like Judo, I would be equipped to handle many SD situations.

So since it seems you have a school already let me ask you something: What is your teachers current training like and do you feel it will impart effective self defence skills, and is that your main aim in training?

Well I started a few weeks ago and as you can imagine the focus for now is Kihon. I am not sure if any dojo throws complete beginners into Kumite , bunkai or SD so may be bit early to tell.

[RenegadeMonk]

Not quite. I am saying if he teaches me the way he was taught in the jka style of the 70s, which by your admission produced very capable karateka, supplmented by a serious grappling art like Judo, I would be equipped to handle many SD situations.

I think you are cherry picking your information to get the answer you wanted hear. Clearly when you take all my posts together, and even the one you are referring to taken alone, in no way endorses 70's JKA karate training. I won't rubbish it: I was not there to say, but nothing I have read or heard suggests to me that it was appropriate self defence training for all but a few gifted individuals and even then only for certain circumstances. My understanding is that JKA training has, since the 50's, been based on winning kendo based karate tournaments.

My question about the training at your dojo was also about those who train around you. What is the training like for higher kyu grades (coloured belts), what kind of things do you see the black belts doing?

Also, when you apply the list of questions I initially posted as my response to you, (which I stand by), how does your dojo do?

[bobby66]

I think you are cherry picking your information to get the answer you wanted hear. Clearly when you take all my posts together, and even the one you are referring to taken alone, in no way endorses 70's JKA karate training.

Here is what you said earlier:

By reputation that training produced very tough, very fit individuals many of whom had very strong techniques. This would. surely be of benefit if one needed to defend themselves. That being said, my understanding is that useful details like how to fall, how to get out of a head lock or how to restrain someone you don't want to knock unconscious, would not have been taught.

You don't think the above implies that if those people knew a grappling art like judo , teaching them how to fall , get out of locks , pins etc, they would be able to hold their own in an SD situation?

My question about the training at your dojo was also about those who train around you. What is the training like for higher kyu grades (coloured belts), what kind of things do you see the black belts doing?

Also, when you apply the list of questions I initially posted as my response to you, (which I stand by), how does your dojo do?

Well as mentioned before, he doesn't have many students. The few black belts who come in belong to other dojos but come to him primary to improve their technique and movement. All of them claim that he helps them elevate their skills.

No there is no SD being taught, there are no bags , no kumite yet and going by your criteria it would be a definte fail.

Having said that, I see how this 61 year old is moving and how powerful his technique is.. He is also quite strong and flexible at the same time. He is very focused on technique and he assured me that all the bunkai and SD work comes after I have mastered the basic technique and body movement. There is something intangible that makes me believe that he is a real deal and that I can trust him even though he does not meet your criteria.

Of course I know I could be wrong, but one thing I know is that he can help me perfect my technique which is not such a bad thing to have should I decide to join another more SD focused dojo at a later time.