Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The History of Karate

smithsonianmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 112 posts

Re: The History of Karate

#21

Post by GloriousKoji »

anon_tor_12345 wrote: post #14
fastball wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was always under the impression that Karate wasn't particularly useful for combat / self-defense. Krav Maga is the martial art that I've always thought of as actually useful for self-defense.

>Krav Maga is the martial art that I've always thought of as actually useful for self-defense i'm not big on martial arts or even mma but for some reason i've seen this argument in various places often enough that i've also seen the appropriate response: if that were true then all of the most successful mma fighters would be krav maga experts. in actuality not a single one practices krav maga. the proof is in the pud…

Maybe because MMA is a sport and not an actual life or death combat? I'm sure if they allowed things like throat jabs, eye stabs, crotch shots and immediate joint dislocation upon grapple we'd see a lot more krav maga techniques.

Re: The History of Karate

#22

Post by 99_00 »

bloniac wrote: post #8

I was a great believer in karate as a combat sport for many years. The arrival of MMA proved the true effectiveness of each of the martial arts in an actual combat situation. Karate has value in combat, but it’s certainly not as effective as I originally thought. I took my son to do karate training for a year and watched the classes and honestly it seemed pretty worthless to me as a way of learning to fight/defend yo…

To train to win a fight you need sparing. Full contact sparing in boxing, kickboxing, or even karate has dangers. A practitioner has to work up to full contact sparing in a controlled way. And even then there is risk of brain damage. I'm not up to date with the latest science, but I wouldn't risk my child's brain on something as unimportant as winning a fight.

On the other hand, with grappling sports like wrestling, judo, BJJ, you can start sparing the first class. And the risk of brain injury (I assume) is less than every other contact sport. So your child will get more time sparing. Which would translate to better real life fighting skill.

In the end, by being in some sort of combat sport your child will probably lose interest in winning fights on the street or playground. Every time they show up to class they are defeating others and being defeated. It loses its emotional charge and they don't need to prove themselves to random people.

Re: The History of Karate

#23

Post by golemiprague »

anon_tor_12345 wrote: post #14
fastball wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was always under the impression that Karate wasn't particularly useful for combat / self-defense. Krav Maga is the martial art that I've always thought of as actually useful for self-defense.

>Krav Maga is the martial art that I've always thought of as actually useful for self-defense i'm not big on martial arts or even mma but for some reason i've seen this argument in various places often enough that i've also seen the appropriate response: if that were true then all of the most successful mma fighters would be krav maga experts. in actuality not a single one practices krav maga. the proof is in the pud…

Krav maga focus on teaching effective and intuitive combat technics to people who are not going to spend too much time in the dojo and are going to be involved in situations where there there are no rules and usually involves more than one person as well as all kind of weapons, from stones to guns.

To fight in an MMA fight you need to put a lot of training into standard boxing, kicking and grappling technics, which a lot of serious krav maga practitioners learn also anyway. It is just that it is not intended for the same purposes.

Re: The History of Karate

#24

Post by giardini »

bloniac wrote: post #8

I was a great believer in karate as a combat sport for many years. The arrival of MMA proved the true effectiveness of each of the martial arts in an actual combat situation. Karate has value in combat, but it’s certainly not as effective as I originally thought. I took my son to do karate training for a year and watched the classes and honestly it seemed pretty worthless to me as a way of learning to fight/defend yo…

bioniac says >"Most martial arts training seems to me to be tangential to actually training the student to actually win a fight...If your goal is for your child to learn to fight..."But do you really* want your child to learn to "win a fight" or to "fight"? To what degree? Any fight whatsoever? Doing so would require teaching things (s)he does not fully understand and are emotionally unprepared for, e.g., maiming or killing someone. [OTOH if you want to teach that to a child, then teach him how to be a doctor b/c doctors know how the human body works better than almost anyone else and how best to turn it off.]

Instead set other goals: self-confidence, pride, athletic skill and endurance. I would first explain the role MA plays and constantly emphasize avoidance of hostile situations. IMO teaching anyone (including children) good evasion/escape is more useful than MA and more fun.

Re: The History of Karate

#25

Post by sizt »

Contrary to what the article says, "karate" does not mean "Chinese hand." That translation is laughable.

"Kara" in Japanese means "empty". "Te" in Japanese means "hand". It is intended, as the name implies, as a means of self defense by people with no weapons, like peasants. The theme of self defense is primary to karate. It is taught to be used only defensively.

Now you know about karate.

Re: The History of Karate

#26

Post by masklinn »

lanevorockz wrote: post #6
_carbyau_ wrote: post #2

"In a Western-style sport, the aim is gaining victory at all costs,” This statement most resonated with me. I had to give up playing hockey because - at the lowest grade - people paid no respect to you. If they could kick the ball and the ref didn't see it, they would continue play. If they could hit the ball hard at you from point blank, that is fine. You see similar in elite sport, players in "football" of whatever…

I really don’t see it like that, true athletes aim to be their best and not just win using any dirty trick. Think Usain Bolt for example.

> Think Usain Bolt for example.

Usain Bolt doesn’t exactly have much opportunity to engage in funny business aside from peps, at least not funny business which would fall short of criminal charges if discovered.

Re: The History of Karate

#27

Post by bloniac »

giardini wrote: post #24
bloniac wrote: post #8

I was a great believer in karate as a combat sport for many years. The arrival of MMA proved the true effectiveness of each of the martial arts in an actual combat situation. Karate has value in combat, but it’s certainly not as effective as I originally thought. I took my son to do karate training for a year and watched the classes and honestly it seemed pretty worthless to me as a way of learning to fight/defend yo…

bioniac says >"Most martial arts training seems to me to be tangential to actually training the student to actually win a fight...If your goal is for your child to learn to fight..." But do you really* want your child to learn to "win a fight" or to "fight"? To what degree? Any fight whatsoever? Doing so would require teaching things (s)he does not fully understand and are emotionally unprepared for, e.g., maiming or…

You are precisely correct.

In most cases parents are happy with “self defence theatre” in which the parent feels they’ve done the right thing, in which the child feels confidence because they falsely believe they can defend themselves.

Most parents I think would be reluctant to have their children really learn to fight/defend themselves.

When parents tell me their kids are doing karate, and if they are interested in my thoughts, then I ask them, “exactly why are they doing karate? Do you know? What’s your true goal?”

And if their real, true goal is self defence then I gently explain there’s better options than karate.

Re: The History of Karate

#28

Post by dng88 »

lanevorockz wrote: post #6
_carbyau_ wrote: post #2

"In a Western-style sport, the aim is gaining victory at all costs,” This statement most resonated with me. I had to give up playing hockey because - at the lowest grade - people paid no respect to you. If they could kick the ball and the ref didn't see it, they would continue play. If they could hit the ball hard at you from point blank, that is fine. You see similar in elite sport, players in "football" of whatever…

I really don’t see it like that, true athletes aim to be their best and not just win using any dirty trick. Think Usain Bolt for example.

The Golden hand of a famous footballer came to mind immediately.

Re: The History of Karate

#29

Post by skinkestek »

giardini wrote: post #24
bloniac wrote: post #8

I was a great believer in karate as a combat sport for many years. The arrival of MMA proved the true effectiveness of each of the martial arts in an actual combat situation. Karate has value in combat, but it’s certainly not as effective as I originally thought. I took my son to do karate training for a year and watched the classes and honestly it seemed pretty worthless to me as a way of learning to fight/defend yo…

bioniac says >"Most martial arts training seems to me to be tangential to actually training the student to actually win a fight...If your goal is for your child to learn to fight..." But do you really* want your child to learn to "win a fight" or to "fight"? To what degree? Any fight whatsoever? Doing so would require teaching things (s)he does not fully understand and are emotionally unprepared for, e.g., maiming or…

> But do you really* want your child to learn to "win a fight" or to "fight"? To what degree? Any fight whatsoever?

I teach my girls to fight.

My intention is 1. to keep them out of fights 2. to make sure they can escape or win any fight someone else forces upon them.

Play dumb, hide your worries, try to talk yourself out, if it doesn't work hit, grab and twist or kick with the intent to cause severe pain. Then shout and run.

An armed society is a polite society and I do my part.

If an assailant get hurt I can live with that. The bloke I gave a beating some 25 years or so ago actually became a better person as far as I could se.

Re: The History of Karate

#30

Post by wirrbel »

I think there is an interesting YouTube series up by Jesse enkamp who kind of builds the theory that karate was more of a grappling martial arts but kind of got turned into a boxing sport when the Japanese adapted it from Okinawa. They already had Jiu-Jitsu and were kind of looking for another martial art akin to boxing.

Basically Jesse visits China, finds people showing him Kung fu katas that resemble goju ryu katas. And their explanations about what the katas describe supports the “grappling” theory.

For me who trained goju ryu a s a kid it was eye opening and I think makes a lot of sense

Post reply on HN