Kyokushin: Your face=punch magnet?

[Hotora86]

Open hand strikes with the palm are good to hit someone's head too (teisho type of strikes), not just elbows. The way Bas Rutten used them in pancrase. They can work greatly and deliver quite a lot of power. Hitting someone's jaw, temple or even face with palm strikes does real damage when applied properly.

Both palm strikes and elbows are indeed better than punches as they don't break easy.

Tru dat, palm strikes are good.
Wonder why they're not used in modern MMA anymore.

 

[Tayski]

Tru dat, palm strikes are good.
Wonder why they're not used in modern MMA anymore.

Most likely because they didn't use to have to wear gloves back in the day, while now it's mandatory. So I guess if you're wearing gloves you can just punch.

Apart from Pancrase and the very early UFC's when there were no gloves I can't remember the last time I've seen them used.

 

[j123]

The Standard American diet will do that to you, I've heard.

But freedom...

Tru dat, palm strikes are good.
Wonder why they're not used in modern MMA anymore.

They definitely can hit you in the eye. Gloves have mass so you don't get hit in the eye, but the palm has room to sneak in.

 

[Hotora86]

But freedom...


They definitely can hit you in the eye. Gloves have mass so you don't get hit in the eye, but the palm has room to sneak in.

Best for self defense then!

 

[j123]

Best for self defense then!

Wear sunglasses, its self-defense proof

 

[Hotora86]

Wear sunglasses, its self-defense proof

 

[j123]

 

[Hotora86]

 

[Azam]

Having my back, shoulder and wrist injured multiple times I finally understood just how brittle and fragile the human body really is. Hitting people's skulls with an empty hand is a bad idea. Elbows are better but baseball bats are best.

Open hand strikes with the palm are good to hit someone's head too (teisho type of strikes), not just elbows. The way Bas Rutten used them in pancrase. They can work greatly and deliver quite a lot of power. Hitting someone's jaw, temple or even face with palm strikes does real damage when applied properly.

Both palm strikes and elbows are indeed better than punches as they don't break easy.

The human body is definitely very fragile - I've realised that as well with all the injuries I've got especially with my knees. Most of it has come from training though and it's made me think about wear/tear in training as I'm still pretty young but have a lot of wear/tear issues with the knees. Usually with martial arts you're training to failure (especially with kyokushin training) and I've come to believe that training to failure isn't necessarily the optimum way to train. It gives you the quickest results but the wear/tear it gives you long term is significant. Personally I've taken the Pavel Tsatsouline approach to S&C to my martial arts training and don't really train to failure as much anymore. I think training to failure isn't necessary for 90% of people that do martial arts - it's only really needed for those that want to compete. Why give your body considerable wear/tear if you training just to keep strong/healthy or as a lifestyle.

I use to believe that striking with your knuckles isn't a good idea but I think nowadays that it's a bunch of BS. I've seen boxers in self defense altercations that have had no problems putting people away with their knuckles and haven't had to resort to open hand strikes - I feel like that's a myth in the Karate world that we perpetuate. Of course they probably feel sore as hell after and if you can use open hand strikes it would be preferably to your knuckles. But then again I'd wager most boxers are more proficient with the use of their hands than someone studying karate or kickboxing/mt etc.

Something that I've seen in uechi ryu is kote uchi and I think that's even better than an open hand strike - imagine getting close-lined with the forearm. I feel like it's something that's also very difficult to block - it's like an overhand right but with the thick bone of your forearm. Bas Rutten has also been advocating for it's use in self defense & mma.

 

[Hotora86]

The human body is definitely very fragile - I've realised that as well with all the injuries I've got especially with my knees. Most of it has come from training though and it's made me think about wear/tear in training as I'm still pretty young but have a lot of wear/tear issues with the knees. Usually with martial arts you're training to failure (especially with kyokushin training) and I've come to believe that training to failure isn't necessarily the optimum way to train. It gives you the quickest results but the wear/tear it gives you long term is significant. Personally I've taken the Pavel Tsatsouline approach to S&C to my martial arts training and don't really train to failure as much anymore. I think training to failure isn't necessary for 90% of people that do martial arts - it's only really needed for those that want to compete. Why give your body considerable wear/tear if you training just to keep strong/healthy or as a lifestyle.

I use to believe that striking with your knuckles isn't a good idea but I think nowadays that it's a bunch of BS. I've seen boxers in self defense altercations that have had no problems putting people away with their knuckles and haven't had to resort to open hand strikes - I feel like that's a myth in the Karate world that we perpetuate. Of course they probably feel sore as hell after and if you can use open hand strikes it would be preferably to your knuckles. But then again I'd wager most boxers are more proficient with the use of their hands than someone studying karate or kickboxing/mt etc.

Something that I've seen in uechi ryu is kote uchi and I think that's even better than an open hand strike - imagine getting close-lined with the forearm. I feel like it's something that's also very difficult to block - it's like an overhand right but with the thick bone of your forearm. Bas Rutten has also been advocating for it's use in self defense & mma.

I can relate to that. I used to train to failure for bodybuilding - since the bro science said that's the only way to achiever hypertrophy and strength. Studies from recent years have shown this to be false however, as the same volume of exercise spread over a few sessions instead of one grueling workout have shown similar results, while being safer and less aggravating for the body and nervous system. I've switched to HFT (High Frequency Training) recently and I don't get DOMS anymore, which is nice.

BTW I've noticed that training to failure is "normal" for most Kyokushin dojos, while Shotokan and many Okinawan styles prefer the "slow and steady" approach. As you mentioned - this means slower progress but better longevity.

As for striking with (the top 2) knuckles - I've acquired a few very unpleasant wrist injuries due to this, my TFCC is ruined forever. My physio (who did Kyokushin and TKD for 7 years BTW) claims that the Kung Fu way of striking with the bottom 3 knuckles is actually safer for the wrist.

Kote uchi is fine I guess, but similarly to palm strikes there is still risk of hurting your hand if you don't land clean. My go to would still be the elbow or a weapon. On second thought, my go to would actually be to GTFO.

 

[spacetime]

Ifighters who do have some good footwork.

Kyokushin guys tend to do well in KB / MT. They just need to get used to the distancing and head punches coming at them, but they're usually be able to handle being hit very hard without going down and it's always scary sparring or fighting someone who's not afraid of getting hit and never gives up regardless of what you throw at them.

Would you agree that a boxer is worse match-up (supposing the boxers legs are conditioned) being that thaiboxers don't rely on their hands as much? I would put a Kyoushin guys kicks up against a thaifighter any day of the week, so I don't think that match up is as dangerous as against boxer who will have such a superior in fighting-boxing,

 

[AshiharaFan]

I can relate to that. I used to train to failure for bodybuilding - since the bro science said that's the only way to achiever hypertrophy and strength. Studies from recent years have shown this to be false however, as the same volume of exercise spread over a few sessions instead of one grueling workout have shown similar results, while being safer and less aggravating for the body and nervous system. I've switched to HFT (High Frequency Training) recently and I don't get DOMS anymore, which is nice.

I'm no expert but I do hit the weights as part of my person S&C routine I do know going to failure and beyond does wonders for hypertrophy but is a very, very bad idea for strength. Strength is more of a CNS thing while hypertrophy is more of a recruitment and breaking down of (mainly fast twitch) muscle fibers. But as you said the same thing can be accomplished in a number of less grueling sessions spread out.

BTW I've noticed that training to failure is "normal" for most Kyokushin dojos, while Shotokan and many Okinawan styles prefer the "slow and steady" approach. As you mentioned - this means slower progress but better longevity.

If I'm not mistaken you are a Shotokan practitioner, no? Have you ever trained in Kyokushin and if so what are your impressions as far as how they compare to each other?

I'm not a fan of point style sparring AT ALL......BUT.....I missed the last two classes at the Dojo for yet another injury. And this time it was just from the training itself. I too am seriously considering the slow and steady progress approach if it means less injuries and better longevity. But if I had to go back to a non-contact Karate style Tang Soo Do would be my first choice and Shotokan Karate would be my second choice.

Kote uchi is fine I guess, but similarly to palm strikes there is still risk of hurting your hand if you don't land clean.

Yep.

My go to would still be the elbow or a weapon. On second thought, my go to would actually be to GTFO.

Yep again. Avoidance (if possible) is even better than GTFO. As they say, an ounce of prevention is always better than a pound of cure.

 

[Jimmy Jazz]

I'm no expert but I do hit the weights as part of my person S&C routine I do know going to failure and beyond does wonders for hypertrophy but is a very, very bad idea for strength. Strength is more of a CNS thing while hypertrophy is more of a recruitment and breaking down of (mainly fast twitch) muscle fibers. But as you said the same thing can be accomplished in a number of less grueling sessions spread out.



If I'm not mistaken you are a Shotokan practitioner, no? Have you ever trained in Kyokushin and if so what are your impressions as far as how they compare to each other?

I'm not a fan of point style sparring AT ALL......BUT.....I missed the last two classes at the Dojo for yet another injury. And this time it was just from the training itself. I too am seriously considering the slow and steady progress approach if it means less injuries and better longevity. But if I had to go back to a non-contact Karate style Tang Soo Do would be my first choice and Shotokan Karate would be my second choice.



Yep.



Yep again. Avoidance (if possible) is even better than GTFO. As they say, an ounce of prevention is always better than a pound of cure.

Thats interesting. I did TSD. Why do you prefer it to shotokan?

 

[AshiharaFan]

Thats interesting. I did TSD. Why do you prefer it to shotokan?

Two reasons really. First reason is that the stance training in Tang Soo Do tends to be somewhat higher and shorter than the really low and long stances that one has to endure in Shotokan Karate. This is what I have to go through in the Kyokushin class that I go to and it's really bad for your knees after a while.

The second reason is that when I trained Tang Soo Do years ago I recall that the Sabum-Nim at my Dojang taught and encouraged turning the foot of the supporting leg when executing a roundhouse kick whereas Shotokan seems to have this reputation of insisting that the foot of the supporting leg remains rooted in position while doing a roundhouse kick. If this is true then this is bad. It's really bad for the knees.

I'm not against visiting a few Shotokan clubs to see how they train and expressing the above mentioned concerns to the Chief Instructor to find where he stands on these issues.

By the way, I already know that some people disagree with this or just don't believe it but Tang Soo Do is South Korea's version of Shotokan Karate. Just compare the respective syllabus of each art while also noting that Japan once occupied Korea and exported their martial arts (including Shotokan Karate) to that country.

 

[Hotora86]

If I'm not mistaken you are a Shotokan practitioner, no? Have you ever trained in Kyokushin and if so what are your impressions as far as how they compare to each other?

I'm not a fan of point style sparring AT ALL......BUT.....I missed the last two classes at the Dojo for yet another injury. And this time it was just from the training itself. I too am seriously considering the slow and steady progress approach if it means less injuries and better longevity. But if I had to go back to a non-contact Karate style Tang Soo Do would be my first choice and Shotokan Karate would be my second choice.

I am a Shotokan practitioner but my dojo is very "traditional" (for a lack of a better word) - used to be ITKF, now affiliated with Fudokan (the sensei is a 4th Dan under Iliya Yorga).

In simple terms this means the opposite to the WKF approach - no bunny hopping, rooted stances, hard blocks, kihon-kata-bunkai on every session, mostly 3-step kumite. I'm not saying that this is necessarily better than WKF - both approaches have their pros and cons so it's a matter of taste really. Looking back, the best thing to take away is the in-depth bunkai and the con is a certain stiffness / rigidity one attains from doing so much 3-step kumite.

We've had a Kyokushin practitioner train with us a few times and he was hell-bent on sparring all the time - both during and AFTER class. Certainly a tough fellow but a bit pushy.

I've been to Kyokushin training myself in shihan Bogdan Jeremicz's place (5 Dan, former IKO1, now Kyokushinkan) in Gdansk and in Niedzwiedz's place (5 Dan, not sure which org). Both were pretty exhausting, especially the second one where the sensei insists on pushing yourself beyond fatigue, which was even worse due to the dojo being in a basement (less air to breathe). He has trained a few national champs though, so I guess he knows what he's doing. At Jeremicz's I liked the extensive padwork but also a very humble and respectful attitude (eg. cleaning the dojo after every session).

Overall it was a nice experience and I found fellow Kyokushin karateka to be nice and decent people, despite some Shotokan snobs regarding them as aggressive brutes (very unfair and untrue). Kyokushin mawashi kicks make more sense than Shotokan's - due to the turning of the supporting leg which, as you mentioned, Shotokan does not do. Also, low kicks and low kick defense is a wonderful thing. No punches to the head is a problem of course but Kyokushin is much better suited for full contact competition than Shotokan, no doubt. Still, for longevity I'd stick to Shotokan. Maybe it's nostalgia but to be fair, all of my injuries happened OUTSIDE Shotokan class - in Judo, BJJ and MMA mostly.

 

[Azam]

Two reasons really. First reason is that the stance training in Tang Soo Do tends to be somewhat higher and shorter than the really low and long stances that one has to endure in Shotokan Karate. This is what I have to go through in the Kyokushin class that I go to and it's really bad for your knees after a while.

The second reason is that when I trained Tang Soo Do years ago I recall that the Sabum-Nim at my Dojang taught and encouraged turning the foot of the supporting leg when executing a roundhouse kick whereas Shotokan seems to have this reputation of insisting that the foot of the supporting leg remains rooted in position while doing a roundhouse kick. If this is true then this is bad. It's really bad for the knees.

I'm not against visiting a few Shotokan clubs to see how they train and expressing the above mentioned concerns to the Chief Instructor to find where he stands on these issues.

By the way, I already know that some people disagree with this or just don't believe it but Tang Soo Do is South Korea's version of Shotokan Karate. Just compare the respective syllabus of each art while also noting that Japan once occupied Korea and exported their martial arts (including Shotokan Karate) to that country.

Any Okinawan Karate style might be to your liking then. The stances tend to be higher/shorter than mainland Japanese karate styles. Also the syllabus for Okinawan Karate styles tend to be much more compact/simple in comparison to shotokan/kyokushin. Uechi ryu has 8 kata for example, while okinawan goju has 12. I get the sense that Okinawan karate seems to be more mindful of long term training which is great - you won't train to failure but you'll still get pushed in a way that you'll still be able to attend the next lesson/class.

Also something I really love about Okinawan Karate is that S&C tends to be a part of classes as hojo undo. Unlike kyokushin/shotokan or other mainland karate styles - in Okinawan karate you do strength & conditioning as part of your karate training - there is time dedicated to it during lessons - the whole point of it is to strengthen/adapt the body for karate training.

The only thing that tends to be missing is that Okinawan styles won't do as much kumite as you'd probably get in kyokushin/shotokan. I try to get my sparring fix from kudo though.

@Hotora86 - It's a very normal thing to train to failure in Kyokushin - most dojos I think will push you to failure. It's great for quick results but not a smart way to train long term because you just pick up injuries and some of them can become chronic problems later on in life. I think also when you reach a certain age it becomes very counterproductive to train to failure - I think it does more harm than good if for example your a 50 year old.

Also I like the way that Okinawan Karate seems to be less cult like than Kyokushin. The atmosphere is more calm (less military like) & you don't osu osu osu to every single thing like a maniac lol.

 

[Hotora86]

Any Okinawan Karate style might be to your liking then. The stances tend to be higher/shorter than mainland Japanese karate styles. Also the syllabus for Okinawan Karate styles tend to be much more compact/simple in comparison to shotokan/kyokushin. Uechi ryu has 8 kata for example, while okinawan goju has 12. I get the sense that Okinawan karate seems to be more mindful of long term training which is great - you won't train to failure but you'll still get pushed in a way that you'll still be able to attend the next lesson/class.

Also something I really love about Okinawan Karate is that S&C tends to be a part of classes as hojo undo. Unlike kyokushin/shotokan or other mainland karate styles - in Okinawan karate you do strength & conditioning as part of your karate training - there is time dedicated to it during lessons - the whole point of it is to strengthen/adapt the body for karate training.

The only thing that tends to be missing is that Okinawan styles won't do as much kumite as you'd probably get in kyokushin/shotokan. I try to get my sparring fix from kudo though.

@Hotora86 - It's a very normal thing to train to failure in Kyokushin - most dojos I think will push you to failure. It's great for quick results but not a smart way to train long term because you just pick up injuries and some of them can become chronic problems later on in life. I think also when you reach a certain age it becomes very counterproductive to train to failure - I think it does more harm than good if for example your a 50 year old.

Also I like the way that Okinawan Karate seems to be less cult like than Kyokushin. The atmosphere is more calm (less military like) & you don't osu osu osu to every single thing like a maniac lol.

Oh I'd love to train an Okinawan style, I really would! Always impressed by these 60+ yo Okinawan masters that can still do amazing things.
Like this guy:



Always liked the practical simplicity of stuff like the below in Okinawan Karate too:

 

[AshiharaFan]

Also something I really love about Okinawan Karate is that S&C tends to be a part of classes as hojo undo. Unlike kyokushin/shotokan or other mainland karate styles - in Okinawan karate you do strength & conditioning as part of your karate training - there is time dedicated to it during lessons - the whole point of it is to strengthen/adapt the body for karate training.

Yeah, this is a big help. It can be stressful and overwhelming after a while when you have to do your own S&C outside of training at the dojo.

The only thing that tends to be missing is that Okinawan styles won't do as much kumite as you'd probably get in kyokushin/shotokan. I try to get my sparring fix from kudo though.

So you're still doing Uechi Ryu in addition to training Kudo?

Also I like the way that Okinawan Karate seems to be less cult like than Kyokushin. The atmosphere is more calm (less military like) & you don't osu osu osu to every single thing like a maniac lol.

LOL. I have to admit that we say Osu to almost everything. I've even caught myself just in time on quite a few occasions from saying Osu to people outside of the Dojo. We say it so much that I don't think most KK students realize just how cult like it sounds.

 

[AshiharaFan]

Oh I'd love to train an Okinawan style, I really would! Always impressed by these 60+ yo Okinawan masters that can still do amazing things.
Like this guy:

Well Damn!

Always liked the practical simplicity of stuff like the below in Okinawan Karate too:

Three things I want to comment on:

1). The technique in which they do an outside parry with one hand and follow it up with a mawashi uchi looking technique with the other hand is something that Mas Oyama covers in at least two of his books that I have. He covered it in the sections on Chinese Kempo techniques. I can see the origins and the connections.

2). I'm assuming the older gentleman in the middle is either the Sensei or Senpai to the other two. What I find interesting is his obi which looks grey or silver.

3). Those are some interesting and nice looking gi's that they are wearing.

 

[Tayski]

Would you agree that a boxer is worse match-up (supposing the boxers legs are conditioned) being that thaiboxers don't rely on their hands as much? I would put a Kyoushin guys kicks up against a thaifighter any day of the week, so I don't think that match up is as dangerous as against boxer who will have such a superior in fighting-boxing,

Here comes spacetime again with his senseless style vs. style posts.

A boxer with conditioned legs? So basically not a typical boxer?

Thaiboxers might not be as proficient with their hands compared to pure western boxers but they do use their hands, and they're also very good with elbows and the clinch.

If you're talking about a full standup fight with kicks allowed then the boxer isn't really a worse matchup compared to a Nak Muay for a Kyokushin Karateka. However it massively depends on the actual fighters and their experience rather than the martial art they come from.

You should have a look at what happens to western boxers when they have a go in Kickboxing or Muay Thai without much training in those styles, more often than not they go down with low kicks or even high kicks that they don't see coming.