That youtube thing

Hi Finlay

I think they are both very interesting questions.

The matter of learning forms from a video or a book is going to depend upon the style of martial art practised, the ability/knowledge level and normal learning mechanism of the student concerned, and what is required to be transmitted on to others by that person.  

Although I don't practice them all now, there was a time when there were only 4 of the 27 Shotokan forms that I did not know at performance level.  I had to move away from my first club when I was 3Kyu and from then onwards I trained with a number of different associations and clubs at home and at university while continuing to visit and grade with my original chief instructor.  Why do I mention this?  Every single Shotokan form I knew from Bassai Dai onwards I learned from reading books by John Van Weenan, Funakoshi, Enoeda and Nakayama while watching Kanazawa on video (and yes, they were all different).  Very occasionally someone might tweak my form, saying 'we do it this way' (and I soon learned that every association has slightly different Kata) - but no-one ever asked me 'did you learn that from a video/book'?  

Now with very few exceptions, in Shotokan the emphasis on Kata is generally on correct form, not on application.  Having a good knowledge of correct form for the majority of the techniques and seeing the form in books and videos I was able to replicate that straight away.  With regard to the application, I quickly realised that the bunkai suggested in those books was nonsense and started thinking about my own bunkai.  In many respects my 'self learning/training' made me the Karateka I am today.  I spent ridiculous amounts of time practicing alone and visualising applications.

Personally I think that if a student is at the level at which they would normally be taught a form by an instructor, then they are at the level at which they can learn the form for themselves - so long as they have the discipline to exercise rigorous quality control.  Whether they can then teach that form on depends on what they are going to teach - the movements or the application.  In the case of the former I see no issue, though I would suggest videoing the form to check it from a external perspective against other versions.  In terms of the application of the form, the meaning of the form, in my opinion a large number of Karateka have been taught forms by people who had no clue as to their applications for years, so one more doesn't hurt.  However, just because somebody self learns a form doesn't mean they cannot interpret and teach good applications.

The question of when someone is ready to teach is both a hard and easy one.  If we waited until we knew our subject matter completely then an honest man would never teach.  Furthermore there is a difference between being able to do and being able to pass that knowledge on effectively.  Good teaching is a science, but I would say that being a good teacher is an art.

I get the impression that your concern is not so much about your ability to teach as it is about your ability to teach something different.  In very very simple terms (I'm not going to sit here and write a book on teaching) to teach something well you need to be able to show it, break it down, explain it and (if possible) get students to feel it then coach them through replicating it. Perhaps your concern is not so much on your ability to teach but on whether you are 'covered' to teach it?  If you are diverging from a syllabus I would suggest that for the protection of yourself and your students you make sure your insurer knows and that the new material is listed.

Function over form - if the individual is able to present the function of the form in a practical applicable why - then why not? 

Just call a cow for a cow,  If you are unsure if the video kata is correct - then just say so: "i saw this kata on youtube, i liked it and tried to copy it - this is what i think the moves within can be used for"

On a few occasions I have had cause to learn a new kata by video. These were really just pre-learning until I was able to meet and train with my instructor who took me through the details. In my experience, you can only really learn the skeleton of a form by video. Especially a single angle of the kata. There are often small details that are missed, or left out of the video. Subtle things are easily missed and when you have no one to correct you or make suggestions as to your performance it is a very long shot to get it just right on your own.

Having learned a kata properly and using the video to remember or fine tune it is a different story. I do think you can get a majority of the form (even applications) learning in the manner you describe but, I would be very hesitant to claim that I know it after video training only.

Hi there

interesting reponses,

on the subject of teaching, i think that my main issue is that what i want to teach flies in the face of what alot of my teachers presented as Traditional TKD, low blocks to front kicks etc, how can i teach what i see as more practical application without insulting them?

Finlay wrote:

Hi there

interesting reponses,

on the subject of teaching, i think that my main issue is that what i want to teach flies in the face of what alot of my teachers presented as Traditional TKD, low blocks to front kicks etc, how can i teach what i see as more practical application without insulting them?

To teach something that is safe and works is not insulting.  You are just teaching good technique, potentially for another purpose.  It's up to them as to whether to be insulted or not.

Finlay wrote:

i think that my main issue is that what i want to teach flies in the face of what alot of my teachers presented as Traditional TKD, low blocks to front kicks etc, how can i teach what i see as more practical application without insulting them

I like what JWT said above. I would add that I sometimes struggle with the same thing. As a representative of my style, I have the responsibility to pass on what I have been taught, as I was taught it. Historical preservation of a sort. Luckily, my direct instructor has a very practical approach. There are others above him who are more...traditional. It's natural that your approach will change as your experience grows and your goals for training are defined and re-defined.

As a practical minded martial artist, I have a need to teach and train in the way I feel that these skills were intended to be used. I can't teach one thing and expect to train the other somehow!

Most people will agree that there is no single correct answer as far as applications go. I don't see teaching multiple applications being a problem or insulting. There is historical reference that indicates this multi-application approach also. Even leading to new or modified forms. 

Sometimes it can be a tricky balance. I often tell my students to question everything. Even what I tell them. "Don't trust me, test it yourself." Sometimes they shoot down applications I show and sometimes they love them. Everyone gets something different from training and this allows students to seek their own path (with some guidance of course) and find what works best for them. It means that they are thinking. It also means that they can explain to others what they like or don't like rather than just going with what their instructor tells them will work. Again, going on blind trust.

The only downside so far is that they have started to see through some of the "junk" out there when attending seminars, other classes, etc. Luckily, I have a good group and they are polite enough to play nice and respect other ideas.

It also keeps me on my toes. A form of quality control I guess!