Karate and its identity in the world of sports is something it has struggled with ever since the thought first occurred in Japan. Many practitioners feel that this segue into sports has caused the de-evolution of the art, stripping away the roots of self-protection that are the glory of karate. Strangely enough, the same argument is also being made in the world of Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, which in the scheme of history is younger than karate. However, unlike the sport of Jiu-Jitsu, karate has not garnered the same level of respect and national notoriety. But it does beg an interesting question, why does karate struggle to accept itself as a sport?
This is a complicated question with honestly no clear answer. While writing this article, I struggled to find a clear path or precise way of answering this question. I do feel there are three distinct roadblocks that sit in the way of karate and prevent us from accepting a role in sports competitions. These are: the ideas that karate is only about self-protection, an elitist warrior ideology, and in my opinion, our competitions are terrible at representing karate. In many ways, this seems almost as if I said the whole problem with karate is karate and that might not be too far from the truth. But if we look at each roadblock carefully and with an open mind, I think I can make my case.
Looking at self-protection, it seems hard to fathom that this could be any kind of hindrance to karate. If anything, it should bolster karate. The problem lies in the fact that every karate school uses self-defense as a punchline and marketing scheme, rather than teaching adequate self-protection skills. This goes for the hardline traditionalist as well, who claims to teach a pure form of karate or some delusion along those lines. In fact, this is a concept that many martial arts struggle with as all of them see themselves as a method of self-protection first and a sport second. But in my experience, I feel that karate struggles with this the most.
But again, how is this a problem? I can point to all these masters who state that karate is for self-protection, so why should that not be our focus and selling point of the art? It is understandable how one can feel this way when you look at karate’s history.
Choki Motubu, one of the founding fathers of modern karate, states in his book My art of karate “there is nothing more dangerous than a martial art that is ineffective in actual combat”. It is for the above written reasons that this quote gets thrown around so much.
This quote and many others are used as justification to support the idea of karate as a self-protection method. But if we look past the history, traditions, and blind faith, does the training that one finds in karate schools support this notion? Unfortunately, if you look at most karate schools, this is not the case whether it be McDojos or die-hard traditionalists. But no matter where you go it is almost a guarantee that within the first few sentences of the sales pitch of a karate school self-defense will be mentioned. But why?
Outside of the historical context that I just covered, why does every karate school feel the need to sell self-protection? Why can’t they just be a sports gym? The easy answer is because that is what people expect when they walk into a karate school. Right or wrong, when people think of karate, they think of it as a means to protect one’s self so that is why they seek out a school. Karate has this compulsion to be viewed as a means of self-protection even if the school’s curriculum does not provide skills that would be necessary or adequate. I feel our compulsory need to cling to the identity of self-protection is a hindrance. Karate has created a culture that vilifies a certain honesty if a school were to claim themselves as only a sport. The idea that if one does not teach self-defense, it shakes the very bedrock ideology that is karate.
The second roadblock that must be considered when discussing karate’s inability to see itself as a sport is the warrior philosophy that stretches to the roots of modern karate. For many, this is an essential aspect of karate and is oftentimes used as a justification as to why karate is superior to other combat sports. The idea being that the grand philosophical notions elevate karate above the pure barbarism of fighting. What is interesting, though, is if you look back, many of the pioneers of karate did not share this same view.
Karate was originally only about what was functional self-protection and, while philosophical notions are great mental exercises, they do not assist in developing reliable skills. Anko Itosu, who is often considered one of the founding fathers of modern karate, states in his 1908 letter titled, Ten Precepts of Tode, “karate did not originate from Buddhism or Confucianism.” While this does not single out the idea of warrior philosophies, I feel it does speak to the mindset of what was intended for karate—especially the traditional form of karate that came through Okinawa. While the old master may have recognized the idea of a fighting spirit, it was never intended to grow into grand philosophical, religious, or martial ideals.
For better or worse, karate has adopted the notion of a warrior philosophy. The problem that presents is the over-romanticizing of what it means to be a “warrior.” This also dovetails into what is considered “traditional,” as the amount of misinformation or misrepresentation of the cultural elements associated with karate is staggering. From marketing ploys to people who fancy themselves samurai warriors, this warrior philosophy provides a gateway to a whole host of ridiculous antics and nonsensical ideas. One of them being that because “I am a warrior with my training focusing solely on self-defense, I am too dangerous for competition.”
To seasoned combat sport competitors and people accustomed to violence, this notion is just plain silly; but to the average person, this seems plausible and is often a major argument against the idea of competition in karate.
“How can we have competition when everything about karate is meant for war and the battlefield?“ This legend is often perpetuated within the community and while much of karate’s ancient roots cannot be agreed upon, many karate historians have come forward stating this to be blatantly untrue. Whether historical anecdotes can be agreed upon or not, the idea of karate being used on the battlefield of war by an army seems extremely unlikely.
Here is another famous quote from Anko Itosu’s letter, Ten Precepts of Tode, which states, “It is not intended to be used against a single opponent but instead as a way to avoid injury by using the hands and feet should one by any chance be confronted by a villain or ruffian”. Notice how he says nothing about soldiers or warfare; in fact, throughout the entire letter, which is his interpretation of the functions of karate, he never alludes to or suggests karate as an art of war.
But this grandiose notion remains, which in effect raises the ego of many karate practitioners. As karate has spread to the west many of the early practitioners have idolized and almost deified the Japanese and Okinawan masters who were responsible for its spread. Because of this, there is always resistance to the idea of change, which allows for little to no growth of the art. This is contradictory to the nature of a sport, because a sport is always looking to improve as competitors look for better and more efficient ways to win. Karate remains stuck in the past with a rigid mindset that almost demonizes the idea of change.
Finally, we come to the competitions themselves and why I and many others feel that these competitions are not a true representation of karate. Now, where I tend to deviate from the herd is the fact that I feel kickboxing and MMA are better representations. Before someone jumps up and roundhouse kicks me in the face, hear me out. If you look at karate competitions, whether on the national sport stage such as the 2020 Olympics that karate is slated to be an event, or just the average small-town tournament at a local high school, they are almost laughable. In some ways, karate has become the safe combat sport where almost no one gets hit and you are judged not for one’s ability to fight but their acrobatic abilities and lung capacity to deliver ear-shattering screams. It is this silliness that gives so much strength to the argument that karate has devolved and has no business in sports competitions. I mean, who can blame them when karate is represented by choreographed acrobatic routines and a dynamic game of tag meant to represent a fight.
But wait, there is a saving grace or at least a perceived one as the old-timers interject and demand one look at karate competitions from the seventies and eighties. As this is oftentimes considered the golden era of karate competition as competitors did not wear pads and all this jumping around was not done. And while yes, from a fighting spirit point of view, these competitions are better, if one were to step back and look at the rules and compare it to a sport such as boxing, there is much to be desired.
Remember how I said the Japanese cultural warrior philosophies present a problem for karate? Here is a clear example of that impact. Prior to karate migrating to mainland Japan, it had no competitions. In Okinawa, they would hold wrestling matches, but nothing that resembled a striking competition.
To get where this cultural cross-pollination began, we need to follow karate’s growth in Japan as the instructors looked to other sports for inspiration. Two popular sports in Japan were Judo and Kendo. In both styles of competition, the match is stopped once a competitor lands what is perceived to be a killing or crippling blow. So, karate adopted this mindset and applied it to its Kumite bouts; thus “point Kumite” was born. Now, all combat sports are point-based, which is why, for example, in boxing, if a competitor is not knocked out, the match is then scored and decided at the end. The key difference is that, in boxing, the action never stops until the end of the round. In karate, the second a competitor scores a point, the match is stopped, scored, and then competitors continue until the next point is scored, just like a kendo or fencing match.
Now to an average person with a dash of common sense, this seems confusing and pointless. How does that even remotely resemble a fight? This is the notion that gives strength to the warrior self-defense crowd, as clearly the competitions are not an accurate representation of a fight. So, an easy solution might just be to change the rules to resemble a fight. But the reason this has not happened is in part due to karate’s struggle with the cultural warrior philosophy.
Remember Kumite bouts are based largely on Kendo (Japanese fencing) which adheres to the budo philosophy of “one strike, one kill.“ Which does make sense in a sword bout because often one strike would be a killing blow. This does not, however, make sense in a fighting competition without weapons. Unfortunately, competitions with much more popular platforms already exist, as Kickboxing and MMA are arguably better at representing the fighting spirit that karate once carried.
As I stated before, I feel that kickboxing and MMA are better platforms for karate fighters. And we have seen karate practitioners have success in these sports, but it has never really gained a true foothold. Oftentimes, many of the arguments that are applied to typical karate competitions are applied when someone cites Lyoto Machida or Stephen “Wonderboy” Thompson as being examples for why karate works and has a place in combat sports. Right or wrong, karate tries its best to separate itself from the rest of the combat sports available. With almost an elitist arrogance—blended with some true ignorance of the past—many karate practitioners will shun combat sports, thinking themselves above them. This is usually the warrior-elite/self-defense crowd, as no sport is good enough simply because it is a sport, and that conflicts with the idea of them being overwhelmingly dangerous without any evidence. So, karate sticks with its flawed misrepresentation by clinging to its dynamic game of tag in lieu of a more compelling sports expression.
But what does all this ranting, raving, and articulate explanation mean? Karate is not going to change. If anything, we need to hit the rewind button because we have lost ourselves. Unfortunately, many feel the way forward is to bury themselves in the past with their heads in the sand. But truthfully, I feel the way forward is to take a radical approach. Imagine a world where the traditional crowd teaches karate but do not preach self-defense. They merely understand their roles as karate historians preserving a training methodology reflective of the masters and time they cling to. Or McDojos providing a kid-friendly exercise program prompting physical and mental health without the stigmas of brutality and self-protection. How about elite gyms that create badass fighters that carry the fighting spirit of a karateka? This could become a reality, but I can already hear the shocked gasps and steams of anger rising by such an idea. But is it such a radical idea?
The self-defense industry needs a radical overhaul, which is a discussion for another time, so why not just focus on sports and personal health? I can promise that this idea is not the end of the world with the sky falling and all of us running around in flames. Imagine almost for a moment what could be accomplished if we took all the energy we spend justifying ourselves as self-defense experts and put that back into the art. Karate can be an art without an overindulgence of warrior philosophy and traditional misrepresentations. Let us allow individual artistic expression without the need to vilify.
Karate can be a force to be reckoned with in the world of combat sports. We have the tools. We just need to stop getting in our own way. Karate may have started as a means of self-protection, but it has evolved into an art form that is beautiful, exciting, and wondrous with a never-ending well of knowledge to seek. We must respect the past for what is and appreciate the path it paved for us. But ultimately, we have to leave the past where it is and look forward to new horizons.
Editor’s Note: You can read more of Richard Morgan’s thoughts on martial arts in modern times here!
- Time to Learn: Why Is This Taking So Long? - February 15, 2021
- Post-COVID 19: Backyard Schools and Online Training - May 22, 2020
- Barriers to Evolution: Karate’s Struggle to become a Sport - May 11, 2020
Richard,
I cannot say I disagree with your main points. Ranting at the large organizations is all but pointless. Smaller groups are putting some teeth back in karate, I fear that the larger groups will try to co-opt them is they are seen as gaining too much popularity. A competition outlet for karate that allowed for basically the stand up parts of MMA, including all the standing grappling and throws, would come closest to that fighting spirit. It, I don’t know that we would ever see that.
Richard,
I enjoyed this article very much, thank you. Just out of curiosity, what are your thoughts on kyokushin style tournaments where the action is continuous, and the only way to score points is with knockdown/knockouts? In the event that neither of these conditions are met, the judges (often after additional rounds) declare a winner based on performance- at least that is how it works in the tournaments I have attended. Are you familiar with Karate Combat? That seems to be the full contact stand up fights reminiscent of the old school 1970s and 1980s matches you describe here. What are your thoughts on that?
I think kyokushin tournaments are better than WKF style but you can develop bad habits since they don’t strike to the face and karate combat is somewhere in the middle for me. I do feel that karate combat has potential but they keep pooling from WKF athletes so its awkward