Ok, so after the discussion on power v technique, I feel maybe we should discuss functionality v technique. I feel that anyone who has studied any form of martial arts (in my case Shotokan), tend to get bogged down with the techniques taught and practising these techniques in the dojo, never having had to use them in a real life self protection situation because, lets be honest unless you live in a particularly rough area, you just won't stumble into a fight.
To me, in dojo's across the world, what should be taught, as well as the grading syllabus for those traditional schools should be functional techniques that would work in a "real life street fight" (or when our self protection has gone terribly wrong and we end up in a fight).
Take a simple Oi Zuki, one of the if not the first offensive moves any karate-ka will learn, generally on their very first lesson. Yes it is a stable of the style, yes it appears numerous times in kata from Kihon to Bassai Dai, yet in a real life fight, with all the effects of adrenaline thrown in , loss of fine motor skills etc, are you really going to remember all the technical stuff about how to generate the power of the punch? In my experience (and I do have some due to my job), the answer is no. You are far more likely to through arms about hoping to connect while trying damn hard not to get punched yourself as you actively step into your opponent with not a single thing to protect yourself as, according to the teaching, you step forward with your punching hand glued to your hip until you start to move.
Surely a more functional technique to teach would be to incorporate sideways movement at an earlier grade than is "typical" in most syllabus and to teach more functional techniques such as uraken where the technique launches from a more central area?
These are just my thoughts on what we teach from years of working in a high risk area for staff.