Comparing and judging in forms/kata...

[jks9199]

A post in the Kempo forum got me thinking... For convenience, I'm going to describe from a judging a competition view -- but it would also apply to simply comparing the forms.

You've got two people in front of you in an open event. One does a form that's got maybe 15 to 20 moves. The other does a form with 30 or 40 moves.

Which form is more complex? How do you compare them? Is a longer form automatically harder or more complex?

 

[Flying Crane]

well, that is a problem inherent in any open competition event. When people from different systems compete, it is highly unlikely that any of the judges will have the background to appropriately judge all of the competitors. If you as judge do not have experience with the system and form the competitor is competing with, how do you judge it? You don't even know what you are looking at. You don't know if it was done well or not.

Sorry, I don't have an answer for you, I don't think there really IS an answer to this.

Another question: does a more "complex" form automatically win out over a more simple form? Even if the simple form is better executed?

 

[terryl965]

jks I look at them as seperate forms, in such that I really look for balance coordination and proper kicking and punching techniques. You can never really judge off the length of a form in my personal opinion.

 

[stickarts]

When I am judging I don't place a huge value on how long the form is. I have seen competitors with long forms but poor balance and lack of sharpness vs. other competitors whose form is half as long but if done with good speed, balance, and power, then the fact that the form is shorter doesn't count against them. I view complexity more in terms of how difficult the techniques are to perform, not how long the form is. If its an open event, I don't necessarily have to have seen the form before to judge its performance (if by open, you mean it can even be a made up form by the competitor). If its a traditional division, thats different.
I judge by speed, power, balance, and overall presentation (how was the intro, how was the confidence level and energy, etc...)
What is very important is to be consistent with your scores from competitor to competitor as far as what you are looking for in the performance.

 

[Rich Parsons]

A post in the Kempo forum got me thinking... For convenience, I'm going to describe from a judging a competition view -- but it would also apply to simply comparing the forms.

You've got two people in front of you in an open event. One does a form that's got maybe 15 to 20 moves. The other does a form with 30 or 40 moves.

Which form is more complex? How do you compare them? Is a longer form automatically harder or more complex?

Good questions.

When I did this in the past, I looked for intensity and balance and power and eye contact or placement towards their "opponent".

If it was a bladed or other weapon that was fluid then I looked for that.

If it was a more structured format for empty hand I would look for completion of techniques before moving on to others, and not everything being done half like just to get through it.


The question you also forgot to ask, is if the person competing is a black belt versus a person one rank below a black belt. Grouped do to age or numbers or what have you. Is there an epxectation out of the Black Belt to be that much better? I try not to look at ranks but to look at the form and judge from what was presented.

 

[searcher]

A post in the Kempo forum got me thinking... For convenience, I'm going to describe from a judging a competition view -- but it would also apply to simply comparing the forms.

You've got two people in front of you in an open event. One does a form that's got maybe 15 to 20 moves. The other does a form with 30 or 40 moves.

Which form is more complex? How do you compare them? Is a longer form automatically harder or more complex?

Depends on the complexity of the moves and the pace of the form. Compare them by breathing, focus, intensity, stance, technique. That is what I do.

 

[jks9199]

Another question: does a more "complex" form automatically win out over a more simple form? Even if the simple form is better executed?

That's part of what I'm trying to get at. Should length or even complexity/difficulty be the automatic decider? Can it be done fairly, even within a single style, but especially across several styles? Or should a nearly flawless, more basic form win over a solid, but not perfect, more advanced form?

jks I look at them as seperate forms, in such that I really look for balance coordination and proper kicking and punching techniques. You can never really judge off the length of a form in my personal opinion.

I agree; but length does influence people's assessment. If nothing else, it's simply harder to remember and keep straight more moves. But, again, part of what I'm after is really how do you define "more difficult or advanced?"

The question you also forgot to ask, is if the person competing is a black belt versus a person one rank below a black belt. Grouped do to age or numbers or what have you. Is there an epxectation out of the Black Belt to be that much better? I try not to look at ranks but to look at the form and judge from what was presented.

Ranks bring in a whole different issue. Is it fair to compare a white belt with nearly 2 years of experience, because his system doesn't have anything between white & green, and requires two years for green, with someone who's a white belt in a system where you move from white in 6 months?

Depends on the complexity of the moves and the pace of the form. Compare them by breathing, focus, intensity, stance, technique. That is what I do.

But, again, how do you define complexity?

Maybe I kind of introduced a bit of red herring by using competition to compare, but that's what brought it to mind... I've judged in open competitions; generally I look for decent balance, control of their body, that they appear to know their form and aren't merely doing a series of motions. Somewhere, this was brought up a while ago; I'll try to dig it up rather than repeat all of the judging stuff.

What I'm kind of after is how do you define or identify a more complex, difficult or just harder form? Especially across different styles... After all, my style includes punches thrown from one-legged stances; some other styles would say those punches can't have power because they lack a solid base. And that's just one example...

 

[Mark Lynn]

When I am judging I don't place a huge value on how long the form is. I have seen competitors with long forms but poor balance and lack of sharpness vs. other competitors whose form is half as long but if done with good speed, balance, and power, then the fact that the form is shorter doesn't count against them. I view complexity more in terms of how difficult the techniques are to perform, not how long the form is. If its an open event, I don't necessarily have to have seen the form before to judge its performance (if by open, you mean it can even be a made up form by the competitor). If its a traditional division, thats different.
I judge by speed, power, balance, and overall presentation (how was the intro, how was the confidence level and energy, etc...)
What is very important is to be consistent with your scores from competitor to competitor as far as what you are looking for in the performance.

How true, good post.

I don't go by length or complexity unless it is in the same belt catergory.
If I'm grading Orange belts and below and everyone does similar katas, even competitors outside of the dominant system presented will have similar techniques in their forms but one has a slightly longer form or it has more complexity to it (Orange belt form instead of White or Yellow belt level) than the more complicated form gets the nod all things considered equal.

But I don't go for doing "Chungi Modified" where a jump spining back kick is added onto the last move of the kata. I actually saw this in a tournament in the mid 90's.

But in BB kata division again all things equal higher or more complex forms do hold more sway and deserve a higher score. Because there is more chance to screw up and if the person mmade it through it all things considered equal than the more complex should get the nod.

But the key is to maintain a consistant scroing practice, don't be all over the place, picking complexity for this person and form, technique for this guy, and color of uniform for this girl, and hey I loved the butterfly 360 jump round kick combination for that guy and so on. As judges they need to be fair and fair is being consitant in your scoring.

Mark

 

[jks9199]

The specific issue of judging was discussed in these threads/posts:

Evaluating the quality of kata/hyung/etc. performance

Bunkai-informed kata/hyung performance?

Re: Competing against Karate in forms

Obviously, in judging it's important to try to be as fair and consistent as you can. But, again, you get into the idea of what's harder or more complex...

 

[Mark Lynn]

well, that is a problem inherent in any open competition event. When people from different systems compete, it is highly unlikely that any of the judges will have the background to appropriately judge all of the competitors. If you as judge do not have experience with the system and form the competitor is competing with, how do you judge it? You don't even know what you are looking at. You don't know if it was done well or not.

Sorry, I don't have an answer for you, I don't think there really IS an answer to this.

Another question: does a more "complex" form automatically win out over a more simple form? Even if the simple form is better executed?

This is a hard one but here goes. I'll give you two extremes that I 've seen.

In BB kata competition I once saw a BB (senior grade) do Chungi (1st level form) I believe he was trying to make a point. But other BB competiors were doing BB forms, who got the higher scores? The other competitors but did the guy screw up Chungi? No, it looked as if a senior BB was doing the kata, but did he deserve to win over a competitor doing a 3rd Dan grade form? I don't think so.

Likewise I competed at a open competition where some Gojoryu stylists were competing against some TKD/kickboxers in BB kata division. The Gojoryu stylists had beautiful low stances (that no one else there could do) hard style breathing, strong punches, intense presentation, and they were locked in on their form, they were punching their fists right through their enemies you could see it in their eyes (if you looked at them). (Now I had no clue what the name of their form was but they would have had I judged got their highest marks from me because they showed what katas were all about in my book).

However the kick boxers even though at the time were higher dan grades than I (2nd-4th dans) did brown belt TKD forms. But they had the secret to winning kata division high kicks in their forms and they got the highest grades from the other judges. Now these instructors didn't even know their 1st black forms because I did Bassai and they came up to me inquiring about it afterwards. I forget who won, come to think of it I might have placed in the top three, but the Gojoryu guys were left out. My point is really about the 2nd-4th dans performing brown belt katas (not knowing BB katas) and knocking out other BBs doing black belt forms. Now also these were former kickboxers who really didn't see the need in dong katas so their forms looked like they didn't see the need in practicing katas. And yet they had more high kicking, the techniques and forms looked harder to do. And if I remember they did place.

"Geewiz Jim Bob any one can get down there in that low horse stance, do that slow breathing and the slow hand movements, I'll give him a few more tenths since his back is straight, his thighs are level, heck I betcha I could place my rake across them there thighs and it not roll off. Yeah that's pretty good" "But look Jimmy Dean at that there BB with all of the pretty stripes is kicking head high. Why, why, did he stop JD? Oh now I see that was one of them there pregnant pauses so he can get us excited for his next head high kick. Wheeeee".

I've got nothing against high kicking my point is higher ranks who don't know higher forms (the TKD former kickboxers) beating out more traditional forms that don't have high kicks, and of course the judges who didn''t know the forms who graded them (us).

 

[Mark Lynn]

Maybe I kind of introduced a bit of red herring by using competition to compare, but that's what brought it to mind... I've judged in open competitions; generally I look for decent balance, control of their body, that they appear to know their form and aren't merely doing a series of motions. Somewhere, this was brought up a while ago; I'll try to dig it up rather than repeat all of the judging stuff.

What I'm kind of after is how do you define or identify a more complex, difficult or just harder form? Especially across different styles... After all, my style includes punches thrown from one-legged stances; some other styles would say those punches can't have power because they lack a solid base. And that's just one example...

But if done correctly you would demonstrate the power, form, grace, agility, balance etc. etc. that is inherent to your style in that move, therefore you should be graded on how well you perfromed that move not on how I feel that that move has martial applications.

Take the famous pictues of Cynthia Rothrock competing back in the 80's with her hook sword routine. A famous picture perfect pose (which it was) shows her on one leg leaning forward hook swords out to the side and one leg up in the air behind her. No one judge that I can imagine graded her off on that move because they didn't like the non martial application/interpertation of that move. Instead it was graded singuarly on the grace, balance, form, etc. etc. on that move in time (this is the martial art side of the form) and in the context of the overall performence of the whole routine. i.e. Did she make it through without screwing up.

Mark

 

[Brandon Fisher]

jks I look at them as seperate forms, in such that I really look for balance coordination and proper kicking and punching techniques. You can never really judge off the length of a form in my personal opinion.

I agree 100%.

 

[BrandonLucas]

In an open tournement, I'm not sure how someone would judge a kata that they didn't know anything about. I have a TKD background...what do I know about any CMA katas?

I think that in an open tournement, at least 1 judge should be present for each MA that is represented. Whichever competitor is up representing that particular MA, then the coresponding judge should be the primary judge on technique and whether the kata was performed correctly, taking into account interpertation. After all of the competitors have performed, then the judges should compare notes and decide accordingly. If there are 2 or more competitors that are tied in score, then the kata should be performed again, with an average of both katas taken into account to tally the overall score.

That's just how I see it. As far as how to judge based on complexity or length, if it's a kata from a MA I have no experience in, then I'm probably going to go on intensity. But then, that's not really even a good indicator that their kata was any better than the next person's.

I've typed myself into a corner. Good question.

Geez.

 

[MJS]

A post in the Kempo forum got me thinking... For convenience, I'm going to describe from a judging a competition view -- but it would also apply to simply comparing the forms.

You've got two people in front of you in an open event. One does a form that's got maybe 15 to 20 moves. The other does a form with 30 or 40 moves.

Which form is more complex? How do you compare them? Is a longer form automatically harder or more complex?

Someone doing a kata may think that if its long, harder, complex, etc. that its going to ensure that they'll get a higher score. IMHO, I don't look for the length or how complex the form is, but instead: how their stances are, focus, intensity, and power. I've seen inner-school tournaments where a beginner will do the first blocking set as their kata, while another newer student is doing a longer form. Yet despite that, I gave a higher score to the one doing the blocking form due to the reasons above. I mean, if someone is really focused and has alot of power, vs. someone just going thru the moves...well, which would makes more sense to pick?

I've also seen advanced people doing a lower ranked kata. I don't hold that against them. Again, I don't care what kata they do, as long as its meeting the above list.

This applies whether or not I know the kata or don't know the kata, thats being performed.

 

[BrandonLucas]

Someone doing a kata may think that if its long, harder, complex, etc. that its going to ensure that they'll get a higher score. IMHO, I don't look for the length or how complex the form is, but instead: how their stances are, focus, intensity, and power. I've seen inner-school tournaments where a beginner will do the first blocking set as their kata, while another newer student is doing a longer form. Yet despite that, I gave a higher score to the one doing the blocking form due to the reasons above. I mean, if someone is really focused and has alot of power, vs. someone just going thru the moves...well, which would makes more sense to pick?

I've also seen advanced people doing a lower ranked kata. I don't hold that against them. Again, I don't care what kata they do, as long as its meeting the above list.

This applies whether or not I know the kata or don't know the kata, thats being performed.

This holds true for some katas, but don't some of them also have movements and techniques that are going to have exact stances? I'm not sure about it, that's why I'm asking...but for instance, wouldn't some CMA katas be hard to judge on correct stances and crisp technique?

 

[geezer]

This holds true for some katas, but don't some of them also have movements and techniques that are going to have exact stances? I'm not sure about it, that's why I'm asking...but for instance, wouldn't some CMA katas be hard to judge on correct stances and crisp technique?

You are absolutely correct. Many styles have forms that don't lend themselves to competition, especially inter-style competition. As Flying Crane pointed out earlier, it's a problem inherent in trying to judge very different systems. A large number of martial arts including many Korean, Japanese, and some Chinese arts can be judged according to more or less generally accepted standards of speed, power, focus, crispness, difficulty, complexity, presentation, and so forth. But the forms in other systems may not outwardly and obviously exhibit these traits. I have many years of experience in the Wing Tsun system and I would never encourage a student to participate in a "kata" competition. Our forms are not designed for display. They are not even envisioned as defenses against imaginary attackers. They serve entirely different purposes, and I know from experience that many high ranking members of other systems don't have the foundation to judge them. And that's OK. It's just a fact of life.

 

[MJS]

This holds true for some katas, but don't some of them also have movements and techniques that are going to have exact stances? I'm not sure about it, that's why I'm asking...but for instance, wouldn't some CMA katas be hard to judge on correct stances and crisp technique?

Yes, you're correct, many katas do have similar movements. The name of the stance may be different but the idea is probably pretty similar. I found that to be true when I switched from the Parker system of Kenpo to Tracy.

Now, if someone came up and did a TaiChi form, I'd expect those movements to probably be pretty soft and fluid, while still maintaining a good structure as far as stance work goes.

However, I think that it should be apparent if someone is just going thru the motions, vs. being 'into' the form or kata.

 

[geezer]

...However, I think that it should be apparent if someone is just going thru the motions, vs. being 'into' the form or kata.

I agree. An experienced martial artist can usually tell the difference between someone who performs a set with confidence and competence and someone who muddles through the movements. But that's about it when you are looking at radically different systems. And that's not enough to judge a competition on.

That being said, I really enjoy watching top competitors perform. But it's like competitive gymnastics, figure skating, or any other sport that has both objective requirements and subjective, aesthetic judgements. You have to meet those arbitrary requirements and play to the judges. By any analysis, it's a distinct subset of martial arts skills that is not applicable to many MAs.

 

[Kacey]

jks I look at them as seperate forms, in such that I really look for balance coordination and proper kicking and punching techniques. You can never really judge off the length of a form in my personal opinion.

I agree. Length and complexity are less important than performance. I was at a tournament once where a II Dan chose to perform Chon-Ji (the first Ch'ang H'on form) in competition against another II Dan, who performed one of his rank-level forms (Eui-Am) - the II Dan performing Chon-Ji lost, not because of his choice of pattern, but because between the two, the other practitioner did a better job on the form he chose to perform - but it was incredibly close, given the quality with which Chon-Ji was performed. That practitioner lost not because he did Chon-Ji, but not because the other practitioner did Eui-Am better than he did Chon-Ji.

The specific issue of judging was discussed in these threads/posts:

Evaluating the quality of kata/hyung/etc. performance

Bunkai-informed kata/hyung performance?

Re: Competing against Karate in forms

Obviously, in judging it's important to try to be as fair and consistent as you can. But, again, you get into the idea of what's harder or more complex...

In one post in this thread, I posted the following:

9 Points to be observed while performing patterns:
1) Accuracy. A pattern should begin and end on the same spot.
2) Correct posture and facing should be maintained at all times.
3) The muscles of the body should be tensed and relaxed at the proper moments.
4) A pattern should be performed in rhythmic movements with an absence of stiffness.
5) Moves should accelerate or decelerate, according to the instructions.
6) Each pattern should be perfected before moving on to the next.
7) Students should know the purpose of each movement.
8) Students should perform each movement with realism.
9) Attack and defense techniques should be equally distributed among left and right hands and feet.

Some of these, of course, are not relevant when judging a form you don't know - some aren't even relevant; #1, for example, is true for all Ch'ang H'on forms, and can only be done if all the stances are correct, but may not be true for other styles - but several of them apply even if you don't know the pattern. For open patterns, I look for balance, consistency in stances, height of techniques, etc., realism, and focus (does each technique have a target).

 

[Flying Crane]

You are absolutely correct. Many styles have forms that don't lend themselves to competition, especially inter-style competition. As Flying Crane pointed out earlier, it's a problem inherent in trying to judge very different systems. A large number of martial arts including many Korean, Japanese, and some Chinese arts can be judged according to more or less generally accepted standards of speed, power, focus, crispness, difficulty, complexity, presentation, and so forth. But the forms in other systems may not outwardly and obviously exhibit these traits. I have many years of experience in the Wing Tsun system and I would never encourage a student to participate in a "kata" competition. Our forms are not designed for display. They are not even envisioned as defenses against imaginary attackers. They serve entirely different purposes, and I know from experience that many high ranking members of other systems don't have the foundation to judge them. And that's OK. It's just a fact of life.

Very very well said. this is exactly what I was getting at, you fleshed it out clearly, and the example of wing tsun is a very good one.

I could also pull out some forms from Tibetan White Crane, and I bet someone with a background in the Japanese or Korean arts would not have a clue what they are looking at. It really is that different. If the judges were mostly from Japanese and Korean backgrounds, I bet I'd score pretty low, even if I did our forms perfectly.