Forms

[Flatlander]

I'll preface this by offering that the only person I've ever trained under is my current instructor, and would like to get a feeling for what goes on out there in the rest of the Modern Arnis community. My question is to do with forms. Are they usually taught both right lead/left lead (hand), various weapons in hand/emptyhand, standing up/on the knees/on the back, inclusively?

 

[Guro Harold]

Several groups emphasize l/r translation as well as using different weapon combinations.

I have done the forms in this manner but only focus on the various weapon combinations and not left right hand execution of the form. I do require proper application execution however with the left and right hand.

:asian:

 

[arnisandyz]

Forms are not a major focus of our training, however, we do the 4 stick anyos of Modern Arnis and the 64 from Pekiti Tirsia. Its important to get the basic movements of the forms down first (typically with the stick in the right hand), then we start freelancing it with left and right and different weapons using the form as a loose structure. This allows some amount of self-exploration and individuality in something that has potential to become very 'cookie cutter". When I was still doing TKD, I would do some of the forms holding different weapons, with double daggers, the forms took on a more fluid feel, but still maintained the pattern of the form. My TKD instructor at the time was very open minded and encouraged me to explore all the TKD forms he had shown me with weapon application, some work better than others.

 

[Dan Anderson]

There are 8 empty hand forms and 4 cane forms in Modern Arnis. Each of the forms has right and left hand applications of the same moves. I use the empty hand forms to show possibilities of locking and off balancing actions. I don't like the cane forms much but done flowingly, they show the blade actions of Modern Arnis.

Yours,
Dan Anderson

PS - I delineate the 8 empty hand forms in the book Mano y Mano - The Weaponless Fighting Applications Of Modern Arnis.

 

[Guro Harold]

PS - I delineate the 8 empty hand forms in the book Mano y Mano - The Weaponless Fighting Applications Of Modern Arnis.

Dan's book, Mano y Mano - The Weaponless Fighting Applications Of Modern Arnis, is a great reference book to add to your Modern Arnis collection. Each discrete move of the forms have been captured by photo.

Best regards,

Palusut

 

[Flatlander]

Interesting that you mentioned that, as I went and bought it from Mr. Anderson's website as soon as he mentioned it in his last post. So it's good to know you dug it. Can't wait to read it.

 

[Guro Harold]

Hi Flatlander,

I hope that I don't sound like a commercial but Renegade (Datu Tim Hartman) also has the forms on VCD. I bought it as a reference as well.

Please go to the link below to order:
Modern Arnis Anyos
http://wdsupplies.com/store/product_info.php?products_id=28

Rest assured that I get no kickbacks for my recommendations, I just want to make sure that the reference material gets out there.

Best regards,

Palusut

 

[Flatlander]

Thank you very much for the info. Must not spend too much at once. Wife asks many questions. Doesn't understand the value. Must be sneaky....
But will re-visit link later.

 

[Rich Parsons]

I'll preface this by offering that the only person I've ever trained under is my current instructor, and would like to get a feeling for what goes on out there in the rest of the Modern Arnis community. My question is to do with forms. Are they usually taught both right lead/left lead (hand), various weapons in hand/emptyhand, standing up/on the knees/on the back, inclusively?

You can also check discussion on this thread about Cane Forms

Or you can check this thread about Empty Hand Forms

 

[Cruentus]

Flatliner,

One thing you'll notice with forms is that they weren't standardize well by Professor, but rather used as a tool for personal expression within the art, among other things. Group's standardized forms later, and all had their own justifications for it. I believe that WMAA, IMAF Inc., WMAC, MA-80, DAV, for example, all have their own way of standardizing their forms, so "what's right" and "what's wrong" may vary depending on who you train with.

PAUL

 

[Flatlander]

Paul,

Thank you for the insight. The question this raises with me, FLATLANDER, is are the forms that varied in terms of actual movements? Does anyone see this as being a bad thing? A good thing? Immaterial to the fundamental concepts?

 

[Dan Anderson]

Flatliner,

One thing you'll notice with forms is that they weren't standardize well by Professor, but rather used as a tool for personal expression within the art, among other things. Group's standardized forms later, and all had their own justifications for it. I believe that WMAA, IMAF Inc., WMAC, MA-80, DAV, for example, all have their own way of standardizing their forms, so "what's right" and "what's wrong" may vary depending on who you train with.

PAUL

Have to disagree with you there, Paul. RP was very specific (with me) as how to do the forms. I was corrected several times on very exact moves within different ones. Now, that he taught the forms ever so slightly differently in different areas of the US, I'll go for that. Also, that he allowed a wide berth for the base style of who he was teaching the form to (meaning the form done by a taekwondo player would look different than when a kenpo player did the same form), I'll grant as well.

The template was very specific, though. The bunkai or self defense application was open to interpretation. What is "right" or "wrong" is if the template is deviated from.

Yours,
Dan Anderson

 

[arnisador]

I think you both may be saying the same thing--there was a canonical way to do them (Shotokan style, basically), but he didn't insist that every group do it their way--he had an ideal but didn't insist on making it a standard as much as a template.

 

[Cruentus]

I think you both may be saying the same thing--there was a canonical way to do them (Shotokan style, basically), but he didn't insist that every group do it their way--he had an ideal but didn't insist on making it a standard as much as a template.

Perhaps we are saying the same thing (Dan and I). I'll agree that there was indeed a template, but that is as far as I'll go.

I can't say that the template was very specific, though. If you don't believe me, just ask 3 different people from 3 different organizations to do stick form #3, or empty hand form #5. I can bet a beer that actual movements will vary.

No, if we are talking stylistic differences or interpretive differences (bunkai), well, these could be night and day.

Perhaps, Professor Dan, Professor Presas was specific with you. It is good that you have that if he was, as that isn't the trend for everyone else. Maybe you have a forms book or DVD that you can share that will demonstraight what you were taught, specifically? (opportunity for shameless plug here )

Regardless, certian things may have been taught specifically to certian people, but I think it is safe to say that forms were not standardized accross the board with Professor. If they were, then IMAF Shea, WMAA, WMAC, DAV, MA-80, and FMAC, and Tulisan Eskrima group (hell, why not throw in my little group for good measure), would all do the forms the same exact way, right? :uhohh: It would also be my imagination that I have been taught at least three different ways to do every form except stick form #2! :rofl:

:asian:
Paul Janulis

 

[dearnis.com]

Hi Dan-
Hvae to disagree a bit. Professor was very specific, but about different things with different people. I can distinctly remember being pulled from a group at camp and shown a different (and not just subtly different) way to do a certain segment of a form. Professor didnt change the group, nor criticize the instructor; he just wanted me doing a certain sequence a bit differently.
Ultimately I think Professor picked up on the fact that many people just BS'd the forms for testing and his reaction to students doing the forms with precision and intent was was to take them to another level of where they were rather than trying to fit one standard.

 

[Cruentus]

Paul,

Thank you for the insight. The question this raises with me, FLATLANDER, is are the forms that varied in terms of actual movements? Does anyone see this as being a bad thing? A good thing? Immaterial to the fundamental concepts?

Sorry to goof your name, flatlander!

The forms are varied in terms of actual movement, but that is where the least variation exists. The empty hand forms are borrowed from shotokan, the stick forms are all Remy. Forms 6-8 were added later by other influences from form based art practitioners, but were "approved" by Professor Presas.

In terms of actual movement, I have seen different techniques altogether; different punches, different feet forward, etc, etc, etc. It's kind of the same template....but not exactly the same template.

My belief is that forms were used for self-expression, and marketing the art to forms-based artists. There was kind of a template...but (and notice I said kind of) and that is about it. It gave the student ownership of something early on; if a kung-fu guy did his forms with a kung fu stylistic flavor, then that was his self-expression.

Now, to my utmost annoyance, at the old IMAF camps when Professor was alive, people often missed the point. I would learn a form from my teacher and was told, it's the art within your art, do what you'd like, it's all the same. I'd learn more forms at the camps. Then I'd test, doing them stylistically like TKD, because I had a TKD background. I was told, no, thats not right, you have to do them more like Shotokan, because that's where they came from. I'd learn them like Shotokan, then someone else at another test or event would say, no, that's not right, you have to do them with a filipino flavor. I'd do them that way....but that wouldn't be right either by someone with a different opinion. Finally, I said screw it, I'm doing it MY way. That's when I got it the point! I would learn everyones way, from who-ever was covering forms that day during the forms session, and I'd do it their way, then I'd change it to do it my way on my own and with my students.

I'll never forget the MI summer camp (a few years before Remy's passing), when I was over with the black belts, and we were going to split up with forms instruction and black belt tapi-tapi. Professor had left 2 people in charge of coordinating. One of them asked, "O.K....who here knows forms well enough to teach them?" In my unwise youth, I raised my hand. Out of about 20 or more black belts, only about 2 others did as well. The funny thing was, I was just answering a question honestly; I could teach forms if needed, and I taught forms before. However, I didn't really WANT to teach the damn things. The 2 black belts "in charge" exchanged wierd condensending glances with a few others, then looked back at me like I had just s**t on the floor or something. After an awkward silence, someone said, "We don't know if your ready to teach forms yet." Now...of course I am thinking, what a bunch of dopes. But, I just shrugged, said, "Fine...I'll just hang out and tapi-tapi. No problem." Then someone else said (who was very well meaning, I might add), "No no, we don't want your feelings to be hurt, or anything. We just don't know if you can teach the forms because we haven't seen you. So, why don't you work with Lisa (Mcmanus), and she can make sure your up to speed for next time." I shrugged again, and said, "Sure...whatever you guys want to do" THinking in my head that I'd rather go play single stick, but fine, I'll see how Lisa does them differently. Mind you, I had been doing the art since 90, and she had started in like 95 or 96, but SHE was going to ensure that I was up to speed. Whatever... I figured that it ought to be entertaining at the very least.

It was. We did 1-6. I only made "a few mistakes," meaning that we had some stylistic differences. Oh brother. I was glad that I managed to get some single stick play in that night, anyways.

The whole thing was annoying to me then, but also very humerous at the same time. The multitude of people, black-belts and all, who failed to "get the point" all surfaced when it came time to do forms. I get a good laugh thinking about those times.

Flatlander...learn the template, then do one of 2 things. Do it the way your teacher teaches you, and wants for his group, or do it the way YOU want to do it within the basic template. Just know WHY your doing things the way you are. Dan Anderson I am sure will cover the forms well if you ordered his material. Tim Hartman, Datu Worden (I think), and IMAF, Inc. (I think) all have material out for forms as well.

PAUL

P.S....how many of you remember when forms 7 and 8 were "the secret forms." :rofl: I remember hearing about forms 7 and 8. So, I figured I'd ask a few higher ranked people if they could show me it. By the time I got the third, "I don't know if your ready to see that yet" or "I don't know if I am ALLOWED to show you those yet," "because those are the secret forms" I gave up. I remember lterally laughing out loud by myself about that one. Secret froms? WTF! :rofl: That never ceases to crack me up. It's funny how "the secret forms" became a part of the normal cirriculum by 2000. The Idiocy in martial arts sometimes never ceases to amaze me.

I hope you all don't think I am being negative here, but I am just speaking the truth. The mystery shrouding forms, and "secret forms" stepped way over the border of ridiculesness. :uhyeah:

 

[Dan Anderson]

Hi Dan-
Hvae to disagree a bit. Professor was very specific, but about different things with different people.
A.I can distinctly remember being pulled from a group at camp and shown a different (and not just subtly different) way to do a certain segment of a form. Professor didnt change the group, nor criticize the instructor; he just wanted me doing a certain sequence a bit differently.

B.Ultimately I think Professor picked up on the fact that many people just BS'd the forms for testing and his reaction to students doing the forms with precision and intent was was to take them to another level of where they were rather than trying to fit one standard.

Hi Chad,
A. Most likely he was showing you the exact way he wanted it done.
B. I absolutely agree with you on the most people shining on the forms.
In the Northwest camps he'd have me show the prople the forms. He'd be very specific with me and be quiet with everyone else (which would put me in the hot seat when it came time for correcting others). I don't see much of a disagreement with you as he did the same with the both of us.

Yours,
Dan

 

[Dan Anderson]

Flatlander (I know his real name),

What I feel the forms are good for are A. preserving the empty hand material RP taught and B. they show movement and actions which aren't commonly found in typical karate actions. They contain a good template for the catching, locking, and throwing actions which are common in Modern Arnis.

The manner in which they are done is where you are going to find the greatest variation. The practitioner's background is going to influence movement. On RP's first set of tapes, the forms are done by Jim and Judy Clapp. They look like they have a kenpo background. I've seen Paul walk through the forms. I was at Jim Power's (who pre-dates me in Modern Arnis and that's saying something) and watched Rich Parsons go through the forms. None of them look like the way I do the forms. We follow, basically, the same template. It used to be somewhat of a big deal what they looked like. Actually, where the rubber meets the road is in application. What are you doing while you are "doing the dance." That is where the forms have value, I feel.

Yours,
Dan Anderson

PS - Paul - forms 7&8 are secret forms and you were shown something different to appease your curiousity and so we could laugh at you when you weren't looking. It succeeded. :rofl:

 

[Cruentus]

PS - Paul - forms 7&8 are secret forms and you were shown something different to appease your curiousity and so we could laugh at you when you weren't looking. It succeeded.

That's O.K....Remy showed me the secret of Chi power contained in form 10. That's covered in your secret MA black book, right!? :rofl:

 

[Dan Anderson]

I can't believe how many shots you've taken to the head. Form 10 covered Chai power, not chi power. You guys needed some good tea because of the lousy coffee you have in Michigan (or had at the time). :erg:

Yours,
Dan Anderson

PS - Because you spilled the beans on the secret MA Black Book, now you don't get one.