What Good are Forms?

[Hanzou]

That variability is true of most combo drills. Even a jab-straight combo, their reaction can make that not a good choice to continue. Yet we (everyone in every art I've seen training for) trains combos. Done well, it acknowledges the variables exist. Ideally, the combos you work the most in drills are ones that have a high payoff (definitive chance at a win, or are often available).

Well the combos you use the most are often the safer ones as well. The jab is a very safe combo starter that you can work multiple punches off of.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

And that definition wouldn't include the drills found in Bjj or sports in general. Detailed, choreographed, pattern, and individual are all key words.

All the forms I've seen that are traditionally found in NGA and Daito-ryu are short and partnered. They have a lot in common with what you and I would otherwise call "drills". If a wrestling coach uses the same drill as the starting point every time to introduce a single-leg takedown, he's doing pretty much the same thing as those short forms.

We can extend that comparison to a boxing coach who uses the same drill every time to introduce the 1-2-3 combination with a level change in the middle. If he uses a heavy bag or shadow boxing approach, he's doing the same thing as a solo form. The only difference is the length (and, compared to many styles, his willingness to change the drill over time).

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Well the combos you use the most are often the safer ones as well. The jab is a very safe combo starter that you can work multiple punches off of.

Agreed. And the most common combos should probably be the ones codified in forms (long or short) unless the form has an entirely different purpose (such as purposely making transitions that are hard to balance, to develop the balance and posture muscles).

 

[skribs]

Can you give an example or two?

In our forms I have yet to see:

• Axe kick
• Hook kick
• Spinning hook kick
• If I hadn't trained Pyongwon (4th dan form) then I would say "back kick", because up through 3rd dan it doesn't exist
• Step-behind side hook
• Tornado kick
• Any jumping kick except for jumping front kick
• Any footwork that remotely resembles sparring footwork

Any of these kicks we've learned by green belt, and yet only one of them shows up by 4th dan. Some of these kicks show up way late, like back kick in the 4th dan form, or crescent kick in the high red belt forms. All of these kicks are considered foundational kicks that you should have solid technique in by black belt.

 

[TSDTexan]

I'll take your word for it. I never experienced them, so don't know how they were used. And I have no idea what the original intention was in either art.

worth a view

 

[Hanzou]

All the forms I've seen that are traditionally found in NGA and Daito-ryu are short and partnered. They have a lot in common with what you and I would otherwise call "drills". If a wrestling coach uses the same drill as the starting point every time to introduce a single-leg takedown, he's doing pretty much the same thing as those short forms.

We can extend that comparison to a boxing coach who uses the same drill every time to introduce the 1-2-3 combination with a level change in the middle. If he uses a heavy bag or shadow boxing approach, he's doing the same thing as a solo form. The only difference is the length (and, compared to many styles, his willingness to change the drill over time).

Except shadow boxing and hitting the bag isnt patterned or choreographed. Learning the DLT from a coach isnt solo.

 

[Flying Crane]

This form has recorded the side kick, spin back fist combo at 0.18 - 0.20. My concern is if you have never seen this form, how will you even know that side kick, spin back fist combo even exist?

If flying side kick is not in your form, do you think one day you will just figure it out all by yourself?

Who's responsibility is it to record valuable information in a form for the future generation?

People do need to be able to use their imagination. Forms don’t dictate what is possible. They merely contain examples of what is possible.

 

[Mitlov]

Actually the axe kick does appear in Kyokushin katas. It is in Sokugi Taikyoko San.

I appreciate the correction.

My overall point still stands; there are a lot of mainstream styles of karate where some of the popular sparring techniques don't appear in the forms at all.

 

[skribs]

I'd again argue that this is arguing against specific kata and specific use of kata. Once a form is learned (so folks have worked out the parts well enough), I encourage them to experiment by rearranging, replacing one technique with another that can be used in that sequence, etc. This can be done with any form - the form simply becomes the starting point to launch from. Whether an instructor encourages that kind of exploration or not is not dependent upon the form.

I can definitely agree with this. At my dojang, the TKD forms are all very specific. Our long forms are about copying the exact details (basically a physical transcription of the form). Our short forms with a partner must be done the same way: copy the steps of the form from start to finish.

Our HKD forms, on the other hand, are all short forms, and are all open to be modified based on the individual or the situation. My Mom (5' on a good day, yellow belt) gets different versions of the techniques than the black belt student (who towers over me). In TKD, if we're supposed to have someone fall on their back and they fall on their stomach, we did it wrong and have to redo it. In Hapkido, we have to figure out what to do from there.

It's a strange dynamic to me, because both curricula and both classes were created and are taught by the same Master. To this day, I still don't understand why we follow such different training philosophies in each class. I asked him once, but I don't think he understood the question.

 

[skribs]

People do need to be able to use their imagination. Forms don’t dictate what is possible. They merely contain examples of what is possible.

In some cases, the only thing my imagine can come up with is far less practical than other available options. For example, a low-block to one side and high-block to the other, is supposed to block attacks from 2 enemies. When it is much more prudent not to be in the middle in the first place.

 

[pdg]

In our forms I have yet to see:

• Axe kick
• Hook kick
• Spinning hook kick
• If I hadn't trained Pyongwon (4th dan form) then I would say "back kick", because up through 3rd dan it doesn't exist
• Step-behind side hook
• Tornado kick
• Any jumping kick except for jumping front kick
• Any footwork that remotely resembles sparring footwork

Any of these kicks we've learned by green belt, and yet only one of them shows up by 4th dan. Some of these kicks show up way late, like back kick in the 4th dan form, or crescent kick in the high red belt forms. All of these kicks are considered foundational kicks that you should have solid technique in by black belt.

I think all of those are in patterns up to 1st dan, a few are in colour belt patterns (some with different names).

With the exclusion of the tornado kick, which doesn't actually enter into our formal syllabus at all.

 

[skribs]

I think all of those are in patterns up to 1st dan, a few are in colour belt patterns (some with different names).

With the exclusion of the tornado kick, which doesn't actually enter into our formal syllabus at all.

You do realize that I train different forms from you, right? It's very important to me that you understand this. Because it seems to me you think I know the same forms as you do. Which should be obvious from the discussions we've had, that I don't.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I don't think it's necessary that every combo (or even every technique) be cataloged in a form. You'd definitely want a drill for it.

My concern is if you have 60 drills, how will you and your students be able to remember all those 60 drills?

- drill 1,
- drill 2,
- …
- drill 59,
- drill 60.

Is a form necessary to learning a technique?

Did you ever have a class in school that a class didn't have any book/books?

 

[pdg]

You do realize that I train different forms from you, right? It's very important to me that you understand this. Because it seems to me you think I know the same forms as you do. Which should be obvious from the discussions we've had, that I don't.

I know they're different.

The question was about me seeing where those differences may lie without spending the time to analyse videos and descriptions.

I just find it interesting that two arts that (almost) share a common name and initial heritage can vary so much.

 

[skribs]

I know they're different.

The question was about me seeing where those differences may lie without spending the time to analyse videos and descriptions.

I just find it interesting that two arts that (almost) share a common name and initial heritage can vary so much.

I apologize, then. It seemed like you were trying to correct my understanding of the forms, that somehow I'm missing techniques because I don't know the forms.

This is my point - the KKW forms (which are put out by KKW, which means everyone who trains KKW TKD needs to learn them) don't include anything used in WT sparring (the sparring ruleset used by KKW schools). The footwork is different, the stances are different, the techniques are way different. And when I watch people go to the KKW Master's course, the Master or Grandmaster leading the course teaches these prospective masters in the same way that my Master teaches me. No work on the application of the form, no work on a deeper understanding. Simply a correction of technique.

 

[Yokozuna514]

I appreciate the correction.

My overall point still stands; there are a lot of mainstream styles of karate where some of the popular sparring techniques don't appear in the forms at all.

I am sure there are and I think that you have made an interesting observation. I put no value (good or bad) as to why this situation exists. There are probably as many arguments for as there are against and I am not interested in arguing at all really.

I do know that many people can look at the exact same thing and see something different. For many kata is the 'soul of karate' and for others it is just dancing with a few screams now and then. I think it is a useful tool that helps me appreciate my art and all its facets but I have done other MA that did not have forms and I could appreciate those as well. To each his own.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Eh.... Bjj threw out Judo kata, and it came out just fine, if not better.

Will it be nice to have a BJJ form that records all the BJJ principles?

There are 30 principles in SC. There is no form to record these information. I feel like to create a form that can record all these 30 principles so the future generation will have easier time to "remember".

The new form is just to record information. It's not for training.

撕(Si) - Tearing
崩(Beng) - Cracking
捅(Tong) - Striking push
褪(tun) - Hand pushing
肘(Zhou) - Elbow pressing
蓋(Gai) - Covering hands
攞(Lou)- Pulling hands
搖(Yao) - Body-shaking hands
捯(Dao) - Reverse arm-holding
抖(Dou) – Shaking
分(Fen) - Separate hands
掖(Ye) - Hand tucking
引(Yin) - Arm guiding
捧(Peng) - Arm raising
架(Jia) - Elbow Locking
圈(Quan) – Under hook
抄(Chao) - Over hook
抹(Mo) – Wiping
偏(Pian) – Head circling
夾(Jia) – Clamping head
摘(Zai) – Helmet removing
摀(Wu) – Face covering
速(Su) – Forehead push
墬(Zhui) - Sticking drop
撈 (Lao) – Leg seize
環(Huan) – Neck surrounding
托(Tuo) – Chin pushing
封(Feng) – Throat/waist blocking
撒(Sa) – Casting
飄(Piao) - Floating hand

 

[JowGaWolf]

I liked due to the first bit

To me it actually looks like about a 45° parry there, not fully down nor fully to the side.

In either case though (sideways or downward) there are things that can be used as a follow up move.

A sideways parry would help more to initiate the motion for an opportunistic spinning backfist, if the attacking party has decent balance and recovery skills.

Give it a try and let me know what you descover.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Yeah, some modern Judo schools don't even practice the kata because its largely pointless.

If you only treat Judo (or BJJ) form for "recording information" and not for training, you don't have any problem.

 

[pdg]

I apologize, then. It seemed like you were trying to correct my understanding of the forms, that somehow I'm missing techniques because I don't know the forms.

This is my point - the KKW forms (which are put out by KKW, which means everyone who trains KKW TKD needs to learn them) don't include anything used in WT sparring (the sparring ruleset used by KKW schools). The footwork is different, the stances are different, the techniques are way different. And when I watch people go to the KKW Master's course, the Master or Grandmaster leading the course teaches these prospective masters in the same way that my Master teaches me. No work on the application of the form, no work on a deeper understanding. Simply a correction of technique.

Unfortunately that seems like they're massively concentrating on your forms as effectively a competition element - who can do it the closest to what they think it should look like.

To me, there seems little point in 'correcting' technique if there's no application.