When I was a kid I said forms were stupid

[JR 137]

Shouldn't they be designed to teach an aspect of fighting? So it probably would not work as a progression.

Depends on the kata being used. There's a definite progression in the complexity of the Pinan 1-5 series. They're short - 20 counts/movements each - and they're simple enough for beginners to intermediate students to get a good foundation before moving on to more complex stuff. Pinan 1-5...

After those, move on to the longer more intricate forms, such as Kanku Sho...

While it may not seem like it on the surface, there's a lot more going on than just block-punch-kick in those forms.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Many MA styles don't teach defense techniques in the first 2 years. You want your students to attack, attack, and still attack.

In Chinese wrestling, we encourage students to "attack and lose" than to "defense and win". If all you can do is when your opponent tries to throw you, you use "pull guard" to drag him down, you will never be able to learn any throwing skill. You throwing skill development will have no future.

I don't agree that teaching a defense means you'll never develop an attack. I teach defense first (a simple block), because it's something they can do with little practice, and sets up opportunities to counter an attack. They still learn later to counter without the block, when appropriate.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

For a beginner form, I recommend it work fundamental techniques as the embodiment of principles of movemement and good body mechanics. That form is then a staple practice tool for the rest of the students martial career. It's taught to beginners, but is trained constantly, for ever. You don't outgrow something like that.

Applications can come later

All of my forms are full techniques. The second one they learn (very early) is nothing but application.

The post was in response to DB's comment that there should be fighting principles in a form, and asking how those could be provided in a progression. This is part of what I do in my forms, though it's not a strict progression (it's partly tied to the classical curriculum of the art).

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The draw back for this approach is since the students don't see the goal. they may quit before reaching to it.

I like to use "single leg" to take my student down during day one (application first). Since they can see the effectiveness of this technique, when I teach them the foundation required for "single leg" (such as line up back foot with opponent's both feet), they will pay attention and spend time to develop it. In AI, this approach is called "backward search". You define the goal first, you then find a path to get there. During the beginner training stage, students won't be able to understand the usage of "good body mechanics".

Ancient Chinese liked to tell their children that "there are gold and pretty women in book". This way kids will have the motivation to study. It's the same psychology approach.

This is why the forms come after they learn the techniques. The forms are for practice, not for learning the technique.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I don't agree that teaching a defense means you'll never develop an attack. I teach defense first (a simple block), because it's something they can do with little practice, and sets up opportunities to counter an attack. They still learn later to counter without the block, when appropriate.

The striking art is different from the throwing art. To counter a hip throw, all you need to do is to sink down your body. It's much easy to develop that "sinking" than to develop that hip throw. When you are good in sinking, you may think that nobody can throw you with hip throw, you may think hit throw is useless.

 

[Juany118]

The striking art is different from the throwing art. To counter a hip throw, all you need to do is to sink down your body. It's much easy to develop that "sinking" than to develop that hip throw. When you are good in sinking, you may think that nobody can throw you with hip throw, you may think hit throw is useless.

That reminds me of something my Sifu's Master says when it comes to dealing with some grappling attacks, "Sometimes you just have to sit down." The beauty of it is that sometimes, if done correctly, it amounts to a reversal and you aren't simply preventing yourself from being taken down but you instead take down your opponent.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

That reminds me of something my Sifu's Master says when it comes to dealing with some grappling attacks, "Sometimes you just have to sit down." The beauty of it is that sometimes, if done correctly, it amounts to a reversal and you aren't simply preventing yourself from being taken down but you instead take down your opponent.

Indeed, one of my favorite applications to one of our few sutemi waza (sacrifice techniques) is against a basic leg sweep (osoto gari). When they have you in position, weight back, you just sit and the technique falls into place.

 

[Danny T]

I like form...Forms not so much.
Form is extremely important for high level. Set pattern of forms...not so much.
A lot of low level fighters have poor form. A lot of intermediate level fighters have poor form. Most high level fighters have good form.
Knowing and doing a lot of Forms doesn't necessarily make good fighters but makes them good at doing forms.
Some people enjoy doing Forms...Great.
Some don't enjoy doing Forms...Great.
I prefer drills using good form for attribute and skill development others like forms...Great.

 

[Nobody Important]

Forms really are a different animal to drills.

Drills are created by function. So you take from fighting and train in repetition those movements.

Forms are created by ritural. Trained in repetition and then used in fighting.

Some people like ritural. And so will think forms are not stupid.

Some dont like ritural and think forms are stupid.

Both arguments are valid.

To a great many this is true, but it is also a misnomer. Legitimate forms (Kata/Taolu/Hyung/Juru etc.) are devoid of esoteric or erroneous movement, IMO. Because of the influence of Wushu, tournament competition, demonstrations etc. the idea of "form" has been transformed.

All movements in forms should have a realistic, practical and un-convoluted relationship to real fighting application.

A form should be a collection of like principles, applications, mechanics etc. All to which can be extrapolated. There should be no vague conceptual premise. Forms are merely composed of San Sik (drills) of similar or related function. It is merely a method of collection.

Over time, understanding of what is present within a form and/or alteration to make more aesthetically pleasing has become common place, and relegated "forms" to little more than dance. The old timers, of which very few are still around, used to preach, one form equals one style.

If you truly know a fighting form inside and out, all of its principles, mechanics, applications etc. There is no need to collect more.

I practice many forms, but truly only study one in great depth. It contains all I will ever need to effectively defend myself using the methods of Ti, Da, Shuai, & Na. Understanding, truly understanding, the qinna/bunkai theory as developed within a form is forgone by many in this day and age as people pursue rank by accumulating "forms" simply as a means of progression, instead of understanding.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

The following clip shows:

1. roundhouse kick,
2. side kick,
3. downward separate hands,
4. double under hooks,
5. knee strike,
6. outer hook.

Why can't I find this drill in any form? Why do I have to create this drill myself?

 

[Nobody Important]

The following clip shows:

1. roundhouse kick,
2. side kick,
3. downward separate hands,
4. double under hooks,
5. knee strike,
6. outer hook.

Why can't I find this drill in any form? Why do I have to create this drill myself?

Are you looking for the exact sequence, or those specific techniques?

Because those are fairly common techniques. The purpose of forms is to break them down to individual movements that can be combined to create sequences or used solo. Choreography of a form is not important.

 

[drop bear]

To a great many this is true, but it is also a misnomer. Legitimate forms (Kata/Taolu/Hyung/Juru etc.) are devoid of esoteric or erroneous movement, IMO. Because of the influence of Wushu, tournament competition, demonstrations etc. the idea of "form" has been transformed.

All movements in forms should have a realistic, practical and un-convoluted relationship to real fighting application.

A form should be a collection of like principles, applications, mechanics etc. All to which can be extrapolated. There should be no vague conceptual premise. Forms are merely composed of San Sik (drills) of similar or related function. It is merely a method of collection.

Over time, understanding of what is present within a form and/or alteration to make more aesthetically pleasing has become common place, and relegated "forms" to little more than dance. The old timers, of which very few are still around, used to preach, one form equals one style.

If you truly know a fighting form inside and out, all of its principles, mechanics, applications etc. There is no need to collect more.

I practice many forms, but truly only study one in great depth. It contains all I will ever need to effectively defend myself using the methods of Ti, Da, Shuai, & Na. Understanding, truly understanding, the qinna/bunkai theory as developed within a form is forgone by many in this day and age as people pursue rank by accumulating "forms" simply as a means of progression, instead of understanding.

No form is devoid of esoteric and erroneous movement. You can't physically create a form that is perfect.

Assuming a form is right and the rest of reality just doesn't understand it well enough. Is the difference between a form and a drill. And in my opinion backwards.

A martial arts evolution is driven by its practitioners and students. Not its founders.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The following clip shows:

1. roundhouse kick,
2. side kick,
3. downward separate hands,
4. double under hooks,
5. knee strike,
6. outer hook.

Why can't I find this drill in any form? Why do I have to create this drill myself?

Every form was created by someone who saw a need for it. It's likely (simple probability) someone created a form that had a similar sequence, but maybe it didn't survive. If you think it's a needed form, create it.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

No form is devoid of esoteric and erroneous movement. You can't physically create a form that is perfect.

Assuming a form is right and the rest of reality just doesn't understand it well enough. Is the difference between a form and a drill. And in my opinion backwards.

A martial arts evolution is driven by its practitioners and students. Not its founders.

Agreed. Every form will likely have some motion in it that was there just to get to the next "thing", or to keep it more compact for practice, or to get it to end facing the direction the creator wanted, or something. And every form has some movement in it that could be done better (to fit the current usage of some related techniques). Forms shouldn't be seen as sacred and immutable. They should evolve with the art, which should evolve with circumstances and the needs of the students.

 

[Nobody Important]

No form is devoid of esoteric and erroneous movement. You can't physically create a form that is perfect.

Assuming a form is right and the rest of reality just doesn't understand it well enough. Is the difference between a form and a drill. And in my opinion backwards.

A martial arts evolution is driven by its practitioners and students. Not its founders.

Just because something isn't perfect doesn't mean it is esoteric, erroneous or obtuse. A true fighting form is simply a collection of drills put together in a long drill as a method of remembering individual components that number too greatly to retain as individual pieces.

The idea of "forms" today in TCMA as stylized, written in stone rituals is a product of turn of the 20th century British influenced Hong Kong, opera stuff. Traditional TCMA "forms" we're linked drills and referred to as frame training.

Drills contain movement, posture, principle, mechanics etc. Real forms do the same, only in greater number. A real form contains all the pertinent & salient information of a developed method. It's basics, strategy, mechanics, principles etc. It is simply a linked collection of drills as compared to possessing 50 or more loose ones. This is for ease of remembrance and as reference. They can be performed in a variety of manners.

There are many reasons as to why forms are misunderstood, mostly due to ignorance of what it truly is. Most practitioners misinterpret or really don't understand what they are doing and make things up or outright ignore the issue, clinging to tradition. A form in no way dictates how one should "act" in realistic application. Too many strive to mimic the choreography of a form thinking that the way presented is the way it must be in order for it to be correct. In example, the Seisan Kata, at its base it is composed of 13 techniques. Depending on the system the choreography, number of other techniques, repetition, footwork etc. is different, but they all share the 13 methods from which the form derives its name. How those methods are linked is due to personal interpretation, innovation, evolution etc. of the choreographer.

In times past, the teacher would instruct the student in the 13 methods, & and the student would develop a "form" based on their understanding of those methods as a way of remembering them.

A fighting form is an encyclopedia of drills, and should be nothing more. A vast collection of different methods isn't necessary for self defense. Professional boxing uses about 7 strikes, most MMA practitioners employ less than 20 different techniques when fighting, most Olympic judoka use less than 15 techniques in competition.

The sad truth is most martial artists who practice forms have no real inkling about what they are doing. Many rely on creating or collecting "drills" from elsewhere to compensate for the lack of understanding. Chalk it up to ignorance, rank chasing, money bilking, mcdojo, or poor instruction, whatever, this doesn't mean forms are useless.

Instruction through drills is essentially a form, especially if those drills are repeatedly used because they garner results.

Evolving and devolving go hand in hand, convolution of practicality and simplicity often lead to confusion. Founders leave an idea of their understanding of a method for future generations via forms. Ideally over time real systems accumulate more forms due to evolution of an idea, specialization or integration. Mcdojos have a variety to win medals at tournaments and impress with acrobatics in demos. This is why some systems have a plethora of forms. Pick one that agrees with your ideas, forget the others, advanced knowledge of numerous methods of combat isn't necessary for practical defense. A Jack of all trades is a master of none.

 

[Buka]

A martial arts evolution is driven by its practitioners and students. Not its founders.

That's pretty God damn profound. I might even carve that in my table or something.

 

[beastie]

In my art, forms have a very important role. Hand and leg techniques with the accompanying stances and/or stepping patterns are the basics. The longer we train in a form. the more flow the movements take on, the intricacies of power generation become more apparent. But that's not just it. We find out that within the basic techniques, there are variations that can be added. From throws to joint locks to weapons to double weapons to other things ad infinitum. By that time, movements become less "staccato" (I call it kung fu by numbers) and more fluid. Less distinct and separate techniques and more fluid. Less effort or external manifestation of power but more destructive. Without proper training in forms, almost everybody looks like they fight like a "generic" kickboxer when I watch inter-style sparring; can't tell one style from another. Forms can refine movements so a martial artist moves can't be read by the opponent.

 

[drop bear]

That's pretty God damn profound. I might even carve that in my table or something.

I can't go around saying profound stuff. I will lose my rep.






MMA rules!!!!!!

 

[Paul_D]

- MA is 2 persons art. It cannot be done "solo".

Depending on your art, it cannot be done, correctly, with a partner. You cannot practice joint manipulation full speed with a partner, as pretty soon you will have now partners left. Similarly you cannot perform many throws as truly intended as they will similarly injure you partner. The only time you can practice these things correctly, or at full speed/power is on your own.

 

[Buka]

"MA is 2 persons art. It cannot be done "solo".

Amen.