"Common" Moves Not Found in Forms

[isshinryuronin]

If we accept that traditional forms (by this I mean those developed prior to mass public instruction and developed for the most part prior to 1920 and sport karate) were developed by combat professionals to encapsulate their fighting style, it follows that the forms tell us something of the techniques the originating master thought significant and worthy enough to be included and passed on.

It may be equally telling to note what techniques were NOT included in the forms, even though commonly practiced today in many schools.

Most Okinawan styles' forms share a lack of a number of these "common" moves, mostly kicks. Using my style as a representative example, I note that our combined list of seven inherited traditional forms lack the following:

NO roundhouse kicks, back kicks, spinning kicks or high kicks! Just ONE crescent kick. Just TWO side kicks (one to each side,) and just two jump kicks. There are also several notable hand techniques missing or rarely present.

I see two or three main explanations. One, these techniques were not deemed combat-effective enough, or posed too much risk (vulnerabilities or balance), to be included in the forms. Two, they were part of the curriculum but were not memorialized in forms, taught more informally on a personal basis. And, thirdly, perhaps the intention was to just keep the system as simple and stripped down as possible. Afterall, it's not the quantity of moves, but the quality of the moves and their tactical implementation that's paramount. Maybe there are elements of all these reasons.

Many of these "missing" moves are quite useful in modern sport competition and for physical exercise. But looking at the original combat function of early karate and its forms, and its relevance to self-defense nowadays, are these missing moves really missed?

 

[skribs]

I've taken Taekwondo, and I notice the same thing regarding kicks. In the Kukkiwon Taekwondo style (which has arguably the most kick-heavy sparring of the various Taekwondo styles), there is a dearth of kicks. The official forms are 8 Taegeuks before black belt, followed by Koryo, Keumgang, Taebaek, and Pyongwon for 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Dans to get their 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th Dan respectively. Here are the kicks in those forms:

• Front Kick: Pervasive throughout the forms; only Keumgang does not have front kicks (and that form has 0 kicks). There are also jumping double front kicks in Taegeuk 8.
• Roundhouse Kick: There are 2x roundhouse kicks in Taegeuk 6
• Side Kick: Fairly common; 2x in Taegeuk 4, 2x in Taegeuk 5, regular and double (low-high) side kicks in Koryo, and 2x in Pyongwon
• Axe Kick: None
• Back Kick: 2x in Pyongwon (no back kicks until 4th degree)
• Crescent Kick: 2x in Taegeuk 7 (these use your hand as a target and strike with the ridge of your foot, my master says that in sparring or breaking you should use the sole of your foot)
• Spinning Hook or Tornado Kick: None
• Twist Kick: None

However, my belief is that Taekwondo is basically 3 arts in 1. I could claim to teach "Kukkiwon Taekwondo forms class", "World Taekwondo sparring class" and "Hapkido self-defense class", and people would probably believe that these are three different styles. I believe Karate tries to bridge that gap better than Taekwondo does. Based on your posting this thread, sounds like it has mixed results.

 

[_Simon_]

Hmm interesting thoughts!

My take on this however is not so much that forms were meant to pass on the most important (or only important) techniques of a system, but were a specific learning modality or tool to communicate and instil in you the principles of the system. So forms are aspect which help tie all things together in a way, and therefore learning a form properly can assist your use of all kihon (fundamentals).

For example, something like the simple 180° rotation from Taikyoku kata, drilling that endlessly really instills in your body the ability to squeeze your leg in as opposed to shove off and fall forward without control, to rotate on specific parts of your feet, to maintain great posture and alignment, keep your head level through movement, and develop back leg drive through the last half. All or most of those qualities can be immensely helpful to a roundhouse kick for example!

Someone then might ask, well can't you just practice the technique directly in order to get better at it? Of course, but the forms to me are about a holistic development of the person as a whole, and in HOW you move your body, how you transition, how you generate power in awkward "unrealistic" positions (if you can generate power or move efficiently from those very "unrealistic" and awkward positions, how awesome would that training be for developing your body as a whole to really move and do these things when you're not under perfect balance etc???). Developing an internal "quality of movement".

The 2x turn and hammerfist sections near the end of kata Saifa have nothing to do with a hammerfist. Tight, concise rotation, and learning to utilise relaxed heaviness through your whole body to DROP the technique through, an ability to pull through your frame like a cable via the elbow as opposed to focusing on hand movement.

I swear that my rigorous hours upon hours of kata practice have made my EVERYTHING so much better, my balance, control, understanding push/pull, transitions, sparring dynamics etc I personally think kata has helped how I move. Can I prove this or do I have evidence? Heck no! Just a strong sense going by how I move now.

So to me it's not so much that because they didn't include certain techniques within forms that those techniques are then pointless/irrelevant/not a part of the system, but that the specific forms act on multiple levels of exploration of the key principles which you can USE throughout the whole entirety of the system. Instilling a body intelligence that you may not necessarily get through basic standing kihon practice. And the forms don't need to contain every technique of the system. It's about reinforcing and deepening QUALITY of movement as opposed to quantity.

Just my random musings, don't know if that was off the topic haha.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

techniques were NOT included in the forms,

This is why besides the traditional forms, it's a good idea to create a set of "universal" toolbox forms such as:

1. punching form - jab, cross, hook, uppercut, overhand, hammer fist, ...
2. kicking form - front kick, side kick, roundhouse kick, hook kick, crescent kick, ...
3. locking form - wrist lock, elbow lock, shoulder lock, head lock, spine lock, ...
4. throwing form - hip throw, leg twist, leg block, foot sweep, single leg, ...
5. ground game form - arm bar, leg bar, neck choke, side mount, missionary mount, ...
6. footwork form - forward, backward, circle, forward jump, backward jump, ...
7. ...

 

[wab25]

Too many people think of Kata as a Dictionary. That the kata is there to show every move that this system can do. However, if you look at Kata as a Dictionary... its a terrible Dictionary. It would be like reading a Dictionary and finding these entries: "ant," "apple," "ant," "apple," "ant," "apple," "ant," "apple," "car," "car", "car," "ant," "apple,".... Real Dictionaries only have each entries listed once.

Sorry, this is not an argument to shorten all the Kata....

Instead you should think about the Kata and a book on grammar. My english grammar book did not have many of the words I use today in it. They were not there in the book at all. However, that does not mean that these words are not part of the english language and it does not mean that I need to rewrite my grammar book. The grammar book is there to teach you the basic principles of constructing sentences, paragraphs, and papers. It is there to teach you how to use the words in the language. While my grammar book was never an exhaustive list of all english words... it did teach me how to effectively use all the english words. Without the grammar book, one can easily make a list of real and effect english words... that communicate nothing and ends up just being a random list of words... this list being completely ineffective at doing anything, much less communicating.

Also..... what _Simon_ said above...

 

[skribs]

Too many people think of Kata as a Dictionary. That the kata is there to show every move that this system can do. However, if you look at Kata as a Dictionary... its a terrible Dictionary. It would be like reading a Dictionary and finding these entries: "ant," "apple," "ant," "apple," "ant," "apple," "ant," "apple," "car," "car", "car," "ant," "apple,".... Real Dictionaries only have each entries listed once.

Sorry, this is not an argument to shorten all the Kata....

Instead you should think about the Kata and a book on grammar. My english grammar book did not have many of the words I use today in it. They were not there in the book at all. However, that does not mean that these words are not part of the english language and it does not mean that I need to rewrite my grammar book. The grammar book is there to teach you the basic principles of constructing sentences, paragraphs, and papers. It is there to teach you how to use the words in the language. While my grammar book was never an exhaustive list of all english words... it did teach me how to effectively use all the english words. Without the grammar book, one can easily make a list of real and effect english words... that communicate nothing and ends up just being a random list of words... this list being completely ineffective at doing anything, much less communicating.

Also..... what _Simon_ said above...

Except in my experience, the forms are designed as if they're a grammar book written by Yoda.

 

[skribs]

Someone then might ask, well can't you just practice the technique directly in order to get better at it? Of course, but the forms to me are about a holistic development of the person as a whole, and in HOW you move your body, how you transition, how you generate power in awkward "unrealistic" positions (if you can generate power or move efficiently from those very "unrealistic" and awkward positions, how awesome would that training be for developing your body as a whole to really move and do these things when you're not under perfect balance etc???). Developing an internal "quality of movement".

On the one hand, rote memorization is a reason to drill. Not just in forms, but in general. For example, my old school had rote combinations, such as punch #1-8 and kick #1-8. For example, punching #1 may be a punch, step, punch; #2 may be 1-2 punch, step, punch; punch #3 would be 1-2 punch, backfist, step, punch. If you want to pass the test, you need to memorize punch #1-8, and in doing so you will practice the various techniques in those combinations.

But! My issue is that people often focus on the memorization. This includes:

• Instructors in class feel they always have to go over punch #1-8, which reduces the variety in class
• Students do poor imitations of punches so they can get more/faster/easier reps of practicing memorization
• Students who do punches well, but mess up the memorization, will score worse on the test than a student with mediocre technique but good memorization
• Students memorize a combination and then stop practicing it, because "I already know it" (of course, they may not practice at all if memorization isn't required)

 

[wab25]

Except in my experience, the forms are designed as if they're a grammar book written by Yoda.

I am not quite sure how I am able to participate in this forum at all, much less respond to this comment. You see, in my elementary school, the grammar book we had did not have any mention of "kata," "fighting," or "martial arts." Therefore, I should not be able to use english to discuss these things.... ?

 

[skribs]

I am not quite sure how I am able to participate in this forum at all, much less respond to this comment. You see, in my elementary school, the grammar book we had did not have any mention of "kata," "fighting," or "martial arts." Therefore, I should not be able to use english to discuss these things.... ?

Weird speech pattern, Yoda has. Incorrect grammar, if followed. Forms, the same. If grammar they are, then incorrect that grammar is.

 

[wab25]

Instructors in class feel they always have to go over punch #1-8, which reduces the variety in class

Repetition is what martial arts is all about. These should be about repeating the basic motions, to make them better. See _Simon_'s post above. If these repetitions are done right... they should be adding variety, as _Simon_ says... not reducing it. If the kata is reducing variety, they are either very poor kata or the people doing them do not understand them.

Students do poor imitations of punches so they can get more/faster/easier reps of practicing memorization

Then the instructors should slow them down, so they learn to do better imitations. Who is giving them the idea that more and faster is better than doing them properly?

Students who do punches well, but mess up the memorization, will score worse on the test than a student with mediocre technique but good memorization

This depends on how the school / organization / instructors grade the tests. Every instructor, every school and every organization handles this differently. It does say a lot about them, when you see how they handle these situations.

Students memorize a combination and then stop practicing it, because "I already know it" (of course, they may not practice at all if memorization isn't required)

Then they are not martial artists. A martial artist practices what he has learned... over and over and over... for the sake of getting better at it. The joy of being a martial artist is in the training... and repetition is is the training. Its not a matter of how many things you know, or even how well you can do them.... its how much do you enjoy the training and the repetition.... that makes you a martial artist.

(NOTE: being a fighter is a whole other can of worms....)

 

[wab25]

Weird speech pattern, Yoda has. Incorrect grammar, if followed. Forms, the same. If grammar they are, then incorrect that grammar is.

You keep bringing up the point that you feel it has a weird and incorrect pattern.... Can you give an example of this weird and incorrect pattern and then elaborate on why you feel it is weird and incorrect?

I have done lots of training with Danzan Ryu Jujitsu, Shotokan Karate, Aikido and some Daito Ryu... all of which have kata... and I have found no weirdness or incorrect patterns yet.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Too many people think of Kata as a Dictionary.

Form should not be treated as dictionary. But we do need a dictionary no matter what style that we train. If there exist a dictionary that contain all the tools, it can benefit to everybody.

If we expend this toolbox idea further, a toolbox can not only contain tools, it can also contain principle/strategy (grammar).

For example, to use

- kick to close distance.
- kick to set up punch.
- kick to set up another kick.
- ...
- punch to set up kick.
- punch to set up another punch.
- punch to set up clinch.
- ...
- clinch to ...
- ...

For example, the grammar "use kick to set up punch" can be mapped into:

- fron kick, jab.
- front kick, hook.
- ...
- side kick, uppercut.
- side kick, overhand.
- ...
- roundhouse kick, hammer fist.
- roundhouse kick, back fist.
- ...

The beauty of this toolbox approach is students can learn directly from the toolbox even without a teacher.

 

[Alan0354]

This is why besides the traditional forms, it's a good idea to create a set of "universal" toolbox forms such as:

1. punching form - jab, cross, hook, uppercut, overhand, hammer fist, ...
2. kicking form - front kick, side kick, roundhouse kick, hook kick, crescent kick, ...
3. locking form - wrist lock, elbow lock, shoulder lock, head lock, spine lock, ...
4. throwing form - hip throw, leg twist, leg block, foot sweep, single leg, ...
5. ground game form - arm bar, leg bar, neck choke, side mount, missionary mount, ...
6. footwork form - forward, backward, circle, forward jump, backward jump, ...
7. ...

If this is more useful in real life, why do we want to waste time in forms?

 

[wab25]

Form should not be treated as dictionary. But we do need a dictionary no matter what style that we train. If there exist a dictionary that contain all the tools, it can benefit to everybody.

If we expend this toolbox idea further, a toolbox can not only contain tools, it can also contain principle/strategy (grammar).

First... Why would I want to create something that defines a technique as "not part of my system?" Especially when that technique is effective? If you define a dictionary of all the techniques that your system includes, then by definition, techniques not listed are not part of your system.

Techniques do not define systems. Danzan Ryu, Shotokan and Aikido all practice the exact same wrist lock. However, they set up the lock differently, and look for a different outcome from the lock application. This is because the principles, strategies and tactics are different for each art. This results in the kata looking very different for each art, where they practice the same technique.

Once you master the principles, strategies and tactics of an art... that art can include any and all techniques. So long as the techniques are being used with the principles, strategies and tactics of the art... they are part of the art.

Secondly, if we were to create such a list of all the techniques, and all the principles, strategies and tactics as you suggest:

This is why besides the traditional forms, it's a good idea to create a set of "universal" toolbox forms such as:

1. punching form - jab, cross, hook, uppercut, overhand, hammer fist, ...
2. kicking form - front kick, side kick, roundhouse kick, hook kick, crescent kick, ...
3. locking form - wrist lock, elbow lock, shoulder lock, head lock, spine lock, ...
4. throwing form - hip throw, leg twist, leg block, foot sweep, single leg, ...
5. ground game form - arm bar, leg bar, neck choke, side mount, missionary mount, ...
6. footwork form - forward, backward, circle, forward jump, backward jump, ...
7. ...

For example, to use

- kick to close distance.
- kick to set up punch.
- kick to set up another kick.
- ...
- punch to set up kick.
- punch to set up another punch.
- punch to set up clinch.
- ...
- clinch to ...
- ...

For example, the grammar "use kick to set up punch" can be mapped into:

- fron kick, jab.
- front kick, hook.
- ...
- side kick, uppercut.
- side kick, overhand.
- ...
- roundhouse kick, hammer fist.
- roundhouse kick, back fist.
- ...

This would create a huge list. This would be so large as to be completely unusable. There is not enough time in my life to go through a complete list once... let alone trying to get proficient enough to apply them when needed.

This is why we teach language using grammar rules. We don't give someone trying to learn a new language the complete unabridged dictionary of that language and say memorize these, along with all possible phrases, sentences and paragraphs that can be made with them. Rather, the student learns a very small subset of words. This subset is chosen so that the rules of grammar can be taught in a methodical method. This teaches the student how to speak and how to communicate. If done right, the student will start to add in more words than just those used to teach grammar. I do not believe that many people have a vocabulary large enough to contain even a single languages words... however, there are many people that are very effective at speaking a language, even if they only use a subset of the words. What makes things interesting is that many people speak the same language and can effectively communicate with each other, using different subsets of words.... as each student may start with the same subset from the grammar book, they individually add to their vocabulary, with words that fit their interests.

 

[skribs]

You keep bringing up the point that you feel it has a weird and incorrect pattern.... Can you give an example of this weird and incorrect pattern and then elaborate on why you feel it is weird and incorrect?

I have done lots of training with Danzan Ryu Jujitsu, Shotokan Karate, Aikido and some Daito Ryu... all of which have kata... and I have found no weirdness or incorrect patterns yet.

In Taekwondo, many of the "verses" in a form end on a block. For example, in Taegeuk 2, steps 5 and 6 are inside blocks, with no strikes in that section, and then 11-14 are two high blocks, turn and inside block, turn and inside block. Many of the Taekwondo forms were inspired by taking Karate forms and rearranging them, which causes you to lose the original arrangement.

Then there's just the way they're performed. You wouldn't stand in the stances. You wouldn't go at the pace in the forms. You would actually use a guard.

 

[Damien]

Another possibility for them not being present is that the people that created these forms simply hadn't thought of/come across that move before. These days we've all seen a roundhouse thousands of times before we even start training, but hundreds of years ago on Okinawa, if no one local or who travelled there had come up with it or seen it, then it wasn't going to be part of their awareness. a roundhouse is a good kick and less risky than some which do appear in forms, no reason for it to not be in a system.

Traditional Shaolin doesn't have some kicks which are common now, but it does have some which are uncommon. Both those included and those which aren't are useful.

The key thing to remember is that these things are historical, and their creators didn't know everything we do now. That doesn't mean they didn't know what they were doing, but we can expand our repertoire beyond what they taught.

 

[Dirty Dog]

In Taekwondo, many of the "verses" in a form end on a block. For example, in Taegeuk 2, steps 5 and 6 are inside blocks, with no strikes in that section, and then 11-14 are two high blocks, turn and inside block, turn and inside block. Many of the Taekwondo forms were inspired by taking Karate forms and rearranging them, which causes you to lose the original arrangement.

Then there's just the way they're performed. You wouldn't stand in the stances. You wouldn't go at the pace in the forms. You would actually use a guard.

Every block is also a strike.
The low block, for example, is an excellent way to deliver a hammer fist to the groin.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

This would create a huge list. There is not enough time in my life to go through a complete list once... let alone trying to get proficient enough to apply them when needed.

Chinese wrestling has over 230 different throws. Can I do all of those throws in competition? Of course I can't.

Life is too short. If you can master just 1 technique befor you die, you have a successful life.

This is why it makes sense to store those information in computer. You may search those information when you need it.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

their creators didn't know everything we do now.

Agree with you 100% there.

If the WC founder was taken down by "double legs", we may not seen the WC stance like this today that both knees are so close together.

 

[Flying Crane]

Hmm interesting thoughts!

My take on this however is not so much that forms were meant to pass on the most important (or only important) techniques of a system, but were a specific learning modality or tool to communicate and instil in you the principles of the system. So forms are aspect which help tie all things together in a way, and therefore learning a form properly can assist your use of all kihon (fundamentals).

Bingo. There are enough techniques in the forms to give you a broad vision of what is possible, and those techniques illustrate the principles in action. If you learn that lesson, you can take those principles and do anything you want with them. You can use any technique you want, as long as it can function within those principles. This includes techniques that might not even exist within the formalized curriculum of your system.

Forms are a door that opens to all possibilities. They are not a locked gate defining the limits of what you are allowed to do.