In sparring you have an idea that you can test against another person. Who may have the same idea. Or a different one.
it works or it doesn't. If it doesn't you can discard it or tweek it. Retest the idea with more sparring. Trial and error.
kata is given to you by a person of authority requiring you to follow their instructions. Because it is the way it is done and the way everybody else is doing it.
it might work it might not. That is not the point. It is not up to you to test the theory or disagree. It is up to you to be educated and follow the movements as instructed.
but that is not conversation.
Tony already covered this pretty thoroughly, but to put it very simply, I'd say that forms, as I train them, are not unlike verbal recitation, while sparring is comparable to debate. Both are valid methods of learning. Verbally, recitation of great works provides a model to follow, while debate allows us to engage with others and test our ideas and logic against theirs. My training requires both methods ...and others as well.
Last edited: