DF: Forms vs reality?

[Clark Kent]

Forms vs reality?
By aku aku - Sun, 20 May 2007 05:49:29 GMT
Originally Posted at: Deluxe Forums
====================

Hello,

This was never made clear to me in my limited exposure to kung fu. When you do kung fu for real, either for sparring or self defense, how closely are your movements expected to match the moves in the forms? The question might seem silly but a lot of the kung fu I was taught seemed kind of choppy and not as quick and flowing as I would expect a fighting art to be, are the forms supposed to show the 'proper' movements that you should strive for or are some of them exaggerated to illustrate certain principles or what?


Read More...


------------------------------------
Defend.net Post Bot - CMA Feed

 

[Steel Tiger]

Forms vs reality?
By aku aku - Sun, 20 May 2007 05:49:29 GMT
Originally Posted at: Deluxe Forums
====================

Hello,

This was never made clear to me in my limited exposure to kung fu. When you do kung fu for real, either for sparring or self defense, how closely are your movements expected to match the moves in the forms? The question might seem silly but a lot of the kung fu I was taught seemed kind of choppy and not as quick and flowing as I would expect a fighting art to be, are the forms supposed to show the 'proper' movements that you should strive for or are some of them exaggerated to illustrate certain principles or what?


Read More...


------------------------------------
Defend.net Post Bot - CMA Feed

I think that a lot of the movement is CMA forms, all forms for that matter, is exaggerated to allow the practitioner to see the shape of the movement. This is further complicated by the passing on of ways of moving that were designed to hide information from the uninitiated. Remember most of these forms were developed by families or clans who wished to keep their knowledge to themselves. A lot, if not most, of these people were professional fighters whoo needed to keep their edge.

For all that I think that the techniques in the forms are usually quite evident. Would you use the strict form shape in a fight? No, not at all. My experience with this suggests that the movements become smaller and faster in combat, and some parts are left out, depending on the situation. Onem of the probelems I see with a lot of CMa forms these days is a lack of focus right to the fingertips.

By this I mean in the performance of a technique within the form the hands and feet are kind of forgotten. It detracts from both the effectiveness of the technique and its appearance. And if we are talking fajin, then it is gone alltogether.

 

[dmax999]

Some forms have specific purposes as well. Gong Li Chuan for example is meant to teach correct punching techniques. You would never be in a horse stance and switch to bow stance to punch in a fight, but it teaches beginners the correct body mechanics of getting their body into the punch.

Some more advanced forms are more for teaching combinations, which I believe bagua is a good example of that. However, you perform advanced forms in much lower stances then your stances would likely be in a real fight.

On a side note... If you would like to see what fighting using the exact same type of movements as in forms I would suggest "Iron Monkey".

 

[seasoned]

I agree with Steel Tiger that movements become smaller and faster in combat. Kata moves teach many principles that prepare us for battle. Body mechanics as mentioned by dmax999 will produce power and balance which along with technique will result in victory, we hope.

 

[Steel Tiger]

I agree with Steel Tiger that movements become smaller and faster in combat. Kata moves teach many principles that prepare us for battle. Body mechanics as mentioned by dmax999 will produce power and balance which along with technique will result in victory, we hope.

Power and balance are precisely what forms are for. Yes they teach and store technique, but they show the proper way to utilise those techniques as well.

 

[Xue Sheng]

I think that a lot of the movement is CMA forms, all forms for that matter, is exaggerated to allow the practitioner to see the shape of the movement. This is further complicated by the passing on of ways of moving that were designed to hide information from the uninitiated. Remember most of these forms were developed by families or clans who wished to keep their knowledge to themselves. A lot, if not most, of these people were professional fighters whoo needed to keep their edge.

For all that I think that the techniques in the forms are usually quite evident. Would you use the strict form shape in a fight? No, not at all. My experience with this suggests that the movements become smaller and faster in combat, and some parts are left out, depending on the situation. Onem of the probelems I see with a lot of CMa forms these days is a lack of focus right to the fingertips.

By this I mean in the performance of a technique within the form the hands and feet are kind of forgotten. It detracts from both the effectiveness of the technique and its appearance. And if we are talking fajin, then it is gone alltogether.

Also take into account that many of the CMA postures that make up the forms have multiple applications.

Power and balance are precisely what forms are for. Yes they teach and store technique, but they show the proper way to utilise those techniques as well.

They also teach unity of mind and body, which produces power and speed. This tends to be very important in the internal CMA styles

 

[Steel Tiger]

Also take into account that many of the CMA postures that make up the forms have multiple applications.



They also teach unity of mind and body, which produces power and speed. This tends to be very important in the internal CMA styles

These are very good points. Mental and physical synergy is very important.

 

[seasoned]

Power and balance are precisely what forms are for. Yes they teach and store technique, but they show the proper way to utilise those techniques as well.

Power balance and proper use of techniques, sounds like a winner to me, thanks.

 

[Nobody]

I do Taiji, Hsing Yi, Bagua and Wing Chung they literally look like they are applied so i don''t know about Choi Lay Fut.

Taiji, Hsing Yi, Bagua and Wing Chung look exactly like they are applied an you apply them in the exact way you practice them.

Reality does not change cause you know a style of martial arts. Reality are we going out looking for a fight than we pick the weakest one an destroy him. Reality if a criminal choose use we fight exactly as we learned an probably get killed no mater how good you are cause criminal don't play fair an most martial artist are taught to play fair.

 

[HarryJD]

There definately needs to be a balance between training/forms & reality.

As it is, I believe that everything needs to have the appropriate balance to 'work' correctly, but in this case, if you end up in a fight, you are attacked, etc. you probably need to adapt the way you were trained to fight, in a certain way.
To allow yourself to be extremely open-minded, realize that you're opponent may simply do anything to win and expect this, no matter how unexpected you think an action he/she may take, no matter what.

Like that which has been previously iterated, if you learn form A for example in your art/style, that is the way to learn it and maybe the way to fight with it too, but not completely in many cases, depending on your style and philosophies.


Harry J.D.

_____________________________________________________________

 

[funnytiger]

Forms as I have been taught and agree with, are a series of movements and techniques. Their purpose? To teach you what a lot of you have already stated. "Power balance and proper use of techniques" are the most important, imo. They teach the basics, they help condition your body, they help with muscle memory, heck they are a great workout if nothing else.

Some forms (as was stated by a poster) have a specific purpose. Each form for Jow Ga may concentrate on a particular series of movements. They are the focus of the form, so to speak. Usually it comes in the form of a technique that is repeated in the form over and over again. Not sure if that poster intended to mean that, but that is how I interpret it.

Forms are also a catalog of techniques and movements to be easily passed on.

But to see any of these benefits I believe you have to be willing to learn them, study them, pick them apart, practice and train them with intent. Meaning, you have to live test these techniques. Some of the movements can by quite the mystery in trying to figure out what it is intended for only find out it has a multitude of uses or sometimes, it doesn't have a meaning at all.

My 2 cents.

- ft

 

[Steel Tiger]

But to see any of these benefits I believe you have to be willing to learn them, study them, pick them apart, practice and train them with intent. Meaning, you have to live test these techniques. Some of the movements can by quite the mystery in trying to figure out what it is intended for only find out it has a multitude of uses or sometimes, it doesn't have a meaning at all.

I think that this is the reason why so many people don't 'get' forms. For whatever reason, the forms become some kind of sacrosanct thing that must be performed exactly as it was handed down. This attitude can lead to some very odd things depending on how the teacher was feeling on the day. It could also result in a group of students all having different variations of the form which might result in something of a schism in the style. And yet, if those same students got together and pulled apart the form they would probably find the same things were present in each variation.

A form is of no real value if it is treated as nothing more than a sacred dance in honour of past teachers.

 

[funnytiger]

I think that this is the reason why so many people don't 'get' forms. For whatever reason, the forms become some kind of sacrosanct thing that must be performed exactly as it was handed down. This attitude can lead to some very odd things depending on how the teacher was feeling on the day. It could also result in a group of students all having different variations of the form which might result in something of a schism in the style. And yet, if those same students got together and pulled apart the form they would probably find the same things were present in each variation.

A form is of no real value if it is treated as nothing more than a sacred dance in honour of past teachers.

Good post, ST. Forms, again in my opinion, should not all look the same, even if it is the exact same form. The timing, and rhythm should be different from person to person. Everyone has their own strengths and weaknesses and when "performing" a form one should play up to those strengths and weaknesses. A student with a small frame and quick legs may be able to execute speed and agility while a larger student who may not be as fast can display power and control.

This usually results in minor variations between the same form. I don't see anything wrong with that, in fact, I like it when we are taught several variations to forms. Mind you, they are always minor variations. An onlooker can easily tell its the same form, but it just has a few twists to it, heck sometimes they can't tell at all.

I think ALL of the students should be taught and made aware of these minor variations that reflect the ways one technique can be applied in a multitude of ways and should be allowed to choose which technique best applies to them.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Just a quick note

Forms are reality, just not necessarily in that order

 

[ggg214]

i don't know how the external martial art players define their forms.
for taiji, i have been told that form is the way to make your strength smoothly pass your body to your opponent. it's also the way to know yourself.in taiji, there are thirteen strength. form is practising all of them.the purpose is to use these strength in any condition.
when you use them in real fight, you don't need to stand as in a form, but be free to use these strength and KO. your opponent.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Forms vs reality?
By aku aku - Sun, 20 May 2007 05:49:29 GMT
Originally Posted at: Deluxe Forums
====================

Hello,

This was never made clear to me in my limited exposure to kung fu. When you do kung fu for real, either for sparring or self defense, how closely are your movements expected to match the moves in the forms? The question might seem silly but a lot of the kung fu I was taught seemed kind of choppy and not as quick and flowing as I would expect a fighting art to be, are the forms supposed to show the 'proper' movements that you should strive for or are some of them exaggerated to illustrate certain principles or what?


Read More...


------------------------------------
Defend.net Post Bot - CMA Feed

You motion should be the same.
Sean