# What Good are Forms?



## dvcochran (Sep 8, 2019)

There has been some great discussion about whether there is any direct Martial/Fighting value in practicing forms. 

What is your position, not just your opinion? 
If they are good and have purpose, explain why/how. 
If they are purely in the art/dance category for you explain why/how. 
Many of us do them because that was how we learned to perform certain techniques. 

How do you transfer these learned muscle memory skills into application?
How do you defend forms as useful for fighting when they are a very specific pattern and a real fight or encounter is anything but specific?
For the Non-tradition folks out there, is there anything of value in forms? Or are they more akin to a dead language? They had their time but has that time passed? If so how do you recommend training large numbers of people a certain technique all at the same time? What is your method for teaching a specific technique?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 8, 2019)

What is your position, not just your opinion? Position: Critical for training and remembering complex techniques that don't fall within normal everyday movements. There's a potential where the movement will come out during a fight, when the body is in a position and it feels like you should do technique A so you do technique A.  It's rare but it does happen. I think it's happened to me 2 or 3 times since starting Jow Ga (maybe 10 years now).  I wouldn't count on it to happen in a fight\

If they are good and have purpose, explain why/how: In Jow Ga the forms train motion, technique, provides cardio, speed, and endurance training,  It conditions muscle and focus. 

If they are purely in the art/dance category for you explain why/how: For me no.  I don't train for performance purposes. I know some do and for them it's an art/performance.  Usually you can tell because the performance looks nice.  Those who train for function often look rough and not as clean cut as those who do it for performance.
Many of us do them because that was how we learned to perform certain techniques. 

How do you transfer these learned muscle memory skills into application? Sparring. I take one technique that I want to learn how to actually use and I try to use it as much as possible during sparring.  By trying to use, it I learn from my mistakes but I can also observe how my opponent reacts to it.  Which also gives me insight on how to use the technique.

How do you defend forms as useful for fighting when they are a very specific pattern and a real fight or encounter is anything but specific? Forms train motion.  The same kick that you do in a form is the same motion of a kick that is done in a fight. My belief is that Form Patterns were never made as a step A to step Z fighting pattern.  Step A movement may be used independently from Step B and not as a combo.  Step A movement may be for a different situation than B.  In Jow Ga forms we include actual fighting combinations.  Some of the techniques are combos, some aren't, and some combos can be split or broken into individual strikes.  
Form training is not application training and it should never be thought of or relied on as a substitute for application training.


----------



## skribs (Sep 9, 2019)

I'm going to steal @JowGaWolf 's way of answering this.

What is your position, not just your opinion? Forms are a good way to teach and reinforce body mechanics and fundamentals.  In Taekwondo, the forms are a more exaggerated version of the techniques, but they help teach the body mechanics.  While we use a different style when actually striking in Taekwondo, the stances in the forms translate very literally to our throws and take-downs.  There's a form I've known for 5 years in my TKD class, that just yesterday we figured a practical application for one of the techniques in that form.  Sometimes it's about getting used to the motion until the application presents itself.

If they are good and have purpose, explain why/how. As said above, they reinforce fundamentals, and help teach techniques with a more niche application.  They also help with leg strength, balance, posture, and developing applicable speed and power with the techniques.  In addition, they can help with memory and attention to detail.  I've seen this in our younger students who are growing up and need maturity, but also in our more mature students who are starting to worry about neurological decay.  We have had one student who was a brain cancer survivor, who attributed the forms to her surprisingly good neurological health after recovery.

If they are purely in the art/dance category for you explain why/how.  Even for those students who focus merely on the performance, they are still practicing techniques.  If they decide later they would like to learn more about the application, they at least have a solid foundation to build on.
Many of us do them because that was how we learned to perform certain techniques.

How do you transfer these learned muscle memory skills into application?  Sparring, and experimentation.  When you're see a situation where you could have used a form technique, ask your opponent to recreate the situation and see how the technique applies, and troubleshoot what does or doesn't work from there.  
How do you defend forms as useful for fighting when they are a very specific pattern and a real fight or encounter is anything but specific?  I don't, because I don't need to.   If someone has decided that forms are useless, I'm not going to convince them otherwise.  In fact, they're right - for them, forms are useless, because they will likely not practice them hard, or enjoy them, enough to get much out of them.  In a similar manner, melodic death metal is great meditation music for me, but it's useless for meditation for people who don't enjoy that type of music.  I also think it's a problem to over-rely on forms, and not do enough sparring or application drills.
What you get out of a form, to me, is very subjective.  It depends on what you put into it, what your instructor puts into it, and what was put into it when the form was created.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 9, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> What is your position, not just your opinion?


If I know 15 different ways to obtain single leg and 20 different ways to obtain head lock, I can create 2 forms, a single leg form and a head lock form. With these 2 forms, I no longer need to remember

- single leg 1,
- single leg 2,
- …
- single leg 14,
- single leg 15,
- head lock 1,
- head lock 2,
- …
- head lock 19,
- head lock 20.

These information can be recorded and saved into the future generation.


----------



## skribs (Sep 9, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If I know 15 different ways to obtain single leg and 20 different ways to obtain head lock, I can create 2 forms, a single leg form and a head lock form. With these 2 forms, I no longer need to remember
> 
> - single leg 1,
> - single leg 2,
> ...



You still need to remember all of them, they're just packaged into a form for you.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Sep 9, 2019)

The old traditional forms definitely have application to actual combat since they are composed of actual combat techniques.  True, the meaning of some of those techniques may have become clouded over the years, but for an interested practitioner, they are indeed there to be recognized for what they are - real combat combinations.

The fact the moves in a form are practiced in a pattern is irrelevant.  Just because we learn the ABC's in an alphabetic pattern does not mean a word has to be in alphabetic order.  The pattern is there just to help us remember the letters/techniques.  We draw upon those to make whatever words are required for the situation, rearranging those letters as needed.

To best be able to use forms for effective self-defense, break it down into the separate combinations (2-5 moves) and practice them with a partner attacking you.  Some series of moves may look dancelike or_ appear_ to be against two attackers from different directions for example...

But actually are a parry/grab with one hand while simultaneously twisting and chopping/grabbing the neck with the other, followed by a front kick.  Say the next moves are a turn to the rear, kneel and "block".  What's this all about?  In this case, not 2 attackers, but now having the sole attacker's punch and his neck in your hands, and kicking out one of his legs, by placing your kicking leg across his remaining leg and twisting and dropping to the rear, an excellent controlled takedown is executed  (a possible and effective bunkai from Kusanku kata).

Of course, most of us have not been taught in this manner, thinking the form was created first, when the combat combinations were created first, then practiced and used as battlefield self-defense - only later being combined into a form.  In this light, forms are not a dead language, and many practical self-defense moves are at your service.


----------



## Yokozuna514 (Sep 9, 2019)

Forms are a mnemonic learning tool to assist practitioners with remembering techniques in a compact and efficient format.  In an of themselves, they will only be as good as the guide assisting you with decoding the forms so that the finished forms are performed as intended and not simply followed rote.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 9, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> There has been some great discussion about whether there is any direct Martial/Fighting value in practicing forms.
> 
> What is your position, not just your opinion?
> If they are good and have purpose, explain why/how.
> ...


I'm curious what distinction you are making between "position" and "opinion". I tend to use those terms fairly interchangeably.

My view (to use exactly neither of the terms you used ) is that forms are best used to reinforce movements used in techniques. I don't think they're useful for teaching movement, but are useful for reinforcing movements from technique through repetition. Once you know how a movement is used, your practice of forms should support that (not the other way around).

Understand that I came through a sequence of training that had no long forms (I never got to them in the Karate I trained), and where the short forms (one-steps are the closest equivalent for most folks) were (mostly) directly related to the application. I added long(er) forms to what I teach, because I like them for students' solo practice. I find they can be used to challenge movement and balance when you don't have a partner handy. I strongly encourage students to vary the intent of their kata practice, to focus on different things they need to work on.

I don't feel the need to defend forms, in their relationship to fighting. They are a tool that can be used for multiple purposes. I find them useful, and have no issue with those who do not.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 10, 2019)

isshinryuronin said:


> when the combat combinations were created first, then practiced and used as battlefield self-defense - only later being combined into a form.


I like the approach that application -> form. 

Form = a set of partner drills without partner.


----------



## Buka (Sep 10, 2019)

I wish forms had been part of my training, they look kind of fun and most people I know in the striking arts really enjoy them.

To me they are the shadow boxing of Martial Arts. Although some will tell you that they shadow box differently every time, that is not what I’ve seen in my experiences.


----------



## skribs (Sep 11, 2019)

Buka said:


> I wish forms had been part of my training, they look kind of fun and most people I know in the striking arts really enjoy them.
> 
> To me they are the shadow boxing of Martial Arts. Although some will tell you that they shadow box differently every time, that is not what I’ve seen in my experiences.



Um...I hate to break it to you, but I think shadow boxing is the shadow boxing of martial arts.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 11, 2019)

skribs said:


> Um...I hate to break it to you, but I think shadow boxing is the shadow boxing of martial arts.


If your shadow boxing just repeat a single move, it's just shadow boxing. If your shadow boxing repeat a combo sequence, the result of your combo sequence training can be the same as your form training.

For example, your shadow boxing can be a combo sequence such as:

- right roundhouse kick,
- right side kick,
- left back kick,
- left spin back fist.
- right hook punch,
- right back fist,
- left uppercut.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Sep 11, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I like the approach that application -> form.
> 
> Form = a set of partner drills without partner.


Exactly.  Well put.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 11, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Form = a set of partner drills without partner.


Don't forget there are 2 man sets which are forms that are done by 2 people


----------



## skribs (Sep 11, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If your shadow boxing just repeat a single move, it's just shadow boxing. If your shadow boxing repeat a combo sequence, the result of your combo sequence training can be the same as your form training.
> 
> For example, your shadow boxing can be a combo sequence such as:
> 
> ...



My joke went over your head.


----------



## dvcochran (Sep 11, 2019)

Buka said:


> I wish forms had been part of my training, they look kind of fun and most people I know in the striking arts really enjoy them.
> 
> To me they are the shadow boxing of Martial Arts. Although some will tell you that they shadow box differently every time, that is not what I’ve seen in my experiences.


Agree, that is a good analogy which I have heard before. 
I suspect "differently ever time" is easily misunderstood. Each form I know is different in pattern/direction/shape, technique and movement but there are ample techniques that are used in all forms. The latter is what makes the analogy accurate. 
The footwork practice in a form compared to shadow boxing is very different. You could think of them as shadow boxing, cardio, and light weight lifting all rolled up into one. More to it but that is a simple way to think of them.


----------



## Buka (Sep 11, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> The footwork practice in a form compared to shadow boxing is very different. You could think of them as shadow boxing, cardio, and light weight lifting all rolled up into one. More to it but that is a simple way to think of them.



The footwork is different, yes. But if you watch a thousand people shadow box - depending if they're trying to implement a newly learned technique - their footwork while shadow boxing will manifest itself in as much of a pattern as in you'll find any Kata.


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 11, 2019)

Buka said:


> The footwork is different, yes. But if you watch a thousand people shadow box - depending if they're trying to implement a newly learned technique - their footwork while shadow boxing will manifest itself in as much of a pattern as in you'll find any Kata.


How are we defining shadow boxing? Is it what we see in Western boxing?  When I practice a few hundred fundamental punches with the stances and transitions used by my system, is that also shadow boxing?  Is that true if I use a combo of several punches, vs. single punches repeated?

If this is also shadow boxing, then the footwork and stance work are one and the same with what our system is built on.  Meaning: the footwork is not different from the footwork found in our forms.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 11, 2019)

Have anybody seen a form that was created in the following way?

- The 1st move can set up the 2nd move.
- The 2nd move can set up the 3rd move.
- …
- The n-1th move can set up the nth move.
​


----------



## skribs (Sep 11, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Have anybody seen a form that was created in the following way?
> 
> - The 1st move can set up the 2nd move.
> - The 2nd move can set up the 3rd move.
> ...



Depending on how you define "form", all of our forms in Hapkido are this way.

If you're looking at a kata that uses blocks and strikes, and how you define that flow and set up, they either will never or will always do this.


----------



## wab25 (Sep 11, 2019)

I look at forms / kata a little differently.

Assume each technique (punch, block, push, throw, lock...) is a circle. Now, you are going to make a ven diagram with a bunch of those circles. If you pick the right punch, block, push, parry, throw and lock circles... your ven diagram will have something like 80% of the area shared between the circles you chose. (if you pick the wrong circles, you can get very little area shared)

So, if you get two ven diagrams, each consisting of their own sets of technique circles, such that each diagram has 80% or more shared area... then if you practiced one technique from the first and transitioned to one technique from the second... its like you are practicing all of the first set of techniques together, and then transitioning to all of the techniques in the second set. So then, in application, you could pick any of the first set and then go into any of the second set.

You do have to remember, that only about 80% is shared. The other 20% needs to be practiced. Which could be why this one is a "block" and this one is a "punch." That way you are also getting your block, punch, parry.... practice in as well.

Additionally, the 80% of shared area for the set of techniques, is not a random 80%, but rather the most important 80%. The 20% that you have to change, to change a block into a punch, is the least important 20% of the technique. Yes, I realize that your fist has to take a slightly different path and strikes with a slightly different surface when blocking verses striking. But, if you have not developed the power, the speed, the structure, the connection to the ground... then shape of your fist is not really that important... as there is no power to deliver anyway. 

So if you think of the form or kata as how to move from this set of techniques to the next set to the next set... now, there is a ton of stuff to look at.

Now, if I wanted to just practice the techniques and "shadow box" with them or drill with them... that works too. But, if you are trying to pass on all the things you learned to a large group of people, who will be instructors of many more people... you will notice that different people like different combinations. Each of your instructors will teach their favorites and each student will concentrate on their favorites. By making people do set forms or kata, you maintain all the patterns and combinations. Those things remain for future students to rediscover. When they do rediscover it... they already know how it fits into everything else. (judo has like 65 throws... but competitors have their own set of 4 or 5 throws that they use for competition. If each judo player only knew 7 or 8 throws... over time, many of those 65 throws would disappear and have to be rediscovered the hard way)

Why does the down block technique and the advancing lunge punch show up so many times in the kata / forms? Why would a catalog list the same item like 30 times? It showing that these particular two sets of techniques (remember the ven diagrams for each) have many ways to transition into and many options to go to after. Looking at the kata / forms this way... the combinations of things that you are practicing get very big very quickly. Once you find that this move is not only a punch and a block, but also a lock... you just found a ton more combinations you can use... and you have already been practicing the most important 80% of the new thing you just found.

Anyway, thats just how I look at it.


----------



## Headhunter (Sep 11, 2019)

Forms are whatever you want them to be.

If you think they're just dance movements then okay that's fine.

If you think they're a good cardio blast. That's fine.

If you think they're a good way to practice basics and stance proportions that's fine.


Would you win a Mma fight because of form training? No

Would you be able to defend yourself with nothing but form training? No


Simply forms are a tool. You can choose to use them or not. It's not going to harm you to do them and it's not going to hinder you if you don't do them.

For me forms are a quick cardio blast and stretch in the mornings, something I can do to practice my punches and kicks and stances and techniques without having to think about what I'm doing since I can do them instinvely and something I can do without causing my body any damage.

If people like them great if they don't then great, you gotta do the training that's right for you. My idea of good training isn't doing 10 rounds of full contact sparring. Call me a wimp or whatever but it's just not what I'm into. Everyone's in their own journey and shouldn't waste time and effort belittling or criticising someone else's path just because it's not the same as your own. Life's to short for that crap


----------



## skribs (Sep 11, 2019)

Headhunter said:


> Simply forms are a tool. You can choose to use them or not. It's not going to harm you to do them and it's not going to hinder you if you don't do them.



I think that some people would look at any training they don't find useful, or even training they find less useful, to be more harmful than training in the way that's useful.

Which will get you somewhere faster?  To travel by car for 10 miles, or to travel by car for 5 miles and walk for 5 miles?  The walking will get you closer, but not as fast as driving.

(I am, of course, playing devil's advocate, since TKD is very form heavy).


----------



## Martial D (Sep 11, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> There has been some great discussion about whether there is any direct Martial/Fighting value in practicing forms.
> 
> What is your position, not just your opinion?
> If they are good and have purpose, explain why/how.
> ...


Forms are cool, to learn to control your body, and as an isometric workout in a lot of cases (looking at you, hung gar!) Or if your goal is to be good at kata, obviously practicing them will be practical.

As far as actual fighting is concerned, I've never seen convincing evidence that it can help any more than non-martial dancing.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 11, 2019)

Martial D said:


> As far as actual fighting is concerned, I've never seen convincing evidence that it can help any more than non-martial dancing.


If  you have seen any of my sparring videos then you have seen how my Forms have helped me in terms of fighting.  Especially the use of the big punches which come straight out of the forms.  The only thing I had to change up is the timing needed to deploy it in a fight, but other than that my big punches are straight from the form.  I also use a kick punch combo that's directly from the form as well.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 11, 2019)

Here is a perspective on forms


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 11, 2019)




----------



## Martial D (Sep 12, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> If  you have seen any of my sparring videos then you have seen how my Forms have helped me in terms of fighting.  Especially the use of the big punches which come straight out of the forms.  The only thing I had to change up is the timing needed to deploy it in a fight, but other than that my big punches are straight from the form.  I also use a kick punch combo that's directly from the form as well.


Sparring super light, you can use anything. That's why you need to up the intensity sometimes to keep it real.

That aside, I didn't say a dance routine, form, kata, whatever can't contain real moves. They certainly can and do.

But does doing them help you become a good fighter? These are totally unrelated activities.  

Sure, form training can help to learn a syllabus of moves, but you'll have to relearn them anyway when timing distance and footwork get introduced later.

Unlearning and relearning is so much more complicated than just learning correctly to begin with.


----------



## DocWard (Sep 12, 2019)

What is your position, not just your opinion? 
*I'm also not quite clear on the difference between "position," and "opinion." Be that as it may, I'm also not sure I can add anything beyond what has been well stated by others, but am of the position that forms have definite value in the martial arts. I will note that in my explanation below, I use the term "technique" to mean singular strikes and blocks, and to extended "combinations" and "self-defense techniques" which comprise multiple movements.*

If they are good and have purpose, explain why/how.
*     I see the ways in which they have purpose as multi-fold.
          -To use the oft used quote by Bruce Lee, "I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, I fear the man who has practiced one kick 10,000 times." For me, if done with focus, a form is a method of practicing techniques--that kick, punch, block or parry--many times. They also allow the practice of self-defense techniques as a larger action. True, they are not done against an opponent, nor against resistance, but they allow practice to occur, regardless. Perhaps more important, they allow practice in situations where these are not available.
          -I've found that personally, forms have allowed me to improve not only my footwork, but my balance as well. Yes, it can be argued that this would occur if one considered forms simply "choreographed / dance techniques," but I believe, not being a kinestheologist, that by focusing on the movements, and working to understand how I am propelling my body through movements, I am increasing the muscle strength leading to better balance and improved power.
*
If they are purely in the art/dance category for you explain why/how.
*     -While I believe kata/forms are certainly art, I don't consider them "merely" art or dance for me. The difference is mental focus. If I perform a technique while envisioning an active opponent, and responding to said opponent correctly, then I am practicing to hone my skills. If I am focusing on the movements for the sake of movements, then it becomes dance.
*
How do you transfer these learned muscle memory skills into application?
*     -A technique or self-defense technique is not "locked" within a form. It is simply there for purposes of practice. I've been aware of this simple fact for most of my time in practice. It was driven home as I was creating my own kata in preparation for my black belt. In order to create the flow I wanted, I needed to break down the kata into not only specific combinations, but to specific techniques making up the combinations. How an inward block set up a chop, which set up a rising elbow strike, etc... Breaking it down thus, and being mindful of the mental focus mentioned above, assists in transferring it to application. Working with a uke, taking those techniques and combinations from within the form further assists in transferring into application. The next step is to utilize the techniques against a resisting opponent.
*
How do you defend forms as useful for fighting when they are a very specific pattern and a real fight or encounter is anything but specific?
*-Again, I look at forms as a method to practice and recall numerous specific techniques numerous time. While a real fight is "anything but specific," there are a finite number of attacks that an opponent can throw, and likely an even more limited few that an opponent is likely to come at you with. No, I may not be able to perform the entirety of a learned self-defense technique, but I should be able to respond to any number of attacks, with the proficiency to adapt and modify as the situation develops. Yes, this could be done by simply doing techniques and self-defense techniques over and over, but forms or katas help maintain interest, along with the other things mentioned as well.*


----------



## wab25 (Sep 12, 2019)

Martial D said:


> That aside, I didn't say a dance routine, form, kata, whatever can't contain real moves. They certainly can and do.
> 
> But does doing them help you become a good fighter?


Hitting a heavy bag can certainly include real moves, but does that help you become a good fighter? Not necessarily. Hard sparring or rolling certainly can include real moves, but does that help you become a good fighter? Not necessarily. I have seen many people do many types of training and never get it. 

Look at the top full contact fighters. At some point, they have to step away from the heavy bag and the hard sparring and work on their technique. There are many ways for them to work on improving their technique. Kata is one way to do that. Drills would be another. Breaking down the techniques and going through them a step at a time works too.



Martial D said:


> Sure, form training can help to learn a syllabus of moves, but you'll have to relearn them anyway when timing distance and footwork get introduced later.
> 
> Unlearning and relearning is so much more complicated than just learning correctly to begin with.


The timing and the distance and the footwork are all included in the kata or forms. If you come up with a drill to work on a technique... you will still have the same issue when you start hard sparring how to set up the drill and when to actually start the technique from the drill... But I guess its better because its a drill?

One thing I find interesting is that many people are not fans of kata. They find no martial value in it. Then I go watch how they train. If you watch people train, you start to see patterns of things they do. Some things they do every session, some they do every few sessions. When new people start, they are usually introduced to the art by learning the same techniques, with the same drills. The only difference between a drill and a kata are the letters used to spell the term: d-r-i-l-l or k-a-t-a. Kata tend to be a little more universal, as in most people do kata A the same way, or very similar. While bjj and mma don't have kata... show me a class that does not start with shrimping... 

When an arm bar from guard is taught to new people (or when its broken down for experienced people) there is usually a progression of drills introducing the different parts. Drill 1 is how to move the hips and body, practice with your partner. Drill 2 adds in the legs blocking the hip and coming up and over the body, go practice with your partner. Drill 3 is to do drill 2 left side, then right side then left side... back and forth, go do it with your partner. Drill 4 go through and apply the bar, after rolling the guy off on to his back. Drill 5, apply the bar while the other guy is still on top. If thats the progression used when introducing an arm bar from guard, chances are that that instructor uses that same progression of drills with every new student and every time he wants to brush up the students on their arm bar from guard. That progression is a 2 man kata or 2 man form... or a 2 man drill if that makes you feel better. But at least you are only working on one technique at a time.... well, not really. You are also working on a sweep from guard. And you are working on some basic body movement and hip movement from the bottom that can be used to set up all kinds of other techniques.

Every boxer learns the jab first. Then they learn the straight right. Then they learn the old 1-2 kata... sorry, I meant combo. In fact, there are a few common kata / combos that most boxers learn. It teaches them how to put punches together, how to move their body, when to move their body and their feet. On top of that, every boxing coach has his own set of kata / combos and drills that he runs all his fighters through. Sometimes they shadow box these kata, sometimes they hit focus mits with these kata and sometimes they trade with their partner. 

Not every type of training is for every person. Thats why we train different arts and with different instructors. We find what works for us. Just because something doesn't work for me, doesn't mean it doesn't work for everyone. Many people get hung up on how bad kata and forms are... and don't realize that the drills and patterns that they use are essentially the same thing. My Shotokan Karate studies the Heian drills.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 12, 2019)

Buka said:


> I wish forms had been part of my training, they look kind of fun and most people I know in the striking arts really enjoy them.
> 
> To me they are the shadow boxing of Martial Arts. Although some will tell you that they shadow box differently every time, that is not what I’ve seen in my experiences.


I agree entirely. I never did forms (other than the one-step Classical stuff in NGA), even in my Karate training. During a long period when I couldn't reliably train at the dojo, I started stringing together some of those Classical forms into something folks would recognize as forms. I kinda liked it, so I put some together for my students when I started teaching my own curriculum.

I currently have 5 forms I consider "official" (some I've not ever yet taught). Many mornings I go outside and do each form twice. I enjoy it far more than I'd ever have expected.

Now if I could just figure out how to use a form on the dance floor, then I'd enjoy dancing, too.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 12, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Have anybody seen a form that was created in the following way?
> 
> - The 1st move can set up the 2nd move.
> - The 2nd move can set up the 3rd move.
> ...


Isn't that what a form is, more or less? Each move flows from the previous one, and some of those are combos (where one move actually leads into the next/sets it up)?

Or are you talking about the fact that in many forms (maybe all?), there are points where the transition from one move to the next isn't a combo, but a change of action?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 12, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Forms are cool, to learn to control your body, and as an isometric workout in a lot of cases (looking at you, hung gar!) Or if your goal is to be good at kata, obviously practicing them will be practical.
> 
> As far as actual fighting is concerned, I've never seen convincing evidence that it can help any more than non-martial dancing.


To that last statement, probably the biggest difference (in my view) is that you're practicing movements and positions you'd use in a fight (though they may be exaggerated). Jazz hands aren't as useful. This distinction allows you to focus on specific transitions, weight shifts, etc., rather than just generic balance. It's a distinction of merit, but probably not going to make an order-of-magnitude difference. Using the right kind of dance moves would also improve balance, coordination, and body control, while allowing for a good exercise session. And I think those are among the most useful benefits in kata.

So, maybe practicing West Side Story choreography is better than ballet.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 12, 2019)

wab25 said:


> Hitting a heavy bag can certainly include real moves, but does that help you become a good fighter? Not necessarily. Hard sparring or rolling certainly can include real moves, but does that help you become a good fighter? Not necessarily. I have seen many people do many types of training and never get it.
> 
> Look at the top full contact fighters. At some point, they have to step away from the heavy bag and the hard sparring and work on their technique. There are many ways for them to work on improving their technique. Kata is one way to do that. Drills would be another. Breaking down the techniques and going through them a step at a time works too.
> 
> ...


I think many of the issues people have with kata is a problem of expectation, not with the kata, itself. 

Shrimping drills are awful. They're a waste of time and don't teach you to fight. You can't expect someone to allow you to just do that motion over and over across the mat. You have to work on timing, controlling their limbs so they can't stop you, and looking for other options. Or maybe that's not what shrimping drills are about, and they are quite good for their intended purpose.


----------



## Martial D (Sep 12, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> To that last statement, probably the biggest difference (in my view) is that you're practicing movements and positions you'd use in a fight (though they may be exaggerated). Jazz hands aren't as useful. This distinction allows you to focus on specific transitions, weight shifts, etc., rather than just generic balance. It's a distinction of merit, but probably not going to make an order-of-magnitude difference. Using the right kind of dance moves would also improve balance, coordination, and body control, while allowing for a good exercise session. And I think those are among the most useful benefits in kata.
> 
> So, maybe practicing West Side Story choreography is better than ballet.


If you believe that the movements you are learning in a given form or kata are going to translate to movement in a fight, then sure..you might have a case there. I'm not convinced this is so, in most instances anyway. Most of the movement combinations and movements in traditional forms across the board are pretty far removed from what a real game of punchy kicky slammy chokey looks like.

I'd honestly take the jazz hands in many cases. At least it could sort of be a wide high cover for a looping punch. I'd rather that than say, a reverse punch from a low horse stance...

Sure, you could build a form sequence from all practical movements, but why? Now you are practicing a static sequence that will never come to pass, and training your muscle memory to go into certain moves off other certain moves, not to mention you need further instruction to understand the purpose of the movements, because you aren't learning them in their native environment, so to speak.

Why not just learn the right way straight off the bat, one technique at a time?  This is the technique. This is how, this is why, this is when. Grab the focus pads let's go.

It's 2019 bro


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 12, 2019)

Martial D said:


> If you believe that the movements you are learning in a given form or kata are going to translate to movement in a fight, then sure..you might have a case there. I'm not convinced this is so, in most instances anyway. Most of the movement combinations and movements in traditional forms across the board are pretty far removed from what a real game of punchy kicky slammy chokey looks like.
> 
> I'd honestly take the jazz hands in many cases. At least it could sort of be a wide high cover for a looping punch. I'd rather that than say, a reverse punch from a low horse stance...
> 
> ...


I agree not everything in kata is efficient for fighting. In fact, that's true of the forms I created. I put some things in there specifically to force balance shifts, require work on one-legged balance, etc. All things that can be done other ways, or can be part of what we do with forms.

I don't think forms are good for learning a technique, so I agree with you on that. I think they can be good for reinforcing movements that are used in technique (like the shrimping drill does, though it lacks several elements used in the actual escape). I'll take a block or cover in kata over jazz hands, so long as the block or cover approximates (better than the jazz hands) the movement I'd use in a fight.

I also think forms should evolve as movement evolves. If there's a block in a form that doesn't ever get used, it should stop being in the form (at least as a block - I've had some explanations that the movements have another purpose...in which case, that's how the form should be explained from the get-go).

As for the static sequence, every drill has them. And you can never count on being able to repeat that exact sequence, because the other person's reaction can change things. But we don't look at someone practicing a punch combo and say, "You shouldn't practice that over and over, because you can't count on using that exact, static sequence. They might step to the side, slip the punch, parry, or whatever." Again, I think many of the criticisms of forms are just blaming forms for not being something they aren't intended to be.


----------



## wab25 (Sep 12, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Now you are practicing a static sequence that will never come to pass, and training your muscle memory to go into certain moves off other certain moves


Boxers, kickboxers, muay thai fighters have been learning and practicing combos for quite a while now. They seem to be pretty effective with both the combos and the skills practicing those combos have given them. Judo players, sambo players, bjj guys and wrestlers have been practicing chain takedowns, chain throws and chain submissions for quite a while now and also seem to do quite well with it. Are you saying they are wrong and that there is a better way?



Martial D said:


> Why not just learn the right way straight off the bat, one technique at a time? This is the technique. This is how, this is why, this is when. Grab the focus pads let's go.


Thats hard to do... and also not effective. Let's take the boxers 1-2 kata... I combo. If all you are learning from that is how to do a jab, followed by a straight... you are doing it wrong. You are learning how to hit with 2 punches. You are learning how to use the first punch, to prepare your body to give more power to the second punch. You are learning to measure distance with the jab, so you know you can land the harder straight. You are learning to hide the straight punch behind the jab. You are learning to vary your timing of the 2 punches to sneak the second through. You are learning to close distance. You are learning to maintain distance. You are learning how to defend against hooks and haymakers. So yeah, let grab the focus mits... and study a lot of stuff. Saying that the 1-2 kata is only about throwing 2 punches is like saying that the karate "down block to lunge punch" drill is only about a low block followed by a straight punch.

A fun read on this topic:
Lyoto Machida: Old-School Karate


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Sep 12, 2019)

As has probably been stated, they over all 3 spetrums pending style.    Honestly so long as no one sells you a non combat form or style as a combat one (which is fraud in my view) i dont care.

In my perspective im more interested in fighting so unless its good exercise or can be directly applied to fighting, its on secondary importance at the moment.         So basically the kung fu mediation ones take  a lower priority than the others.

edit: obviously its not the end all be all.


----------



## Headhunter (Sep 12, 2019)

Rat said:


> As has probably been stated, they over all 3 spetrums pending style.    Honestly so long as no one sells you a non combat form or style as a combat one (which is fraud in my view) i dont care.
> 
> In my perspective im more interested in fighting so unless its good exercise or can be directly applied to fighting, its on secondary importance at the moment.         So basically the kung fu mediation ones take  a lower priority than the others.
> 
> edit: obviously its not the end all be all.


Since you're more interested in fighting does that mean you're now training?


----------



## skribs (Sep 12, 2019)

Rat said:


> As has probably been stated, they over all 3 spetrums pending style.    Honestly so long as no one sells you a non combat form or style as a combat one (which is fraud in my view) i dont care.
> 
> In my perspective im more interested in fighting so unless its good exercise or can be directly applied to fighting, its on secondary importance at the moment.         So basically the kung fu mediation ones take  a lower priority than the others.
> 
> edit: obviously its not the end all be all.



The meditation and respect I've learned at my dojang has gotten me out of several fights since I started TKD.  I find that in all practicality, it's been the most useful self defense component of my curriculum.


----------



## Martial D (Sep 12, 2019)

wab25 said:


> Boxers, kickboxers, muay thai fighters have been learning and practicing combos for quite a while now. They seem to be pretty effective with both the combos and the skills practicing those combos have given them. Judo players, sambo players, bjj guys and wrestlers have been practicing chain takedowns, chain throws and chain submissions for quite a while now and also seem to do quite well with it. Are you saying they are wrong and that there is a better way?


LOL really? Don't you find it a bit of a stretch to state doing combos that flow off of each other, like a jab jab cross, and say that is the same thing as a 30-150 move sequence that has you doing all kinds of fanciful things while you fight imaginary opponents that surround you? Developing muscle memory for jab jab cross is useful, a boon. Developing muscle memory for low horse stance reverse punch pivot hands to hips backstep forward kick point hands toward sky pivot low punch high punch is just...dancing. A situation to use that 150 move combo will never ever happen.

Whereas jab jab cross lands all day and can be used anywhere.




> Thats hard to do... and also not effective. Let's take the boxers 1-2 kata... I combo. If all you are learning from that is how to do a jab, followed by a straight... you are doing it wrong. You are learning how to hit with 2 punches. You are learning how to use the first punch, to prepare your body to give more power to the second punch. You are learning to measure distance with the jab, so you know you can land the harder straight. You are learning to hide the straight punch behind the jab. You are learning to vary your timing of the 2 punches to sneak the second through. You are learning to close distance. You are learning to maintain distance. You are learning how to defend against hooks and haymakers. So yeah, let grab the focus mits... and study a lot of stuff. Saying that the 1-2 kata is only about throwing 2 punches is like saying that the karate "down block to lunge punch" drill is only about a low block followed by a straight punch.
> 
> A fun read on this topic:
> Lyoto Machida: Old-School Karate



What? A jab cross combo is thrown exactly the same as a naked jab and a naked cross. Not sure what you are on about there.

Tell me, why do you think professional fighters do not incorporate forms or needlessly long and unrealistic sequence training? Sure, I know..machida right? He's a guy that built off his karate by training it the way boxers and kickboxers train. I assure you the guys at black house MMA where he trains do not line up for katas


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 12, 2019)

My personal take, just for me and not for all karateka, there are two reasons I train in forms. I personally am not hugely into the bunkai aspect, and I don't consider them like shadowboxing (which we also do, in the way we punch and kick and move in sparring, and without lengthy choreographed sequences).

FORMS LIKE BOXING'S SPEED BAG

The speed bag isn't punched the way you punch an opponent. It's not a mandatory part of fight training. You can be a very good fighter without doing speed bag. But although it's not mandatory, and doesn't teach technique in the same way that pad work does, it can be beneficial in building attribute,  and some boxers thus find it helps them despite those limitations I describe.

I don't punch and kick in forms the way I do with an opponent. But I've found that forms training has helped with while body movement, whole body connection, and control. It's certainly not necessary for fight training, but I think it's helpful in the way that some boxers find speed bag training helpful, in building attributes.

FORMS LIKE RUGBY'S HAKA

The haka isn't part of competitive rugby play, but it's a performance art that has become part of rugby tradition and culture, and many rugby teams take pride in a good haka. The parallel to karate and tang soo do's forms should be obvious.


----------



## skribs (Sep 12, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> My personal take, just for me and not for all karateka, there are two reasons I train in forms. I personally am not hugely into the bunkai aspect, and I don't consider them like shadowboxing (which we also do, in the way we punch and kick and move in sparring, and without lengthy choreographed sequences).
> 
> FORMS LIKE BOXING'S SPEED BAG
> 
> ...


What is Haka?


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 12, 2019)

skribs said:


> What is Haka?



A ceremonial dance, originally part of Maori culture, that has become part of rugby culture as a pregame ritual/performance in at least in some regions.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 12, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Whereas jab jab cross lands all day and can be used anywhere.


Many 2 or 3 moves combos also work most of the time.

- groin kick, face punch.
- side kick, spin back fist.
- hook punch, back fist.
- roundhouse kick, side kick.
- single leg, foot sweep.
- shine bite, twist and spring.
- inner hook, foot scoop.
- elbow lock, shoulder lock.
- shoulder lock, elbow lock.
- hip throw, leg block, front cut.
- leg twist, leg lift, leg block.
- ankle pick, twist and spring, outer bowing.
- shin bite, reverse shin bite, foot sweep.
- ...


----------



## Martial D (Sep 12, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Many 2 or 3 moves combos also work most of the time.
> 
> - groin kick, face punch.
> - side kick, spin back fist.
> ...


Those are all fine examples of practical effe give combinations, yes.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 12, 2019)

Frankly forms are used nowadays to pad the belt system (and thus the wallet) of many martial arts schools. They serve very little martial purpose, but I suppose you could use them for exercise purposes if you so desire. I occasionally do my Shotokan kata when I'm unable to run or go to the gym for example.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 12, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Sparring super light, you can use anything. That's why you need to up the intensity sometimes to keep it real.


 I don't go below light sparring. My opinion is that super light sparring will actually degrade one's ability, because the brain starts to incorrectly calculate motion, speed, and timing needed to respond to actions (attacks, defenses, escapes, etc.).

My opinion is that in order to do super light sparring, both participants have to be honest and realistic about "what could have been", and move accordingly.  It's more of a visual strategy match than anything else and to me, that is an advanced skill that most people don't have. 

The instructor at my last school did light sparring once and it looked horrible.  soooooooooo unrealistic.  I may have a video of that too.  I watched and the reactions that were made were unrealistic.  It was the only time that I can think of where the school didn't look like we knew what we were doing.  I've seen this so many times in other schools and it's always the thing.  Only the advanced skilled fighters can Spar Super light and benefit from it.  Because what they see visually is based on the light - hard sparring they have done.

Sometimes I go super light only because of the person I'm sparring with is not at the same skill level.  At that point I either try more difficult techniques that I haven't learned to apply yet, or I just focused on training my partner, instead of me trying to get something out of it.



Martial D said:


> But does doing them help you become a good fighter?


Yes. When you do a form you are training the motion needed for that attack.  It's no different than anything else.  Repetition of movement helps you become better at that movement. At the bare minimum a person needs to know how to correctly do a movement of a technique.  Forms are not the only thing that makes a good fighter but they play an important part.

Simple Example, this is the Jow Ga punching form. It trains the punch and how to move with the punch.  It builds the foundation for technique.  Would you become better at using this punch if your practice the movement multiple times?  Or would you be better at this punch if I showed you the punch once and immediately you try to use it in sparring?





Here's the progression of learning to be functional with this punch.
1. First learn the motion and the foundation needed to make this punch "good" and "correct"

2. Once you have the motion, try it in sparring.  You'll make a lot of mistakes and you'll learn that you had a lot of wrong assumptions about what you thought was correct. Stay true to the teaching of the form, figure out what you are doing incorrectly

3. Take your new perspective and try again to use it.  Repeat until you have figured it out.  Stay true to the form.  Do not think the form is incorrect. 99% of the time, it's our understanding of a form that is correct. 

4. Try again, with the new perspective that you gain from #3.  Repeat process  1 - 3 until you get it.

5. You have a "light bulb moment"  you finally understand why it wasn't working and have done it enough in light sparring to have a realistic idea on how to work the technique

6. You try the technique again. You nail it.  Success.

7. Do the form again with the understanding and knowledge that you gain from trying in steps #2 - #6  Now you understand the form has value and it played a role in making you a better fighter.

Steps 1 -7 is a summary of my actual martial arts process and I've have 100% success with it.  I can look at the punching form in that video and I can tell that the person in the video doesn't know how to actually use those punches.  If I were to do the same form, the first thing you'll probably think is,  yeah that guy can probably use that stuff.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 12, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Unlearning and relearning is so much more complicated than just learning correctly to begin with.


 This is an illusion in life.  Everything new that you learn consists of Unlearning and relearning.  When you get a math problem wrong, you unlearn the method that you use and you try again until you understand how to get it right.  Playing an instrument or sport is the same way.  Learning a language is the same thing..

If you are learning something new, then you'll make mistakes and bad habits that you have to unlearn.  Then relearn how to do it correctly.  How many times have we done something in our own lives when someone shows us a better way to do something.  Or points out that we are doing something incorrectly.  That's unlearn and relearn.  That's just a natural process of learning.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 12, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Now if I could just figure out how to use a form on the dance floor, then I'd enjoy dancing, too.


Did someone say Karateeeee -Dance off.?!?!?















Best thing about it.  Doesn't matter what type of martial art system it is.. Since its just all dancing.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 12, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Now if I could just figure out how to use a form on the dance floor, then I'd enjoy dancing, too.


Yes Sir.. I'm going to blame you for the sick and uneasy feeling I have when I watched this lol


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 12, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I agree not everything in kata is efficient for fighting. In fact, that's true of the forms I created. I put some things in there specifically to force balance shifts, require work on one-legged balance, etc. All things that can be done other ways, or can be part of what we do with forms.
> 
> I don't think forms are good for learning a technique, so I agree with you on that. I think they can be good for reinforcing movements that are used in technique (like the shrimping drill does, though it lacks several elements used in the actual escape). I'll take a block or cover in kata over jazz hands, so long as the block or cover approximates (better than the jazz hands) the movement I'd use in a fight.
> 
> ...


For someone who didn't start with forms, I can tell you have given this a lot of thought.  The forms you create are going to be really useful


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 12, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> but I suppose you could use them for exercise purposes if you so desire.


This is actually a common perspective of many people who take a traditional martial art, or just martial arts in general.  They don't care as much about the fighting as they do about the exercise and staying fit.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Sep 12, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Now if I could just figure out how to use a form on the dance floor, then I'd enjoy dancing, too.



You're going to regret saying this...


----------



## skribs (Sep 12, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> You're going to regret saying this...



If we're going to mix martial arts and dance (outside of Capoeira) I'm going to have to go with the original Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers, where Zack made up his own art called Hip Hop Kido.


----------



## dvcochran (Sep 12, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> My personal take, just for me and not for all karateka, there are two reasons I train in forms. I personally am not hugely into the bunkai aspect, and I don't consider them like shadowboxing (which we also do, in the way we punch and kick and move in sparring, and without lengthy choreographed sequences).
> 
> FORMS LIKE BOXING'S SPEED BAG
> 
> ...


Well said.


----------



## dvcochran (Sep 12, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> You're going to regret saying this...


You are So right. That is just terrible.


----------



## dvcochran (Sep 12, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> A ceremonial dance, originally part of Maori culture, that has become part of rugby culture as a pregame ritual/performance in at least in some regions.


I thought those guys looked Hawaiian and/or Polyniesian.


----------



## CB Jones (Sep 12, 2019)

Where I think learning kata is helpful is it helps teach strong stances and stability with your techniques early on which ultimately helps with power generation and balance.  

As an advanced student it probably isnt that important but many enjoy learning new forms just because they like it.


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 12, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Tell me, why do you think professional fighters do not incorporate forms or needlessly long and unrealistic sequence training? Sure, I know..machida right? He's a guy that built off his karate by training it the way boxers and kickboxers train. I assure you the guys at black house MMA where he trains do not line up for katas



Lots of padwork and lots of free sparrig are both NECESSARY parts of becoming an effective striker for competition.  No doubt.  But that doesn't mean everything else is useless and should be discarded.  Just like traditional boxers don't discard speed bag training because not all effective MMA strikers use speed bag.  "Useful" and "necessary" are two different things.  Just because it's not necessary doesn't mean it's not useful.

As for Machida, he fights the way he does because of the way he trains.  He doesn't strike like a boxer or MT guy as a result of his training not being identical to a boxer or MT guy.  And yes, people who train with him who want to fight like him and move like him will train like him.  Forms training isn't going to be the dominant focus of the training--that'll be padwork and sparring--but you bet your butt that forms will be part of it.  Just like if you learn striking from a boxer, they'll probably have you work a speed bag as part of that training.





 (jump to 1:50 if you're impatient)

And Machida's far from the only guy who has used katas as a component (not the dominant component, but a component) of their training while being successful in a full-contact environment.  You know Francisco Filho, K-1 legend?  Here he is teaching a packed seminar including traditional kihon and kata:


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 13, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> Did someone say Karateeeee -Dance off.?!?!?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Nobody said "karateeeee-dance off," because that's Taekwondo Aerobic, which is a formally-recognized type of Taekwondo competition in South Korea nowadays, just as legitimate and competitive as cheerleading competitions in the USA.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 13, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> Yes Sir.. I'm going to blame you for the sick and uneasy feeling I have when I watched this lol


I'll happily take responsibility for that queasiness. This isn't as entertaining as the TKD kids, but gets major points for choice of songs.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 13, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> You're going to regret saying this...


While that is absolutely awful, I have no regrets.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 13, 2019)

In reading the objections to forms, it occurs to me that most of them aren't actually objections to forms. They are mostly either:

objections to specific forms (don't like the combinations/techniques contained in "forms", because they're not what you use in fighting)
objections to how forms are used (forms shouldn't take so much time away from other training/there are too many forms)
objections to how forms are taught (why does it matter if my foot is off by a few degrees, why does a student need to practice in sync with other students)
None of these objections can realistically apply to all forms. 

The first is reasonable from one perspective, but it's entirely possible to make forms that use only movements/combos from actual fighting. Go do some shadow boxing, practicing things you need to work on for fighting. Remember that sequence and use it again the next time. You're doing a form full of techniques you'd use in fighting. There's an argument to be made (and I'd be one of those arguing this) that forms should evolve to match the movements we actually want folks to use in fighting. I'm not at all a fan of forms looking quite similar between groups that don't train together - that suggests to me that they're not letting application lead the form. Of course, there are folks who make a cogent argument on the other side - I'll leave it to them to make that. While mine evolve, they do have some movements that I would never use in fighting. Those were chosen, in most cases, to challenge the student physically.

The second objection is really mostly about too much time spent on forms. I agree that some places seem to have too many forms. While I see a lot of value in a good, basic form, I don't see so much value in having form after form covering the same body of material at progressive levels (I think Shorin-ryu Kensankai has 8+ staff forms). It seems to me most of that time is better spent doing drills, some sparring, etc. But this isn't a problem with the forms - it's an issue with the curriculum. I have one staff form, with 10-17 moves (depending how you count them). If I decide another form is necessary, it will replace the one I have.

The third objection is about the repetitive nature, having to move exactly like others (sometimes at the same time), etc. And this is another one I somewhat agree with. But that's not an issue with the form. Each instructor has to decide what makes an acceptable variation in the form. They could be very restrictive, or allow a wide range of variance. The form doesn't dictate that. 

*TL, DR: Many of the objections I see to forms are objections to either specific forms, or to teaching style.*


----------



## Martial D (Sep 13, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> Lots of padwork and lots of free sparrig are both NECESSARY parts of becoming an effective striker for competition.  No doubt.  But that doesn't mean everything else is useless and should be discarded.  Just like traditional boxers don't discard speed bag training because not all effective MMA strikers use speed bag.  "Useful" and "necessary" are two different things.  Just because it's not necessary doesn't mean it's not useful.
> 
> As for Machida, he fights the way he does because of the way he trains.  He doesn't strike like a boxer or MT guy as a result of his training not being identical to a boxer or MT guy.  And yes, people who train with him who want to fight like him and move like him will train like him.  Forms training isn't going to be the dominant focus of the training--that'll be padwork and sparring--but you bet your butt that forms will be part of it.  Just like if you learn striking from a boxer, they'll probably have you work a speed bag as part of that training.
> 
> ...



Rich Franklin was a math teacher. Did his math skills help him become a great fighter in his time? I'm sure I could dig up a couple more fighters with some higher education in math. More evidence mathematics lead to fighting skills?

Or maybe correlation and causation are different things, just as by the numbers dancing isn't fighting.

I already stated that forms have applications, but getting good at fighting isn't one of them. Sure it might provide a marginal gain in body control(although I'm not convinced even that exceeds the gain of proper drilling or sequence training), but for me the negatives I listed earlier outweigh anything you might get there.

I honestly see forms as a very old marketing ploy used to needlessly extend training times to keep sihan/sifu paid for more years. The only one that really benefits is that guy.

Luckily real martial arts training that breaks from that model is widely available now


----------



## Martial D (Sep 13, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> This is an illusion in life.  Everything new that you learn consists of Unlearning and relearning.  When you get a math problem wrong, you unlearn the method that you use and you try again until you understand how to get it right.  Playing an instrument or sport is the same way.  Learning a language is the same thing..
> 
> If you are learning something new, then you'll make mistakes and bad habits that you have to unlearn.  Then relearn how to do it correctly.  How many times have we done something in our own lives when someone shows us a better way to do something.  Or points out that we are doing something incorrectly.  That's unlearn and relearn.  That's just a natural process of learning.


Sounds good, doesn't check out.

It's patently harder to teach a karate guy to box than an untrained guy, for instance. The karate guy will punch and move karate style because muscle memory. The untrained guy will have no such hurdle.


----------



## wab25 (Sep 13, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Developing muscle memory for jab jab cross is useful, a boon. Developing muscle memory for low horse stance reverse punch pivot hands to hips backstep forward kick point hands toward sky pivot low punch high punch is just...dancing. A situation to use that 150 move combo will never ever happen.


No one ever said they expect to land 150 move combo. Each kata provides a long combo, but in use you would only use 2 or 3 together at a time. In a 150 move kata (not sure there is one that long... but I could be wrong) there are a ton of different 2, 3 and 4 move combos that you are practicing.



Martial D said:


> Sure it might provide a marginal gain in body control(although I'm not convinced even that exceeds the gain of *proper drilling or sequence training*), but for me the negatives I listed earlier outweigh anything you might get there.


Kata done right, is proper drilling and sequence training. Do some schools do it wrong and turn it into a dance? Sure. I would like you to show me drill or sequence that cannot be turned into a dance... I can show you boxing combos that have been turned into dance... it doesn't make proper boxing combos any less effective when done in a non-dance environment.






I guess boxing combos are out now, because someone danced them.



Martial D said:


> It's patently harder to teach a karate guy to box than an untrained guy, for instance. The karate guy will punch and move karate style because muscle memory. The untrained guy will have no such hurdle.


And I guess the only real way to fight is like a boxer? Its also quite hard to teach a boxer karate... as he will move like a boxer... all that muscle memory getting in the way again.


----------



## dvcochran (Sep 13, 2019)

Much thanks to whoever added the (s) in the thread title.


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 13, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Rich Franklin was a math teacher. Did his math skills help him become a great fighter in his time? I'm sure I could dig up a couple more fighters with some higher education in math. More evidence mathematics lead to fighting skills?
> 
> Or maybe correlation and causation are different things, just as by the numbers dancing isn't fighting.
> 
> ...








Option #1: traditional kihon and kata training has nothing whatsoever to do with how a successful karate fighter fights any more than algebra does, and Lyoto Machida, Francisco Filho, and Midori Kenji are all scammers teaching irrelevant algebra-like drills to students, just to make themselves rich.  What they are training their students is not "real martial arts training."  Just a scam.

Option #2: traditional kihon and kata are part of what makes a karate fighter fight like a karate fighter instead of a boxer, and Lyoto Machida, Francisco Filho, and Midori Kenji are teaching people the way they learned, because it is part of what made them into what they are.  There is more than one flavor of "real martial arts training."

I know which I believe.


----------



## Martial D (Sep 13, 2019)

wab25 said:


> No one ever said they expect to land 150 move combo. Each kata provides a long combo, but in use you would only use 2 or 3 together at a time. In a 150 move kata (not sure there is one that long... but I could be wrong) there are a ton of different 2, 3 and 4 move combos that you are practicing.


Sure. You could conceivably create a form or kata built of usable flowing combos. To my knowledge no such form or kata exists within TMA. Once you remove the practical side, the thing you test it against, quality control disappears and movements less and less resemble reality as teacher after teacher with no practical experience water it down further and further. 



> Kata done right, is proper drilling and sequence training. Do some schools do it wrong and turn it into a dance? Sure. I would like you to show me drill or sequence that cannot be turned into a dance... I can show you boxing combos that have been turned into dance... it doesn't make proper boxing combos any less effective when done in a non-dance environment.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No. That is not what I'm saying. What I am saying is dancing it out like that won't do much good either.


> And I guess the only real way to fight is like a boxer? Its also quite hard to teach a boxer karate... as he will move like a boxer... all that muscle memory getting in the way again.



Ya. It works both ways. Muscle memory doesn't have a style preference. This has nothing to do with 'real ways'


----------



## Martial D (Sep 13, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> Option #1: traditional kihon and kata training has nothing whatsoever to do with how a successful karate fighter fights any more than algebra does, and Lyoto Machida, Francisco Filho, and Midori Kenji are all scammers teaching irrelevant algebra-like drills to students, just to make themselves rich.  What they are training their students is not "real martial arts training."  Just a scam.
> 
> Option #2: traditional kihon and kata are part of what makes a karate fighter fight like a karate fighter instead of a boxer, and Lyoto Machida, Francisco Filho, and Midori Kenji are teaching people the way they learned, because it is part of what made them into what they are.  There is more than one flavor of "real martial arts training."
> 
> I know which I believe.


You can couple pointless ritual with actual training you know. I'm sure the ritual..kata..gi..bowing..calling your teacher some name like master or sensei..is what sells a lot of people. The parsley on the side of the plate ain't the meal, but it helps the meal presentation.


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 13, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Sure. You could conceivably create a form or kata built of usable flowing combos. To my knowledge no such form or kata exists within TMA.



You've never heard of Enshin karate, or the Sabaki challenge they hosted?


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Sep 13, 2019)

skribs said:


> The meditation and respect I've learned at my dojang has gotten me out of several fights since I started TKD. I find that in all practicality, it's been the most useful self defense component of my curriculum.



It isnt of a direct primary interest or focus of mine, so they are pretty much worthless to me.   (which is why i express i disinterest and dismay in most traditional styles as they put a focus on that more than the reverse usually)

And it might be, but going by the proverb of: "better to have it than not need it" it would be better to have that and not need it.  Now after my primary focus is complete then yes, all the meditation ones etc are fine to me.   

Oh plus some people mis sell the spiritual side of martial arts as being combative when they arent.   Not directly anyway, and that isnt of any importance to the non spiritual person anyway.   (its not like you an fill out a life insurance document via interpretive dance is it?)

That is just a elaboration of my view on it.   


Also the irony is i used something from a TKD form once in light free sparring and i hurt myself more than i hurt the other person.   It was a knife hand step back to the foot.   Also i don't really know the point in the TKD forms, granted not asked about 4 directional punch/block but from me thinking about it i came to my own conclusion, and the move i used was from a version of that.   (trying not to dox myself so i have to keep the sub orginsiation out as its a semi small sub group of ITF)

And i do know the 4 directional punch and block, i have done it enough times i just need a refresher more than anything.     Its not really directly applicable to fighting.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Sep 13, 2019)

Headhunter said:


> Since you're more interested in fighting does that mean you're now training?



Since it keeps getting asked:

I stated i was waiting on a boxing session, and i have done one within 4 weeks of this date.     And they are going to be done when time and money allows for both myself and the boxing teacher.     Since its 1:1 sessions, it really is as and when time and money allows. 

And proper boxing is my focus not boxerise.    @skribs

and i was always interested in fighting, i just dont think i have access to a TMA style which really fits my priorities that well.  I also plan on un conditioning my hands to the typical boxers fist by doing some things with thinner gloves at home. 

To be fair boxing doesnt really fit it fully that well as its not like  grappling doesnt exist or kicks or elbows etc.   could do worse though.


----------



## skribs (Sep 13, 2019)

Rat said:


> It isnt of a direct primary interest or focus of mine, so they are pretty much worthless to me.



If avoiding fights isn't important to you, then it's probably good you're not in a martial arts class.

Edit:  I see you've finally taken a class.  I'm hopeful that your boxing instructor can help instill a sense of respect and humility in you.


----------



## skribs (Sep 13, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> The third objection is about the repetitive nature, having to move exactly like others (sometimes at the same time), etc. And this is another one I somewhat agree with. But that's not an issue with the form. Each instructor has to decide what makes an acceptable variation in the form. They could be very restrictive, or allow a wide range of variance. The form doesn't dictate that.



I think the attention to detail is an important aspect of the forms in Taekwondo.  The specifics are to reinforce the mechanics and concepts taught by the form.  The requirement to match exactly means you must spend time training.

Even if it's not a 1:1 for fighting capability, training exaggerated stances and motions helps build muscle memory.  People tend to shorten up their techniques in an actual fight, so the idea is that you train for those details in your forms, and then in a real situation it comes out in a more practical manner.


----------



## Headhunter (Sep 13, 2019)

Rat said:


> Since it keeps getting asked:
> 
> I stated i was waiting on a boxing session, and i have done one within 4 weeks of this date.     And they are going to be done when time and money allows for both myself and the boxing teacher.     Since its 1:1 sessions, it really is as and when time and money allows.
> 
> ...


So basically that's a no then?


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Sep 13, 2019)

skribs said:


> If avoiding fights isn't important to you, then it's probably good you're not in a martial arts class.



De escalation is not commonly taught.   Nor is it fully viable in all situations.   It is important for self defence, but i haven't used that term for why i want to seek martial arts, since i came to the conclusion saying combat is better.    (which is uncommon in martial arts to learn BTW, as they don't teach you scaling force usually, de escalation etc, you need to seek out specilist instruction or a uncommon type of school)

And the moral and judicial argument and elaboration of above is probably outside the scope of this thread as this is strictly about forms.   Just in case what i stated looks like a borderline ToS break, all i will say is, so long as you have lawful authority to use violence in that situation its up to your own moral judgement if you do or not.   (which knowing my typex, it looked greyzone to endorsing unlawful violence. )

And for self defence the first is paramount but read above.   Both about my view on it and how the category of martial arts school, usually doesn't teach self defence skills to you.   Wouldn't call it common, wouldn't call it rare, so its uncommom if they do.      How ever there are some specialist schools which fall outside the martial art category i would say, which do teach you these skills.  

I think Ramsey Dewy said something like(in relation to RBSD i think or bad MA):"they teach you how to face violence with wimpy violence"

edit: Martial arts and combat sports also help people with aggression, anger and violence issues also.     varying amounts but it gives them a positive place to release it and help control it.


----------



## Headhunter (Sep 13, 2019)

Rat said:


> De escalation is not commonly taught.   Nor is it fully viable in all situations.   It is important for self defence, but i haven't used that term for why i want to seek martial arts, since i came to the conclusion saying combat is better.    (which is uncommon in martial arts to learn BTW, as they don't teach you scaling force usually, de escalation etc, you need to seek out specilist instruction or a uncommon type of school)
> 
> And the moral and judicial argument and elaboration of above is probably outside the scope of this thread as this is strictly about forms.   Just in case what i stated looks like a borderline ToS break, all i will say is, so long as you have lawful authority to use violence in that situation its up to your own moral judgement if you do or not.   (which knowing my typex, it looked greyzone to endorsing unlawful violence. )
> 
> ...


Look man I have nothing against you you seem a nice enough guy. but you don't half talk nonsense.

You don't know what's commonly taught in training sessions because you don't train.

How can you say what's commonly taught and what's not taught in martial art classes when you don't train martial arts?

I've been in martial art clubs since I was 8 years old and I've seen deescalation taught in plenty of schools all over the world I've it in karate clubs and other traditional styles I've even seen the basics taught in some sporting clubs. So yes it is commonly taught.

The reason myself and others are asking if your training is because you are constantly posting stuff like you're an expert in it. Your basing your opinions as facts even though you have 0 proof or experience to back it up.

All your "facts" are based on articles you've read. When I post opinions they're based on years of training not what Ramsey dewy wrote in an article. I mean when I post stuff I could be wrong I have been plenty of times and no doubt I will be again. But I've been in the gyms and put in the hours and seen and done things that can back up my own opinions and beliefs 

If you don't want to train then there's no shame in that I'm not judging you for it. It's not for everyone but simply you're acting like you're an expert on these subjects and talking like you have all this knowledge and talking down on certain areas when you don't have the experience to base the opinions on.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 13, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Sounds good, doesn't check out.
> 
> It's patently harder to teach a karate guy to box than an untrained guy, for instance. The karate guy will punch and move karate style because muscle memory. The untrained guy will have no such hurdle.


I've seen this go in both directions. Someone who is singularly ungifted (not naturally athletic, etc.) who has developed good skill in another art is usually easier to teach new movement than a similarly ungifted person who has no training, as the past training (even if it's dance) improves their awareness of their body and ability to control it. Someone who is gifted is usually easier to work with from scratch.

Will some parts be harder to teach to someone with past training? Absolutely. Give me the average well-trained Shotokan Karateka, and I'll struggle for years with their propensity for hard angles, when our movement needs a circular (and line-and-circle) approach.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 13, 2019)

skribs said:


> I think the attention to detail is an important aspect of the forms in Taekwondo.  The specifics are to reinforce the mechanics and concepts taught by the form.  The requirement to match exactly means you must spend time training.
> 
> Even if it's not a 1:1 for fighting capability, training exaggerated stances and motions helps build muscle memory.  People tend to shorten up their techniques in an actual fight, so the idea is that you train for those details in your forms, and then in a real situation it comes out in a more practical manner.


I agree there's a benefit to exactness. I don't personally think that benefit extends to fighting application, but I've too little experience with traditional forms practice outside NGA to make a strong case.


----------



## skribs (Sep 13, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I agree there's a benefit to exactness. I don't personally think that benefit extends to fighting application, but I've too little experience with traditional forms practice outside NGA to make a strong case.



To me, the exactness is more about following the teachings of the Master.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 13, 2019)

skribs said:


> To me, the exactness is more about following the teachings of the Master.


And it helps build a discipline (skill) of working with detail. Some of us don't have that naturally, and really benefit from spending some time focusing there.


----------



## CB Jones (Sep 13, 2019)

Martial D said:


> The parsley on the side of the plate ain't the meal, but it helps the meal presentation.



Incorrect.

Parsley is part of the meal.

It helps with digestion, reduces gas and bloating, reduce water retention, and freshens your breath.  It is intended to be ate at the end of the meal.

So just because someone might not understand something's purpose that does not mean its purpose does not exist.


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 13, 2019)

CB Jones said:


> Incorrect.
> 
> Parsley is part of the meal.
> 
> ...



Not to mention, I think that Filho and Machida know enough about fight training to know the difference between (1) ritual associated with training (like bowing and mokuso) and (2) a component of the training itself. Both treat kihon and kata as a component of training when they train people.

Personally, while part of what I enjoy about forms is more ritual performance (like haka in rugby), I definitely think forms training made me move the way I do when I spar. That characteristic mechanic that karate folks have, with a straighter back and lower shoulders and the like? I think kihon and kata causes that. It doesn't come out of nowhere.


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 13, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I agree there's a benefit to exactness. I don't personally think that benefit extends to fighting application, but I've too little experience with traditional forms practice outside NGA to make a strong case.


I think it does extend to fighting application.

In forms practice (and any foundational work), you practice to be as exact as you can be, because that is where the technique is most effective.  In the chaos of a fight, your technique will not be perfect, it will break down.  But the more perfect the practice is, the better the technique will hold up in the chaos of a fight, and the more effective it will be.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Sep 13, 2019)

Rat said:


> De escalation is not commonly taught.   Nor is it fully viable in all situations.   It is important for self defence, but i haven't used that term for why i want to seek martial arts, since i came to the conclusion saying combat is better.    (which is uncommon in martial arts to learn BTW, as they don't teach you scaling force usually, de escalation etc, you need to seek out specilist instruction or a uncommon type of school)
> 
> And the moral and judicial argument and elaboration of above is probably outside the scope of this thread as this is strictly about forms.   Just in case what i stated looks like a borderline ToS break, all i will say is, so long as you have lawful authority to use violence in that situation its up to your own moral judgement if you do or not.   (which knowing my typex, it looked greyzone to endorsing unlawful violence. )
> 
> ...


All but one of the schools ove trained at has spent time focusing on de escalation and the other 'soft skills'. The one that didn't, was a competition art, where most of the people there competed, so that was their main focus.

So from my own experience it's pretty common.


----------



## Buka (Sep 13, 2019)

I'm an Emancipation Proclamation guy. I am so dead set against the whole Master term and concept in Martial Arts it makes my head hurt.


----------



## skribs (Sep 13, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> I think it does extend to fighting application.
> 
> In forms practice (and any foundational work), you practice to be as exact as you can be, because that is where the technique is most effective.  In the chaos of a fight, your technique will not be perfect, it will break down.  But the more perfect the practice is, the better the technique will hold up in the chaos of a fight, and the more effective it will be.



This is what my Master teaches.  He wants everyone to kick a few feet higher in practice than they need to in sparring, because when you get tired and your kicks get lower, your kicks are at the right height.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Sep 13, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> All but one of the schools ove trained at has spent time focusing on de escalation and the other 'soft skills'. The one that didn't, was a competition art, where most of the people there competed, so that was their main focus.
> 
> So from my own experience it's pretty common.



Specialist schools or not?   (just curious)

i haven't seen it and 3 call themselves martial arts.     As i was going to write, it was the case of it not being that common a while ago, so its probably changed as there is little excuse for it now days.   And all 3 used self defence somewhere in their advertisements.    (and if they didn't teach it to beginners thats just shame on them in my view)

Anyway, thats slightly off point for the thread, pahaha.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Sep 13, 2019)

Rat said:


> Specialist schools or not?   (just curious)
> 
> i haven't seen it and 3 call themselves martial arts.     As i was going to write, it was the case of it not being that common a while ago, so its probably changed as there is little excuse for it now days.   And all 3 used self defence somewhere in their advertisements.    (and if they didn't teach it to beginners thats just shame on them in my view)
> 
> Anyway, thats slightly off point for the thread, pahaha.


Nope, none are specialist. One advertised self-defense, but that was it. 
I think part of it might be how much time you spent in the school. If you spend a month there, or less, you might not see it. Not because it's not important, but either a: bad luck on the days you went, or b: they teach physical stuff first because that's what people are looking to learn. If you sign up for a martial art, and spend half the class learning about spatial awareness or "how to talk good", you're probably not going to come back. If you've been there for a bit, have learned the basics and had little smidgens of it added in, you might be more receptive to learning it.


----------



## Headhunter (Sep 13, 2019)

Rat said:


> Specialist schools or not?   (just curious)
> 
> i haven't seen it and 3 call themselves martial arts.     As i was going to write, it was the case of it not being that common a while ago, so its probably changed as there is little excuse for it now days.   And all 3 used self defence somewhere in their advertisements.    (and if they didn't teach it to beginners thats just shame on them in my view)
> 
> Anyway, thats slightly off point for the thread, pahaha.


Wrong again. It was taught to me in a number of different places including a boxing gym I trained at over 30 years ago


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 13, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> I think it does extend to fighting application.
> 
> In forms practice (and any foundational work), you practice to be as exact as you can be, because that is where the technique is most effective.  In the chaos of a fight, your technique will not be perfect, it will break down.  But the more perfect the practice is, the better the technique will hold up in the chaos of a fight, and the more effective it will be.


While I don't entirely agree, there's a good concept at work there. And if I think hard enough, I'll probably find something in my own training that follows that concept.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 13, 2019)

Martial D said:


> It's patently harder to teach a karate guy to box than an untrained guy, for instance. The karate guy will punch and move karate style because muscle memory.


But if the karate guy wants to learn how to box then that's the natural course of learning.  I've seen it go the other way around where boxers came to my school and we tried to get them to learn how to relax and move in a way that would allow them to use big punches and kicks.   They always had a hard time trying to relax and trying not to move as a boxer.  If they really want to learn kung fu then that's the natural way of learning.  

And it's not so much as "unlearning" as it is "just learning something new."  I don't "unlearn" how to play the piano when I'm "leaning" how to play the guitar.  I'm just learning how to do something new and use my fingers in a new way.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 13, 2019)

Martial D said:


> The untrained guy will have no such hurdle.


The untrained guy may not have the hurdle of breaking previous punching methods.  The trained guy has a better understanding of punching and how to do it correctly, even if he has to learn how to do it a different way.  A trained guy would already have a better understanding of fist structure and driving power.  He may also have a better understanding of how to evade and set up attacks.  An untrained guy is going to be lost in that area.  

Just like people who know how to spar always look like they know what they are doing even if they are training  a different system.  Those who are untrained in sparring always look like they shouldn't be doing. 
No matter what system I train in.  I will never have this hurdle.  Untrained people almost always do.  A trained person looks at this and already knows how it's going to turn out before punches are even thrown.






This guy probably never did any realistic sparring in his life.  This one hurdle that I'm glad I got over when I was 7 and taking karate.  If my hurdle is just learning how to punch in a different way then I'm fine with that.  Once I get over that hurdle my previous experience will allow me to progress at a much faster pace than someone who is coming without any experience including the basic understanding of incoming punches.


----------



## Martial D (Sep 13, 2019)

CB Jones said:


> Incorrect.
> 
> Parsley is part of the meal.
> 
> ...


Dude. I train every day. I've spent years doing forms in cma. Aren't you a martial arts soccer dad? Lol


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 13, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Dude. I train every day. I've spent years doing forms in cma. Aren't you a martial arts soccer dad? Lol


 So you erased "go cheerlead your son" and you replaced it with "aren't you a martial arts soccer dad? Lol". Either way, rude, tasteless, and unproductive.


----------



## Martial D (Sep 13, 2019)

Further, I do understand the purpose of forms and kata. To convolute and extend training times to keep the sensei dollars rolling in. As it has been for generations now.

Why teach in a week what they will pay you 200 bucks a month for a year to learn right?


----------



## Martial D (Sep 13, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> So you erased "go cheerlead your son" and you replaced it with "aren't you a martial arts soccer dad? Lol". Either way, rude, tasteless, and unproductive.


So some dude that doesn't train in anything makes some smug remark that the guy that came up in a form heavy ma 'doesnt understand their purpose' because he doesn't like me calling ******** on his sons hobby.

And some sensitive Nancy offers me a dislike and a scolding for it.

Am I supposed to care?


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 13, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> This is actually a common perspective of many people who take a traditional martial art, or just martial arts in general.  They don't care as much about the fighting as they do about the exercise and staying fit.



While true, the danger is in people who think that the performance of pretty forms translates into fighting ability.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 13, 2019)

Rat said:


> De escalation is not commonly taught. Nor is it fully viable in all situations.


 De escalation techniques are big money.  Law enforcement gets training in that all the time, because shooting up the place should never be the only option.

De escalation is viable in all situations. Even in fighting.  Here's an example





When anyone comes in to try to break up a fight they are using  de-escalation techniques.  Here's another example,





De-escalation should always be used when possible.  Because it greatly reduces your risks.  Here are some quotes from the Art of war that follow along those lines.


The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.
Supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.
If we do not wish to fight, we can prevent the enemy from engaging us even though the lines of our encampment be merely traced out on the ground. All we need to do is to throw something odd and unaccountable in his way.
All three are shown in this video.  People expect certain reactions but when they get something that's not what they are expecting then they really don't know how to handle it.





De-escalation isn't about being afraid, it's about taking control of a hostile situation by reducing your attacker's desire and will to fight you or someone else.  There are many ways to accomplish this.

The point of de-escalation isn't about not getting hit or attack.  If that's why a person uses it then they wont be successful. But if the person understands that it's about taking control of a hostile situation, he or she will be more successful with it.


----------



## CB Jones (Sep 13, 2019)

Martial D said:


> makes some smug remark



Wasnt intended to be smug.

Just that often times we miss the actual intent or purpose of something...but that does not mean the intent or purpose does not exist.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 13, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> While true, the danger is in people who think that the performance of pretty forms translates into fighting ability.


That's definitely the risk, especially when the school helps create that image. But it looks like it's been getting better.  MMA help set the standard of what it looks like to train to fight.  Gives people a good reference for comparison.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 13, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> That's definitely the risk, especially when the school helps create that image. But it looks like it's been getting better.  MMA help set the standard of what it looks like to train to fight.  Gives people a good reference for comparison.


Ignore the bob cat.  It's from a different response I was typing right before the power went off.


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 14, 2019)

Martial D said:


> So some dude that doesn't train in anything makes some smug remark that the guy that came up in a form heavy ma 'doesnt understand their purpose' because he doesn't like me calling ******** on his sons hobby.
> 
> And some sensitive Nancy offers me a dislike and a scolding for it.
> 
> Am I supposed to care?



So to be clear, when someone says your post was rude and unproductive, you swear about somebody else's children and also call someone you don't know a Nancy?

If you want to convince people on an internet forum that your opinions have value, this is an interesting strategy.

For the record, there's a big difference between saying "the forms training in my old style had no value for me" and "no style's forms training could have any value for anyone."


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 14, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> Ignore the bob cat.  It's from a different response I was typing right before the power went off.


This is bad advice. Never ignore the bobcat. They're stealthy predators.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 14, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Further, I do understand the purpose of forms and kata. To convolute and extend training times to keep the sensei dollars rolling in. As it has been for generations now.
> 
> Why teach in a week what they will pay you 200 bucks a month for a year to learn right?


Again, a blanket statement. I challenge you to make that make ANY sense regarding my use of forms, for instance.

Forms have many uses. I know pretty much nothing of your training, so I can't say whether the forms were used well or not with you. I do know that you entirely dismiss them - as a whole - on arguments that don't hold universally true. And often your argument is along the lines of "There are other ways to do that", which is fine, but is also true of literally every drill and training exercise ever used.

Forms can be used to extend training times, keep people dangling between ranks, etc. But where I've seen them, the instructors had real purpose in their use, evident in the way they practiced them, themselves.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 14, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> This is bad advice. Never ignore the bobcat. They're stealthy predators.


Sage advice.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 14, 2019)

REMINDER TO ALL POSTERS:

Insults and baiting are contrary to the guidelines you agreed to when you registered. Continued action along this course may result in thread locking, warnings, and/or points.

-------------
*Gerry Seymour*
Martial Talk Moderator
@gpseymour


----------



## pdg (Sep 14, 2019)

Rat said:


> Also the irony is i used something from a TKD form once in light free sparring and i hurt myself more than i hurt the other person. It was a knife hand step back to the foot. Also i don't really know the point in the TKD forms, granted not asked about 4 directional punch/block but from me thinking about it i came to my own conclusion, and the move i used was from a version of that. (trying not to dox myself so i have to keep the sub orginsiation out as its a semi small sub group of ITF)
> 
> And i do know the 4 directional punch and block, i have done it enough times i just need a refresher more than anything. Its not really directly applicable to fighting.



Yeah, that sounds like you tried to use a knife hand low block...

It's a valid technique once you know how and where to apply it. And how to shape your hand (protip, it's not dead straight).

The 4 direction punch and 4 direction block exercises aren't considered patterns (forms/kata/whatever), they're just introductory exercises to familiarise yourself with the most basic of movements.

You saying you don't know the point in the forms is mostly down to you having only done a few lessons - no white to yellow belt is going to have an in depth discussion as to "the point".


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 14, 2019)

pdg said:


> It's a valid technique once you know how and where to apply it.


I went through a lot of this type of learning.  I knew the motions of the technique but didn't know how, where, and when to apply it.. It took quite a bit of trial and effort to figure it out. 

The biggest thing I notice is that the "demo" of what a technique is used for isn't always the most practical use for that technique.  I'm not sure how that came to be.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Sep 14, 2019)

pdg said:


> Yeah, that sounds like you tried to use a knife hand low block...



i did and i aint doing that again.  It hurt like hell.   

It was taught as part of the form in the style i went to though as a counter kick action.    If i needed any neuances etc to do it right, then it should have been taught upon introduction to the knife hand to the foot, not at a later date, that is just stupid to me.    Why introduce someone to a technique and not teach them how to do it right?

It how ever was not into another TKD style i tried, the former being a ITF offshoot.  but then the latter style had me do the reset to belt punch each time. 

As above i would rather practical application for the pattern be taught there and then or else there is no point, whats the point if you learn it 4 belts away? you are just doing it wrong for those 4 belts and if you ever need it you dont have it.    I think there was a case in American kempo where there was a technique in a form that they learnt two belts from learning the form with it in, thats just silly.  By that i meant the form was first then learning the technique in it. 

i would call it a introductory pattern, as it is listed under patterns.  And that is basically the conclusion i came to as to why it exists.        you could also just get me to walk forwards and backwards and not bother with a pattern for it... (or the official/formal naming of it)

Obviously i lean towards not liking patterns, i understand their point etc they just have to be done right and introduced right, plenty of less savory places have used belts to milk people out of money.  That doesnt mean i hate them, i just dont like them.    
Also skimming back up, you know someone is going to want to try all this in actual situations so its probably better to teach them how to not hurt themselves doing it ASAP.  

Edit: And yes, some of these are probably mitigated if i got a belt or something in one of the styles.    I might give it another shot at a later date, that is TKD.  


Also @JowGaWolf    My point wasnt that it doesn't work, but rather its not appropriate in some situations, if someones kicked in your door, you are probably going to want to meet them with force 9/10 times rather than try to talk them out of not doing what ever they were planning on doing after they kicked your door in.    Or if someone refused to leave your property your going to have to move them. (or call the police to remove them)


----------



## pdg (Sep 14, 2019)

@Rat - well there's the problem really.

You want everything right now and don't seem at all prepared to do any work toward it. By not bothering to do more than a few lessons you won't learn much of any use at all.

It's the same in almost anything I can think of - a few introductory classes give you a couple of basics that could be developed into something useful later, but in isolation aren't much good.

You can stop/deflect a kick with a knife hand 'block', but the instructors are using the exercise to get you to move the correct foot rather than instant application.

(Btw, the 4 direction exercises, all 3 of them, aren't listed under patterns - they're called fundamental exercises...)


----------



## skribs (Sep 14, 2019)

Rat said:


> i did and i aint doing that again.  It hurt like hell.
> 
> It was taught as part of the form in the style i went to though as a counter kick action.    If i needed any neuances etc to do it right, then it should have been taught upon introduction to the knife hand to the foot, not at a later date, that is just stupid to me.    Why introduce someone to a technique and not teach them how to do it right?
> 
> ...



This is why I've told you in numerous posts you have to train.  You can't learn all of the nuances as a white belt.  It's impossible.  There is so much information a martial art can give you, you can't learn it in one class.  I've been taking Taekwondo for over 10 years, I've been putting in 15+ hour weeks at the dojang for 5 of those years, and I am *still* learning things.

You can't take a month of classes and know all of the stuff you need to know.  It takes time to learn everything, it takes time to train.

You want everything now, right in front of you.  You want to know how to fight after just a few classes.  It's not going to happen.  It takes years and years of training in any art to develop that proficiency.  It takes experience to be able to read other people, it takes sparring and drills to know your timing and distance, and it takes practice with the techniques to hone them into something correct.

Most white belts don't do techniques correctly.  They have poor timing, distancing, angles.  They have sloppy technique that makes them more likely to hurt themselves.  They kick roundhouse kicks with the side of their foot, they kick with their toes, they have loose fists, all sorts of bad habits that get weeded out over years and years of practice.  A white belt should never be going full force on a pad or another person, because they are more likely to hurt themselves.  A white belt needs the patience to work on their techniques before moving on.

The white belt curriculum teaches you the foundational skills you will need.  As you advance through the ranks, you will learn more about those skills:

How to do them properly
How to add in speed and power
Get rid of bad habits
How to do them in combination with each other
How to apply them in different scenarios
This takes time, and it doesn't come all at once.  A white belt is already "drinking from a firehose" in terms of how much info we throw at you.  There's no way you can learn this all at once.  It's just like language.  You don't expect a three year old who can barely say "I'm hungwy, I want bweakfast" to be able to read Shakespear.  It takes time to learn the spelling, pronunciation, and meaning of the words, it takes time to learn grammar and sentence structure, and to be able to piece more and more complicated concepts together into a story.

You've been on this forum over a year now.  If you would have kept up with the classes when you started here, like we recommended, you would be well on your way to that journey.  You would have learned a lot more about the techniques you're learning.  It's not about keeping it secret from you, it's not about milking money from you.  It's about teaching you things when you're ready for them, instead of overloading you with everything at the start.  

I mean, it sucks that you got hurt.  But it's not because you were taught wrong, it's not because the curriculum is bad.  It's because you tried to get ahead of yourself instead of trusting the lesson plan.


----------



## skribs (Sep 14, 2019)

pdg said:


> @Rat - well there's the problem really.
> 
> You want everything right now and don't seem at all prepared to do any work toward it. By not bothering to do more than a few lessons you won't learn much of any use at all.
> 
> ...



Whether they're "exercises" or "patterns" is largely school-specific, in my understanding.  (Unless you trained at the same school).

As I hinted at in my post above, you learn more about the blocks in drills and training.  A low knife-hand block (which isn't in any of our forms until later on, we use a low closed-fist block in our basic and intermediate patterns) can cause you to be injured in a variety of ways:

If your hand is loose
If you catch the shin instead of the thigh
If you hit with your fingers instead of your wrist/blade
Like you said, pdg, it takes time.  Which he didn't want to spend, and now he's a year behind where he could have been.


----------



## pdg (Sep 14, 2019)

skribs said:


> Whether they're "exercises" or "patterns" is largely school-specific, in my understanding. (Unless you trained at the same school).



It's how they're listed in the encyclopedia of taekwon-do, so not school specific at all.

If you're ITF, that's how they are.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Sep 14, 2019)

pdg said:


> You want everything right now and don't seem at all prepared to do any work toward it. By not bothering to do more than a few lessons you won't learn much of any use at all.



Thats not the case, i haven't really found a style which fits me due to lack of accessibility to them.   i have also done TKD for 1-2 (maybe 3) years on and off, earlier i did more big bulks of it than i did later or it was usually a bulk sessions time off, bulk etc.          I just don't really like the belt system to begin with and all of that.    

Fundamentally speaking, i don't think the training system for TKD fits for someone focused on learning to fight 9/10 times.  And in addition to that, i still stand by you learning any technique done in your form for your belt level, if you don't learn it, it shouldn't be in your belt, seems like wasted space.   

And if you compare training time and where people are on average between styles and systems where does TKD sit with others for fighting on average?   You cant really look from the top of it as the validity for it as a begginer, if it takes 4 years to get sufficient skills to fight someone and thats your focus and you need it before the 4 years are up? pretty much screwed, where as other places might give you it in a quicker time frame so mitigate that issue.     Taking into account you are going to have to supplement some of these with some grappling component to account for that sector and cost in both hours and money to learn that to a sufficient degree and how well it will blend etc.   


Also i might give it another shot, me falling out of doing is a mix of a disdain with the style and its training method and personal reasons, probably going to do some boxing sessions to get fundamentals in that then go back to it so i at least have a good standard of punching and the rest of the things boxing teaches.     What would honestly be enough time to scout out TKD to see what it offers? at what approx belt rank would it be where i get to see the fundamental full picture?




skribs said:


> I mean, it sucks that you got hurt. But it's not because you were taught wrong, it's not because the curriculum is bad. It's because you tried to get ahead of yourself instead of trusting the lesson plan.



i would state, it was me trying to apply a TKD technique in a light sparring match, which you should expect anyone who takes it serious to try to do.  Like you would expect someone who does boxing to try and weave, hook uppercut etc if they spar someone.   

     I do honestly think the training in TKD takes too long for what it delivers.   I dont want to have to give 4 years of time to get the fundamentals down, this isnt a degree of mastery it is the fundamentals of how to fight someone else.  Granted you cant learn it over night, but there is a clear disparity in training regimes as people seems to learn it quicker in some places than others on average.   (taking into account time dumped in the styles and personal intelligence etc)

I have also covered both of these above in some capacity as i have combined the responses.  Im not entirely sure if this is still ontopic for this thread as its more issues with one style more than forms as a whole.  


Oh and the amount of offshoots for TKD annoys me.  It gets confusing after a while.


----------



## Headhunter (Sep 14, 2019)

Rat said:


> i would state, it was me trying to apply a TKD technique in a light sparring match, which you should expect anyone who takes it serious to try to do.  Like you would expect someone who does boxing to try and weave, hook uppercut etc if they spar someone.


Yeah but that's the thing you didn't take it serious...you did it on and off for 1-2 years your words. That's not taking it serious so of course you haven't got the technique worked properly because you never put the work in for it


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Sep 14, 2019)

Rat said:


> i did and i aint doing that again.  It hurt like hell.
> 
> It was taught as part of the form in the style i went to though as a counter kick action.    If i needed any neuances etc to do it right, then it should have been taught upon introduction to the knife hand to the foot, not at a later date, that is just stupid to me.    Why introduce someone to a technique and not teach them how to do it right?
> 
> ...


I disagree with just about every sentence in this, and dont have the energy to explain why.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Sep 14, 2019)

Rat said:


> Thats not the case, i haven't really found a style which fits me due to lack of accessibility to them.   i have also done TKD for 1-2 (maybe 3) years on and off, earlier i did more big bulks of it than i did later or it was usually a bulk sessions time off, bulk etc.          I just don't really like the belt system to begin with and all of that.
> 
> Fundamentally speaking, i don't think the training system for TKD fits for someone focused on learning to fight 9/10 times.  And in addition to that, i still stand by you learning any technique done in your form for your belt level, if you don't learn it, it shouldn't be in your belt, seems like wasted space.
> 
> ...


How old were you when you trained tkd for 1-3 years? Reason i ask is, like i said in another thread recently, theres a difference between training at 4-7 years old vs 10-12 vs 15-18 vs. 20s vs. Above.

And the amount of detail a 4 year old is taught is different than a 15 year old, since at 4 you're still learning basic motor skills.


----------



## pdg (Sep 14, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> How old were you when you trained tkd for 1-3 years?



Well, middle of last year there was this thread, about different punches.

@Rat said he'd studied TKD, so I said:



pdg said:


> So, for how long did you do TKD?



And what was the reply?



Rat said:


> I think i have around 10-50 hours in one style and 3 in another.  I dont keep a track record, but i am still a beginner in it and its made harder by me originally doing it twice a week to doing it once, month wise i think it was closer to a year. Not all at once either, i had periods of leave during this.



So, 1 to 2 years, maybe 3?

Okie dokie.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 14, 2019)

Rat said:


> It was taught as part of the form in the style i went to though as a counter kick action.


Unfortunately there are a lot of schools that teach this as an application.   For me personally I wouldn't use a knife hand against a kick or foot.  Shin,leg, and ankle is going to beat-beat up my hand every time.  I like to use my knife hand on things that don't move so much.  This make more sense to me for knife hands.





This downward strike using the knife hand is very risky as it's shown.  There is a high probability that the knife hand is going to strike the top of the shin like a chop and the person will end up damaging their hand.  I'm not sure why people teach it like that.  Their is a way to strike the side of a kick with the hand but this isn't it.


----------



## pdg (Sep 14, 2019)

Oh, and then:



Rat said:


> Im not any belt, school didnt hand out white belts and i didnt grade when i went.  I have my reservations about doing that if i did/do go back anyway.





pdg said:


> Reservations about doing what, grading?
> 
> If you don't, then you're stuck on white belt material...





So yeah, 1-3 years training - either he lied then or he's lying now (or is counting 2.5 years sitting on the sofa between lessons as training).

Passing judgement on stuff used as introductory basics when he's not got past the introduction and complaining he's not been shown enough in his TEN WHOLE HOURS (possibly, maybe less).

An utter Walt of the highest level.


----------



## pdg (Sep 14, 2019)

Let this be a lesson.

Stuff you say on the internet stays on the internet (even if you delete it, there are ways of finding it for those with an inkling).

There will always be some complete barsteward ready and waiting to quote you.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 14, 2019)

Rat said:


> if someones kicked in your door, you are probably going to want to meet them with force 9/10 times rather than try to talk them out of not doing what ever they were planning on doing after they kicked your door in.


 This depends on where I am in my house and the advantage that the person has over me after kicking my door down.  If I'm caught in a bad situation with a gun pointed at me or my family then I'm not going to try to rush the guy.  I'm going to use other methods even if it's to de-escalate the situation just enough to give me an open line of attack with minimum injury.   I'm more likely to attack back if I have the upper hand.  The reason I say this is because kicking down doors sounds like a home invasion scenario.

Here's a couple of examples:
Closing the door was the better choice.  Not even sure if it was locked.  But by closing it, it presents some uncertainty.  Does the home owner have a gun and is waiting for me to open the door.  It would have been a different outcome had the home owner tried to attack or if the home owner tried to run without closing the door.






Here's another situation that anyone would be screwed with trying to fight back.  That person is already in a bad situation because the criminals are in the house.  No need to make it worst.





So much for "Fighting Back"  We see how well that worked out.





Sometimes all you need is to create some uncertainty in an attacker and use that as part of the de-escalation skill set.  1st the lady says she's calling 911.  Excellent, because it adds some difficulty to what the criminal wants to do.  Try to give them something else to worry about.  The second part was her screaming.   Now she's on the phone with 911, Screaming so people can hear her, which in this case her dogs heard her.  Had she tried to fight back it would have been a different story, probably one where she gets shot.





I don't know about anyone else here, but for me personally.  I'll only fight a physical fight that I can win without great injury and only if I really have to, such as self preservation. Like everything else de-escalation is a timing thing.  And it's necessary to know when to do it and when not to do it.   I think it's important to understand that de-escalation isn't always about convincing someone not to attack.  In all of my conflicts I always tried to increase the aggressors level of uncertainty that things aren't going to turn out how he expected.  I made them calculate if attacking me was worth the effort or risk.   The longer I could pause the attack the better, because the moment I get a clean opening, I just may take it.  But I didn't let them know that.


----------



## Headhunter (Sep 14, 2019)

pdg said:


> Oh, and then:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah I see lots of far fetched explanations and lots of excuses.


----------



## Headhunter (Sep 14, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> How old were you when you trained tkd for 1-3 years? Reason i ask is, like i said in another thread recently, theres a difference between training at 4-7 years old vs 10-12 vs 15-18 vs. 20s vs. Above.
> 
> And the amount of detail a 4 year old is taught is different than a 15 year old, since at 4 you're still learning basic motor skills.


Plus he said he trained on and off. So he didn't even train 1-3 years consistently he probably once every few weeks for about 2 years or something like that


----------



## pdg (Sep 14, 2019)

Headhunter said:


> Yeah I see lots of far fetched explanations and lots of excuses. Anyone who takes that long to talk about their martial art training obviously is self conscious about it



I don't believe it's a case of being self conscious about it personally.

I think it's more a case of blurring the lines between reality and fantasy.

In another thread (which I'll happily find) he goes into detail about his favourite calibre of handgun and which he would choose.

I know roughly where he lives and know that he has (and has had) roughly zero exposure to any sort of handgun so this 'knowledge' can only come from the telly.


----------



## Headhunter (Sep 14, 2019)

I never understand the point of lying over martial arts experience


----------



## Headhunter (Sep 14, 2019)

pdg said:


> I don't believe it's a case of being self conscious about it personally.
> 
> I think it's more a case of blurring the lines between reality and fantasy.
> 
> ...


I think the fact he has to lie means his confidence is very low in himself. I don't go around saying about guns because I know absolutely 0 about guns never even held a real one but I'm happy to admit that and not pretend I know more than I do


----------



## pdg (Sep 14, 2019)

Headhunter said:


> I think the fact he has to lie means his confidence is very low in himself. I don't go around saying about guns because I know absolutely 0 about guns never even held a real one but I'm happy to admit that and not pretend I know more than I do



That's the thing, because you're telling the truth you don't have to keep track of what you've said 

I've said stuff on here before that I now disagree with - opinions can change.

What can't change, without training more, is how long you've trained...


----------



## skribs (Sep 14, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> I disagree with just about every sentence in this, and dont have the energy to explain why.



Please do, for the rest of us.


----------



## skribs (Sep 14, 2019)

pdg said:


> I don't believe it's a case of being self conscious about it personally.
> 
> I think it's more a case of blurring the lines between reality and fantasy.
> 
> ...



My issue is that he passes himself off as an expert based on whatever training he has or hasn't had. He assumes he knows more than the masters because of what he read in an article or saw on TV, instead of their decades of experience fighting and training and teaching.


----------



## jks9199 (Sep 14, 2019)

Folks,
Perhaps we can return to the topic of the utility of training forms?  Debate the post, not the poster.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Sep 14, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> Unfortunately there are a lot of schools that teach this as an application. For me personally I wouldn't use a knife hand against a kick or foot. Shin,leg, and ankle is going to beat-beat up my hand every time. I like to use my knife hand on things that don't move so much. This make more sense to me for knife hands.



Im personally not touching it again for use against the foot, that first experience was enough to nope out of it, then someone elaborated at a later date about breaking fingers etc, safer and easier to just dodge.   That was the contrary to using a knife hand block and not the closed hand one.    

Also you know if in the second vid what they were trying to kick in the counter?    I cant decipher if its meant to me the leg or the groin.


----------



## skribs (Sep 14, 2019)

Rat said:


> Im personally not touching it again for use against the foot, that first experience was enough to nope out of it, then someone elaborated at a later date about breaking fingers etc, safer and easier to just dodge.   That was the contrary to using a knife hand block and not the closed hand one.
> 
> Also you know if in the second vid what they were trying to kick in the counter?    I cant decipher if its meant to me the leg or the groin.



It's not to be used against the foot, but the thigh.  Attack where the leg is moving slow, so you don't take the full force of the kick.

Edit to add: you can use it against the foot if it's not in line with the foot's direction of power.  Don't eat the kick with your hand, but deflect it.  Or block the leg from executing it.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Sep 14, 2019)

skribs said:


> It's not to be used against the foot, but the thigh.  Attack where the leg is moving slow, so you don't take the full force of the kick.
> 
> Edit to add: you can use it against the foot if it's not in line with the foot's direction of power.  Don't eat the kick with your hand, but deflect it.  Or block the leg from executing it.



Wait, do you have a video of it being used like that?   

The angle seems semi wrong from the literal application of the form to the leg for a thigh.    Belay that upon revision i just tried it, you could reach the thigh for the intended scope of it.    at least in some instances, that would explain a decent bit however.


----------



## skribs (Sep 14, 2019)

Rat said:


> Wait, do you have a video of it being used like that?
> 
> The angle seems semi wrong from the literal application of the form to the leg for a thigh.    Belay that upon revision i just tried it, you could reach the thigh for the intended scope of it.    at least in some instances, that would explain a decent bit however.



I can't speak specific to the ITF forms, but a lot of times in KKW forms the application isn't directly tied to the form.  The motions of the form are exaggerated (for various teaching purposes), and then further obfuscated for aesthetic purposes.  What the forms do is build muscle memory so the movements are easier, and the application is easier to learn.

I get that you want the application RIGHT NOW, but even with something more direct like boxing, you have to take time to work on the techniques, and they won't always be used the way you train them when you're just starting.  There are things in the forms I'm finding applications for.  There are other things I don't directly use, but the forms have helped me with (for example, forms which have you balance and perform blocks).  I wouldn't do that in a fight, but the balance, posture, and control are useful.

The forms aren't presented in a way that you would actually use in fighting.  But a lot of the concepts, modified to fit the situation, translate well.  It just takes time and experimentation to figure out how that works.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 14, 2019)

Rat said:


> Thats not the case, i haven't really found a style which fits me due to lack of accessibility to them.   i have also done TKD for 1-2 (maybe 3) years on and off, earlier i did more big bulks of it than i did later or it was usually a bulk sessions time off, bulk etc.          I just don't really like the belt system to begin with and all of that.
> 
> Fundamentally speaking, i don't think the training system for TKD fits for someone focused on learning to fight 9/10 times.  And in addition to that, i still stand by you learning any technique done in your form for your belt level, if you don't learn it, it shouldn't be in your belt, seems like wasted space.
> 
> ...


It takes time to learn to fight, regardless of style. Some styles have a more limited "vocabulary", so can progress faster. Some places offer more intense training and more hours of availability, so progression takes less calendar time.

But it does take MANY hours to develop skill from nothing. If someone already used to scrapping steps in, they might (or might not) have an advantage and be able to progress faster in the early stages of training. When folks say it takes years to learn to fight, this is usually in reference to the typical time commitment of the hobbyist. Some MMA gyms (like where @drop bear trains) offer intensive "first fight prep", which can be just a few months (I think theirs is 12 weeks). But if you look at the hours is requires, it's close to 1-2 years of hobbyist training.

And some people learn slower, especially at the early stages.

As for some things being offered early and taught for use later, that's a valid approach for things the beginner isn't expected to be able to use, but benefit from a long exposure time. You learn parts of them early, develop some good muscle habits, and learn to put them to use once the basic movement is working. In fact, this exists nearly everywhere, but doesn't look the same way. There are always movements where the instructor says, "So, you're going to start this by doing that thing you've been doing for a long time. Except now, instead of X, you're going to do Y." That's essentially the same thing, except there was another use placed on the movement earlier.

But understanding all of this requires some training time. You could learn to punch in a few lessons, if you focus on one or two punches. To learn to punch reasonably well probably requires 20+ hours for many people. To learn to punch a person well takes many more hours. And that's just learning to punch (probably one or two punches, at most). If you want to learn to move, defend, etc., that's going to take more time.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 14, 2019)

Rat said:


> Also you know if in the second vid what they were trying to kick in the counter? I cant decipher if its meant to me the leg or the groin.


Your guess is as good as mine.  To be honest it looks like they are modifying the kick so that the technique will work.  Front kicks don't look "jammed up like that."

Since we have been taking about it, I wonder if that downward knife hand was actually meant to be used against the side of someone's head.  For example, if I were going to try to "tackle" you for the the purpose of taking you down, how realistic would it be to apply that knife hand against the head.

For example, if someone comes in similar to this position.  What's the possibility of being able to land a knife hand to the side of the face, or behind the ear?  When you look at it, change the defender's stance to a TKD stance like in the forms.  Whatever stance that may be.





If  instead of trying to go backwards, go forward into a strong bow.  Would that throw off the distance for the attacker? Would the attacker's face run into your knee?  Or maybe someone is trying to get off the ground and they are close enough knife hand the person.  For example, like after a throw to the ground the opponent tries to get up and their head is in a good position for that downward strike.

I


----------



## skribs (Sep 14, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> As for some things being offered early and taught for use later, that's a valid approach for things the beginner isn't expected to be able to use, but benefit from a long exposure time. You learn parts of them early, develop some good muscle habits, and learn to put them to use once the basic movement is working. In fact, this exists nearly everywhere, but doesn't look the same way. There are always movements where the instructor says, "So, you're going to start this by doing that thing you've been doing for a long time. Except now, instead of X, you're going to do Y." That's essentially the same thing, except there was another use placed on the movement earlier.


This is a very salient point I wanted to highlight.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Sep 14, 2019)

Karate is kata.


----------



## skribs (Sep 14, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Karate is kata.


Care to elaborate?


----------



## Buka (Sep 14, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Karate is kata.



Some Karate yes, some Karate no.

American Karate is Kumite.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Sep 15, 2019)

skribs said:


> Care to elaborate?


Not especially.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Sep 15, 2019)

skribs said:


> Care to elaborate?


Sorry, double post for some reason.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 15, 2019)

One day I gave a CMA form demo on a local TV station. The news report then said to the camera, "Kung Fu is like dancing." After that day, I no longer spent training time on my CMA forms. I then realized that I could spend my training time in a lot of different areas and get more result out of it.


----------



## skribs (Sep 15, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> One day I gave a CMA form demo on a local TV station. The news report then said to the camera, "Kung Fu is like dancing." After that day, I no longer spent training time on my CMA forms.



Why did you let someone else's opinion dictate your training strategy?  Especially the opinion of a reporter?



Bill Mattocks said:


> Not especially.



Then what was the point of even saying that?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 15, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> One day I gave a CMA form demo on a local TV station. The news report then said to the camera, "Kung Fu is like dancing." After that day, I no longer spent training time on my CMA forms. I then realized that I could spend my training time in a lot of different areas and get more result out of it.


 Sometimes you just have to ignore people like that.


----------



## Martial D (Sep 16, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> Sometimes you just have to ignore people like that.


And other times, one can make revelations, or have 'a ha' moments, based on unlikely sources.


----------



## dvcochran (Sep 16, 2019)

CB Jones said:


> Incorrect.
> 
> Parsley is part of the meal.
> 
> ...


Well, I just learned something about parsley. Thanks Mr. Jones.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Sep 16, 2019)

> Then what was the point of even saying that?



I was stating an opinion. I wasn't trying to convince anyone. I've been down that road before. Karate is kata, kata is karate. They are inseparable. In my opinion. You may someday come to that realization yourself. Or not.


----------



## skribs (Sep 16, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I was stating an opinion. I wasn't trying to convince anyone. I've been down that road before. Karate is kata, kata is karate. They are inseparable. In my opinion. You may someday come to that realization yourself. Or not.



I'm not asking for you to justify it.  I'm asking for you to explain what you mean.  I don't even understand what you're trying to say by saying that.

Considering I don't train Karate, and probably never will*, I probably will never come to any realization by myself about it.

*Nothing against Karate, it's just very similar to TKD, which I already train, and if I cross-train it will be something else.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 16, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I was stating an opinion. I wasn't trying to convince anyone. I've been down that road before. Karate is kata, kata is karate. They are inseparable. In my opinion. You may someday come to that realization yourself. Or not.


Okay, but if someone doesn't understand what you mean, why not help them understand the statement?

Frankly, I don't think any art is inseparable from its forms. There are those who disagree with my view (you'd be among them, of course). I just don't think there's anything that is taught via forms that can't be taught via something else. I rather like forms, but don't consider them irreplaceable. I think Shorin-ryu (to grab a style more or less at random) can remain Shorin-ryu without the kata, so long as the same approach to the techniques exists.


----------



## Headhunter (Sep 16, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> One day I gave a CMA form demo on a local TV station. The news report then said to the camera, "Kung Fu is like dancing." After that day, I no longer spent training time on my CMA forms. I then realized that I could spend my training time in a lot of different areas and get more result out of it.


Sooo you based your training on some reporters quote?


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 16, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Okay, but if someone doesn't understand what you mean, why not help them understand the statement?
> 
> Frankly, I don't think any art is inseparable from its forms. There are those who disagree with my view (you'd be among them, of course). I just don't think there's anything that is taught via forms that can't be taught via something else. I rather like forms, but don't consider them irreplaceable. I think Shorin-ryu (to grab a style more or less at random) can remain Shorin-ryu without the kata, so long as the same approach to the techniques exists.



Personally, I see karate as a combination of kihon, kata, and kumite, and I have trouble seeing it as karate training without all three bring present.  You could train to strike like Lyoto Machida without doing kata, sure, but in my mind I wouldn't call that fight training "training in Shotokan karate."

Likewise, I also struggle with the assertion that "karate is kata" because I think it throws kumite (and kihon) by the wayside. If you just did Shotokan's forms in a park like non-combative Tai Chi groups, is that still really Shotokan karate? To me, I'm not sure it is.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 16, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> Personally, I see karate as a combination of kihon, kata, and kumite, and I have trouble seeing it as karate training without all three bring present.  You could train to strike like Lyoto Machida without doing kata, sure, but in my mind I wouldn't call that fight training "training in Shotokan karate."


Some of that comes down to how we define the style. To me, the style is entirely in the end result, not in the training approach. So, if someone can teach the Shotokan movement and strikes without the kata, I'd still consider it Shotokan. I'm okay with the view that without the kata it's an offshoot of Shotokan, though. For comparison, I've changed enough of the Classical forms in NGA (and added kata) that some would say I teach an offshoot of NGA. While I don't say that (I still see it as NGA), I don't have any issue with someone saying it's an offshoot. It's just semantics.


----------



## skribs (Sep 16, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Some of that comes down to how we define the style. To me, the style is entirely in the end result, not in the training approach. So, if someone can teach the Shotokan movement and strikes without the kata, I'd still consider it Shotokan. I'm okay with the view that without the kata it's an offshoot of Shotokan, though. For comparison, I've changed enough of the Classical forms in NGA (and added kata) that some would say I teach an offshoot of NGA. While I don't say that (I still see it as NGA), I don't have any issue with someone saying it's an offshoot. It's just semantics.



To me, it's a mix of both.  How you train, how new students gain knowledge, it's all part of the style.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 16, 2019)

skribs said:


> Why did you let someone else's opinion dictate your training strategy?  Especially the opinion of a reporter?





Headhunter said:


> Sooo you based your training on some reporters quote?


Because I did agree with what that reporter had said.

What's the difference between the following 3 training options?

Option 1: 100% solo form training.
Option 2: 50% solo form training and 50% partner drill training.
Option 3: 100% partner drill training.

To train a good fighter, IMO, 3 > 2 > 1

Example of solo form training:






Example of partner drill training.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 16, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Because I did agree with what that reporter had said.
> 
> What's the difference between the following 3 training options?
> 
> ...


That's pretty binary. If we make a category that forms fit in (that's not only forms), say "solo drills", I think it's easy to make an argument that a % of time spent in solo drills is a beneficial component. That would include heavy bag, shadow boxing, speed bag, forms, line drills, etc.


----------



## skribs (Sep 16, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Because I did agree with what that reporter had said.
> 
> What's the difference between the following 3 training options?
> 
> ...



I'd say it depends on your art.  Striking I'd say it's going to be about 60-40 for solo forms, grappling maybe 30-70.  I don't think anything is 100% either.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 16, 2019)

skribs said:


> I'd say it depends on your art.  Striking I'd say it's going to be about 60-40 for solo forms, grappling maybe 30-70.  I don't think anything is 100% either.


Grappling could be 100% partner work, though I think some of the drills fulfill the same functions as forms do for striking. I can't think of much in the way of solo drill work (other than fitness stuff, and falls training) that was part of my grappling training. Nearly all the solo work was in striking.

And I do think there's questionable value for solo forms in grappling, as it's difficult to mimic the mechanics without the partner. I try to minimize the time spent in class on the one I have - it's really meant mostly for warm-up, remedial movement work, and to have something for solo practice outside class.


----------



## skribs (Sep 16, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Grappling could be 100% partner work, though I think some of the drills fulfill the same functions as forms do for striking. I can't think of much in the way of solo drill work (other than fitness stuff, and falls training) that was part of my grappling training. Nearly all the solo work was in striking.
> 
> And I do think there's questionable value for solo forms in grappling, as it's difficult to mimic the mechanics without the partner. I try to minimize the time spent in class on the one I have - it's really meant mostly for warm-up, remedial movement work, and to have something for solo practice outside class.



Sometimes you have to go over the footwork or the gross hand motion without a partner, so you can drill it a bunch in rapid succession.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 16, 2019)

skribs said:


> Sometimes you have to go over the footwork or the gross hand motion without a partner, so you can drill it a bunch in rapid succession.


Okay, I can buy that. We always used a partner even for that, but I can see the value in working some motions without the partner, too.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 16, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Option 1: 100% solo form training.
> Option 2: 50% solo form training and 50% partner drill training.
> Option 3: 100% partner drill training.
> 
> To train a good fighter, IMO, 3 > 2 > 1


 Option 3 is only true when you have a sparring partner around.

Option 1: 100% Solo form training -  Not real option if you are trying to be a fighter.  That's like saying "Option 1: for being a good swimmer is 100% Swimming movement training, outside of the pool"   This leaves us with #2 and #3.

Option3 2: 50% solo form training and 50% partner drill training.  This is actually what boxers do.
Take a look at videos of people's 1st day at the boxing gym. You'll see things similar to forms training.  Like locks of correction of stance, structures, and lots of practicing the same thing.  





There are tons of solo boxing drills. The only difference is that with forms you are practicing way more techniques than what boxers train.

Option3: 100% partner drill training.  No one does this.  Why?  Because what are you going to do if you don't have a partner to drill with?  Not train?  Of course not.  You are going to work on your solo drills, which is like doing the forms with the exception you pick 1 thing and really drill it to get it right.  Martial art is going to be different because there's a lot  "doing 2 things at once" in martial arts. 


For most people the most difficult thing about martial arts is learning how to move in  different and uncommon ways.  Most adults who take kung fu for the first time look exactly like this. How many techniques do you learn in Martial arts in comparison to boxing?





Most common statements that I've heard from adults is that it's mentally challenging just to get the body to do what you want it to do. Because of the complex movement people are going to spend a lot of time just learning how to get their brain to better communicate with their body.

You won't be good at partner drills if you can't do the movement or if you have bad structure.


----------



## skribs (Sep 16, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Okay, I can buy that. We always used a partner even for that, but I can see the value in working some motions without the partner, too.



You can do more reps without waiting for your partner to stand back up every time. It also lets you isolate a movement (i.e. footwork) wothout worrying about everything else working right.


----------



## skribs (Sep 16, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> Option 3 is only true when you have a sparring partner around.
> 
> Option 1: 100% Solo form training -  Not real option if you are trying to be a fighter.  That's like saying "Option 1: for being a good swimmer is 100% Swimming movement training, outside of the pool"   This leaves us with #2 and #3.
> 
> ...


Option 1 can work if your primary goals are fitness and mental wellness.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 16, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> You won't be good at partner drills if you can't do the movement or if you have bad structure.


1. If you teach the following technique, will you teach the application first, or will you teach the solo form first?
2. If you teach the solo form first, do you think your student can understand what they are doing?
3. What kind of body structure does a student need for this technique?
4. Do you think students can develop a good body structure just from the partner drill?
5. After a student has learned the partner drill, does he still need to learn the solo drill (since solo drill is just partner drill without partner)?

Application training:






Solo form training:


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 16, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> 1. If you teach the following technique, will you teach the application first, or will you teach the solo form first?


When I teach anything in general,  start with the basics.   I don't go straight to applications  if they lack the ability to get the movement of that application correct. Trainers don't even do that in boxing.



Kung Fu Wang said:


> 2. If you teach the solo form first, do you think your student can understand what they are doing?


  Yes. They will understand what they are doing according to their skill level and the skill level of the form.



Kung Fu Wang said:


> What kind of body structure does a student need for this technique?


I don't know the structure of that as I don't run into my opponent like that to trip them.  In my book I wouldn't  recommend doing the technique that way.  If your opponent is quick they can use your forward momentum to counter you..  I'm not guessing on this.  I've actually have done this before. 



Kung Fu Wang said:


> Do you think students can develop a good body structure just from the partner drill?


 Yes.  because that's the foundation for which other skills are built upon.  A weak foundation means that everything else will be weak.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 17, 2019)

skribs said:


> You can do more reps without waiting for your partner to stand back up every time. It also lets you isolate a movement (i.e. footwork) wothout worrying about everything else working right.


It also means everyone is practicing that movement, not half the room. There are some benefits.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 17, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> 1. If you teach the following technique, will you teach the application first, or will you teach the solo form first?
> 2. If you teach the solo form first, do you think your student can understand what they are doing?
> 3. What kind of body structure does a student need for this technique?
> 4. Do you think students can develop a good body structure just from the partner drill?
> ...


I believe it's best to learn the actual technique (what you call the application) first, then the form related to it. (The exception would be where a form contains movement to support multiple techniques - then it's not necessary to learn all of those techniques before the form, though it is probably helpful to know some of them.) My reasoning is that students - especially adults - learn much more quickly with context. Learning a movement out of context at best begets an approximation of what's needed. Learning to use the movement, then using solo form to reinforce it is a more effective sequence, IMO.  That's not to say the form necessarily comes after the technique is learned well, just that they should be introduced to the technique first, so they know what the movements mean.

In some cases, students struggle to do the movement correctly in actual application. Some time spent practicing the movement to engrain some "feel" for it can be helpful. I usually do this by having them repeat the movement at that point in the technique with their partner, but as @skribs points out, there are some advantages to doing this sometimes without a partner.

And the answer to #4, IMO, is no. But just because they don't need to do the solo form, it doesn't necessarily follow that the solo form has no benefit. There are many ways to help develop movement, and I find solo forms work reasonably well, especially for filling those times when the student doesn't have a partner (or maybe just doesn't have a safe place for the partner to fall).


----------



## skribs (Sep 17, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> 1. If you teach the following technique, will you teach the application first, or will you teach the solo form first?
> 2. If you teach the solo form first, do you think your student can understand what they are doing?
> 3. What kind of body structure does a student need for this technique?
> 4. Do you think students can develop a good body structure just from the partner drill?
> 5. After a student has learned the partner drill, does he still need to learn the solo drill (since solo drill is just partner drill without partner)?




In TKD, it's random.  Sometimes it's form first, sometimes application first.  There are movements in our blue belt forms I'm just now finding the application for.  In a lot of cases, we're building muscle memory for techniques that come later, so it's easier to learn the technique when the time comes.
Irrelevant.  You copy the Master.
Stance and posture is very important for TKD solo forms.
It depends on the student.  Some students only work well with others and their forms are sloppy, because they don't really understand what they're supposed to do, and they lack imagination.  Others have a hard time applying on another person, but a very easy time doing the forms.  When they're having trouble with a throw and I tell them "use front stance instead of back stance" they understand and can shift their weight to make the throw happen.
Unless you carry around a partner with you, yes, solo forms are needed to practice.


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 17, 2019)

When I competed in Olympic-style epee fencing, there were three parts to training.

1. Solo drills (footwork drills, blade drills on a training dummy). This is where you improve your form and efficiency and precision.

2. Scripted two-person drills. This is where you learn a particular sequence against a partner to get the feel, the rhythm, and to commit it to muscle memory.

3. Free sparring. This is where you learn to apply what you've learned against a resisting opponent who is trying to apply what they've learned against you.

I know of no competitive fencers who skip the first category, because of its benefit for fast efficient movement. This curriculum had nothing to do with tradition; the first category was part of training simply because it works.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 17, 2019)

That is what happens when you base grappling on kata instead of randori/rolling.

We call it "crappling".


----------



## skribs (Sep 17, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> That is what happens when you base grappling on kata instead of randori/rolling.
> 
> We call it "crappling".



What is this "instead of" you speak of?


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 17, 2019)

skribs said:


> What is this "instead of" you speak of?



There are JJJ and classical schools that don't do any sparring at all. What you see in that vid is a possible result of that practice.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Sep 17, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Okay, but if someone doesn't understand what you mean, why not help them understand the statement?
> 
> Frankly, I don't think any art is inseparable from its forms. There are those who disagree with my view (you'd be among them, of course). I just don't think there's anything that is taught via forms that can't be taught via something else. I rather like forms, but don't consider them irreplaceable. I think Shorin-ryu (to grab a style more or less at random) can remain Shorin-ryu without the kata, so long as the same approach to the techniques exists.



OK, fair enough.  I am going to start a new thread.  I may not participate that much in it because very honestly, I'm past arguing over it.  I get that people want and need something else from their martial arts training than I do, so I'll leave them to it.


----------



## skribs (Sep 17, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> OK, fair enough.  I am going to start a new thread.  I may not participate that much in it because very honestly, I'm past arguing over it.  I get that people want and need something else from their martial arts training than I do, so I'll leave them to it.



I'm not trying to argue.  I just want to know what you mean so I can understand what you said.

Otherwise, you might as well say "hopscotch buttermilk cowabanga dingdong".


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Sep 17, 2019)

skribs said:


> I'm not trying to argue.  I just want to know what you mean so I can understand what you said.
> 
> Otherwise, you might as well say "hopscotch buttermilk cowabanga dingdong".



So I started a new thread about it.  I hope it enlightens.  I suspect it won't.  I also suspect that there will be statements explaining how wrong I am, because that's what we do here.


----------



## skribs (Sep 17, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> So I started a new thread about it.  I hope it enlightens.  I suspect it won't.  I also suspect that there will be statements explaining how wrong I am, because that's what we do here.



This has got to be the most glum post I've ever seen on this forum.


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 18, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I was stating an opinion. I wasn't trying to convince anyone. I've been down that road before. Karate is kata, kata is karate. They are inseparable. In my opinion. You may someday come to that realization yourself. Or not.



the absence of kata is the absence of authentic karate. Kata is the seed, the blueprint and the foundation of traditional Okinawan karate.

if a school only taught kumite and kihon then they have abandoned the tactics, strategy, body conditioning and gross motor coding needed for muscle memory.

Without kata you have no record from which to create promise kumite (_yakusoku kumite) _ commonly called 1 steps. without 1 steps you only have free sparring  (_jiyu kumite) _whichs looks like poorly executed kickboxing.

Without kata, karate looses its grappling intelligence... devolving into just a standup striking sport. The tactical knowhow of the takedowns, sweeps and throws and when/where/how of their application is lost... to the detriment of the art.

which is such a watering down of the art to the degree, that it stopped being the art and has become an imitation. Karate in name only.


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 18, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> Personally, I see karate as a combination of kihon, kata, and kumite, and I have trouble seeing it as karate training without all three bring present.  You could train to strike like Lyoto Machida without doing kata, sure, but in my mind I wouldn't call that fight training "training in Shotokan karate."
> 
> Likewise, I also struggle with the assertion that "karate is kata" because I think it throws kumite (and kihon) by the wayside. If you just did Shotokan's forms in a park like non-combative Tai Chi groups, is that still really Shotokan karate? To me, I'm not sure it is.



They (the Machidas) still teach the shotokan forms in their karate dojos.


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 18, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> They (the Machidas) still teach the shotokan forms in their karate dojos.



I didn't mean to suggest otherwise. I've pointed out the same thing in other threads. I meant that if somebody emulated Machida's striking style without training with kihon or kata, I wouldn't call that hypothetical training "doing karate."

Edit: that said, I don't think that the kata has to be the _primary_ focus to be "karate," or "real karate," or "authentic karate."


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 18, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> I didn't mean to suggest otherwise. I've pointed out the same thing in other threads. I meant that if somebody emulated Machida's striking style without training with kihon or kata, I wouldn't call that hypothetical training "doing karate."



agreed.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 18, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> if a school only taught kumite and kihon then they have abandoned the tactics, strategy, body conditioning and gross motor coding needed for muscle memory.


But does it necessarily follow that if they don't do kata, they only do what's left in a school that does kata? Could they not use other methods in place of kata?


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 18, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> But does it necessarily follow that if they don't do kata, they only do what's left in a school that does kata? Could they not use other methods in place of kata?



Absolutely they could. I personally wouldn't call it "karate" without forms, but that doesn't make it worse.

Like how I don't think ice cream can be ice cream without dairy, but it can still be a great dessert. See: sorbet.


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 18, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> But does it necessarily follow that if they don't do kata, they only do what's left in a school that does kata? Could they not use other methods in place of kata?



well, if they threw out the kata, then they never knew what it was.

it would be like throwing out a pc and server mainframe and buying a box of pencils and notebooks... without ever learning what the computers did.

You could say that kata is the logic and coherence of the art. Both the operating system and the soul of it.

kata solo practice was paired with partner drills that came directly from the kata. what we call one steps.
two sides of a coin.

kata trains the body how to maintain proper structure while attacking and defending.

kata conditions the body. Both in how to breathe while fighting, and receive impacts (more in NahaTe traditions like gojo or Uechi than the other two like ShuriTe or TomiriTe)

Bunkai is the analysis of kata to distill or unpack the strategy and tactics of a series of paterned movements

i dont have the time right now, class is in 30 minutes, but i will follow this up with you later.
(i promise)


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 18, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> well, if they threw out the kata, then they never knew what it was.
> 
> it would be like throwing out a pc and server mainframe and buying a box of pencils and notebooks... without ever learning what the computers did.
> 
> ...


I appreciate you trying to explain your view. I can't see my way to understanding it quite yet. But again, I think part of the problem I have is that I see the end result as the art. So, if someone can deliver the same skills and lessons (including the non-fighting lessons) with different methods, then I'd consider it the same art. But it sounds like changing the methods makes it no longer the same art to you, so you're defining the art at least in part by the training methods, rather than the result.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 18, 2019)

If you like to use side kick, spin back fist combo, but this combo is not in any form that you have learned, what will you do? 

Will you add this combo into one of your forms?


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 18, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I appreciate you trying to explain your view. I can't see my way to understanding it quite yet. But again, I think part of the problem I have is that I see the end result as the art. So, if someone can deliver the same skills and lessons (including the non-fighting lessons) with different methods, then I'd consider it the same art. But it sounds like changing the methods makes it no longer the same art to you, so you're defining the art at least in part by the training methods, rather than the result.



yeah.... the method is bound up within kata. more to come soon.


----------



## pdg (Sep 18, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you like to use side kick, spin back fist combo, but this combo is not in any form that you have learned, what will you do?
> 
> Will you add this combo into one of your forms?



There's no need to add it if it's not there.

In this instance, it's not about restricting yourself to only the combos present in the forms, it's more about them giving you the moves and transitions to combine as you will.


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 18, 2019)

pdg said:


> There's no need to add it if it's not there.
> 
> In this instance, it's not about restricting yourself to only the combos present in the forms, it's more about them giving you the moves and transitions to combine as you will.



But at least in Shotokan, it's not just that we lacked this exact combination from kata, it's that even the components of it aren't in kata. Skipping front leg side kick? I'm not sure if that's in any kata. Same with spinning backfist. You can drill them in kihon (basics), in the air and in pads. You can utilize body control and power generation principles you learned in the katas. But I really really don't see kata as encyclopedias of everything the art has to offer.

Let me put it this way. Kyokushin is one form of "real karate," right?  And the axe kick is one of the signature kicks of kyokushin, right? Yet that technique doesn't appear in Kyokushin kata at all, does it? This isn't a problem if you just view kata as one of several training tools in the art. This is really hard to explain, though, if you view the forms as the sum total of what the art has to offer.


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 18, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> well, if they threw out the kata, then they never knew what it was.
> 
> it would be like throwing out a pc and server mainframe and buying a box of pencils and notebooks... without ever learning what the computers did.
> 
> ...



No, it's like replacing a Linux server with a Windows server or vice versa, not like replacing a server with pen and paper. Because while kata is one way to "train the body how to maintain proper structure while attacking and defending," it's not vastly objectively more effective than all other methods of accomplishing that same task.


----------



## skribs (Sep 18, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> But at least in Shotokan, it's not just that we lacked this exact combination from kata, it's that even the components of it aren't in kata. Skipping front leg side kick? I'm not sure if that's in any kata. Same with spinning backfist. You can drill them in kihon (basics), in the air and in pads. You can utilize body control and power generation principles you learned in the katas. But I really really don't see kata as encyclopedias of everything the art has to offer.
> 
> Let me put it this way. Kyokushin is one form of "real karate," right?  And the axe kick is one of the signature kicks of kyokushin, right? Yet that technique doesn't appear in Kyokushin kata at all, does it? This isn't a problem if you just view kata as one of several training tools in the art. This is really hard to explain, though, if you view the forms as the sum total of what the art has to offer.



That's the same thing with Taekwondo.  I know the forms up through Pyongwon (4th dan form) and there a lot of kicks we learn at the intermediate belts that haven't shown up yet.  There's a ton of footwork that isn't there either.  If you watch someone do KKW forms and WT sparring, it would be like watching someone practice shooting hoops in basketball and then going up to bat in a baseball game.


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 18, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I appreciate you trying to explain your view. I can't see my way to understanding it quite yet. But again, I think part of the problem I have is that I see the end result as the art. So, if someone can deliver the same skills and lessons (including the non-fighting lessons) with different methods, then I'd consider it the same art. But it sounds like changing the methods makes it no longer the same art to you, so you're defining the art at least in part by the training methods, rather than the result.



well take a look at Iain Abernethy, as he is analyzing (bunkai) the TSD form called _Kong Sang Koon,_ aka Shotokan's _Kusanku.
_





He lays out the rationale for the movements.

This is a 3rd dan(or higher) tsd form, in Chuck's fighting art [which blends bjj and tsd.] it is a 3rd dan form.

There is a lot being unpacked. But there is cohesive system here. Now, typically the bunkai isn't fully disclosed so openly, this fast.

Usually a good amount of time is spent mastering the movements of the form.(solo form) and the student breaks the movements into chunks, and create partner drills (one step sparring) with progressive escalating resistance.

but the honto bunkai... or canonical/official analysis and meaning of a 3rd dan form would be typically disclosed at 5th or perhaps even 6th.

Part of the problem is too many people were rushed through to instructor grades and sent out to plant schools before ever receiving the deeper things of blackbelt forms... so stuff gets lost and falls out of the curriculum.
(mainly talking about WW2 and Korean war era US Serviceman geting 18 month BBs, znd being sent back stateside to open dojos, and perpetuate the art.

eventually, people have a shallow understanding of a form at best.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 18, 2019)

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?


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 18, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> No, it's like replacing a Linux server with a Windows server or vice versa, not like replacing a server with pen and paper. Because while kata is one way to "train the body how to maintain proper structure while attacking and defending," it's not vastly objectively more effective than all other methods of accomplishing that same task.



well that is just one of the many things that kata practice produces. But i never said kata is "more effective a method" then something else.

its simply an example of something that kata utilization provides, among many.

I should dig out that thread on why forms have an impact on speed and hardwireing motor skill neural pathways.


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> 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?
> 
> ...
> 
> ...



Is this a real question?  Same way that fencers and boxers transmit combinations from decade to decade down the line without having kata...through continuous lineages of coaching and competition.


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 19, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> well take a look at Iain Abernethy, as he is analyzing (bunkai) the TSD form called _Kong Sang Koon,_ aka Shotokan's _Kusanku.
> _
> 
> 
> ...



Not sure whether I should:

(1) be pedantic and point out that Kusanku is the Okinanwan name and it's called Kanku Dai in Shotokan, or

(2) point out that it's not a true Chuck Norris bunkai if no bears were round-kicked


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 19, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> Is this a real question?  Same way that fencers and boxers transmit combinations from decade to decade down the line without having kata...through continuous lineages of coaching and competition.


If all the MA techniques (such as fencing skill and boxing skill) are recorded in the form, it's easier to pass that information from one generation down to the next generation.

For example, you can teach 24 different throws as throw 1, throw 2, … throw 24. You can also teach a throwing form that contain all 24 throws.

The following form (I created it) records 24 different throws.





​
The following form (also I created it) records 13 different posture training. The order is not important. The content is important. By using this form, students can easily remember all 13 postures.


----------



## pdg (Sep 19, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> But at least in Shotokan, it's not just that we lacked this exact combination from kata, it's that even the components of it aren't in kata. Skipping front leg side kick? I'm not sure if that's in any kata. Same with spinning backfist.



Both those components are in ITF TKD patterns, jus' sayin'


----------



## pdg (Sep 19, 2019)

skribs said:


> That's the same thing with Taekwondo. I know the forms up through Pyongwon (4th dan form) and there a lot of kicks we learn at the intermediate belts that haven't shown up yet.



Can you give an example or two?


----------



## pdg (Sep 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> 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 the individual components are in the forms (or in the training) then why the requirement for that specific combination to be as well?

If you know the moves, and you know transitions, you should be able to combine them in any way to suit the situation.

For example, I have done - lead hand straight punch flowing into backfist (same hand, no return, one move) followed by lead leg twisting kick followed by rear leg jumping turning kick (roundhouse).

Not in any form verbatim to my knowledge, and the initial hand move isn't in any form at afaik (straight punch is, as is backfist, but not as single combined), yet I put those components together from knowing the components and transitions.



Kung Fu Wang said:


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



Notwithstanding a flying side kick is in 'my' patterns - someone figured it out all by themselves at some point...


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you like to use side kick, spin back fist combo, but this combo is not in any form that you have learned, what will you do?
> 
> Will you add this combo into one of your forms?


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.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> No, it's like replacing a Linux server with a Windows server or vice versa, not like replacing a server with pen and paper. Because while kata is one way to "train the body how to maintain proper structure while attacking and defending," it's not vastly objectively more effective than all other methods of accomplishing that same task.


This is a great way of saying that. And I agree entirely. And if that server was being used to run web hosting, you could still use it to run web hosting. There would be some changes consequent of the change of platform, but it would still be a web server.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> well take a look at Iain Abernethy, as he is analyzing (bunkai) the TSD form called _Kong Sang Koon,_ aka Shotokan's _Kusanku.
> _
> 
> 
> ...



I believe this happened with NGA, as well. While Richard Bowe was clearly a gifted martial artist at the time (he's getting quite old now and no longer teaches), he had only trained NGA for a few years when the founder of the art died, and Bowe returned to the US. Everyone now practicing NGA is descended from his teaching (the school in Japan closed many years ago), and I believe the lack of that long-term exposure to the source (founder or source arts) caused some loss of knowledge. I've been reaching back to some of the source arts to better understand principles, and adding material to improve understanding.

(Side note - I'm not sure this was meant as a response to my post you quoted. While interesting, it seems _non sequitur _to my comment.)


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> 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?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Is a form necessary to learning a technique? (Obviously, that's a facetious question; many styles don't use forms and teach many techniques without them.)

I don't have forms for most of the techniques I train outside the 50 Classical techniques in NGA. If I ever grow any instructors (seems doubtful, but I keep hoping), it's up to them to communicate the full curriculum - as they see it - to their students. I won't codify the entire syllabus, because I don't want them blindly copying what I do. They should prune what they don't see useful and add what they think fits.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If all the MA techniques (such as fencing skill and boxing skill) are recorded in the form, it's easier to pass that information from one generation down to the next generation.


I think it's also easier to pass along incomplete information, which might be less useful than simply losing a technique. If a technique gets lost, it probably wasn't being used much. If it gets communicated incompletely (because it's not used much, but is codified in a form) then time may be spent learning something that's not really understood, so isn't useful.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you like to use side kick, spin back fist combo, but this combo is not in any form that you have learned, what will you do?
> 
> Will you add this combo into one of your forms?


 This isn't a planned combo.  This is a recovery after a successful parry of a side kick.  What we are looking is what many instructors may warn about "don't push your opponent into the next technique".  

I know in Jow Ga there are blocks and parries that will help your opponent flow into another technique if done incorrectly.  This is where the form becomes important and why certain parrying and blocking techniques stop at a specific point or are done in a specific direction.  Get the technique incorrectly and you'll help your opponent.  

For example in this clip, the parry is a downward parry.  All of the parry's to a side kick used in Jow Ga send the kicking leg side ways, and not downward.  Moving that kicking leg side ways throws the opponent off balance.  Moving that kicking leg down helps the opponent set his root.  In practicing the parry in a form, an instructor would have gotten on him for not sending the parry side ways.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 19, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> well, if they threw out the kata, then they never knew what it was.
> 
> it would be like throwing out a pc and server mainframe and buying a box of pencils and notebooks... without ever learning what the computers did.
> 
> ...



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


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 19, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> Not sure whether I should:
> 
> (1) be pedantic and point out that Kusanku is the Okinanwan name and it's called Kanku Dai in Shotokan, or
> 
> (2) point out that it's not a true Chuck Norris bunkai if no bears were round-kicked



(1) would be expected. I was hoping someone might point it out. I actually started my Te journey in a Shotokan dojo. It doesn't matter what Funakoshin renames it as, because he is wrong. (chuckle)

(2) bears may or may not have been round kicked by Chuck. The video specifically pointed out that it didn't cover everything at the seminar.


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 19, 2019)

Hanzou said:


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



Gracie JJ uses two man drills that are "one steps", that are a judo legacy that were derived from kata.


----------



## pdg (Sep 19, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> This isn't a planned combo.  This is a recovery after a successful parry of a side kick.  What we are looking is what many instructors may warn about "don't push your opponent into the next technique".
> 
> I know in Jow Ga there are blocks and parries that will help your opponent flow into another technique if done incorrectly.  This is where the form becomes important and why certain parrying and blocking techniques stop at a specific point or are done in a specific direction.  Get the technique incorrectly and you'll help your opponent.
> 
> For example in this clip, the parry is a downward parry.  All of the parry's to a side kick used in Jow Ga send the kicking leg side ways, and not downward.  Moving that kicking leg side ways throws the opponent off balance.  Moving that kicking leg down helps the opponent set his root.  In practicing the parry in a form, an instructor would have gotten on him for not sending the parry side ways.



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.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 19, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> Gracie JJ uses two man drills that are "one steps", that are a judo legacy that were derived from kata.



But it isn't the Kata. The nine kata of Judo is not in Bjj.


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 19, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> But it isn't the Kata. The nine kata of Judo is not in Bjj.


missing my point.

There is a ton of bjj kata. 
while it isn't fighting kata (just like Sanchin isnt a fighting kata)


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 19, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> missing my point.
> 
> There is a ton of bjj kata.
> while it isn't fighting kata (just like Sanchin isnt a fighting kata)



Your point was that removing kata is like removing the mainframe of a system. Bjj clearly removed Judo kata and its just fine. You're now moving the goal posts to say that any drill or practice method is "kata", which is simply nonsense. Kata are historical pre-arranged movements, not practice drills that you do to sharpen an individual skill. Shrimping drills in Bjj isn't kata. Tackling drills in football isn't kata. Shooting drills in Basketball isn't kata.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

Hanzou said:


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


I never saw kata in Judo, either. I don't know that it made much difference in Judo.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I never saw kata in Judo, either. I don't know that it made much difference in Judo.


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


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 19, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Your point was that removing kata is like removing the mainframe of a system. Bjj clearly removed Judo kata and its just fine. You're now moving the goal posts to say that any drill or practice method is "kata", which is simply nonsense. Kata are historical pre-arranged movements, not practice drills that you do to sharpen an individual skill. Shrimping drills in Bjj isn't kata. Tackling drills in football isn't kata. Shooting drills in Basketball isn't kata.



well, my earlier point i was referring to karate.
now i am talking bout bjj. hardly moving goalposts. its apples and oranges.

shrimping into a sweep leg sweep.
shrimping into a technical standup.

Both of those are a pair of seperate techniques that are being arranged. they are now a form. a 2 step solo drill.

And a drill is a pattern. or form. when you do a series of drills in sequence that is kata. see the second video where the guy is flowing from drill to drill.

and while historical "orthodox", fully formed, pre arranged forms exist, that is not exclusively kata.


----------



## pdg (Sep 19, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> You're now moving the goal posts to say that any drill or practice method is "kata", which is simply nonsense. Kata are historical pre-arranged movements, not practice drills that you do to sharpen an individual skill.



They don't have to be historical, TKD tul aren't that much older than me.

They are simply prearranged moves.

So solo drills (that are scripted and always performed with the same goal in technique) are by definition patterns/kata/whatever.

Partner drills, if choreographed, are the same.

In BJJ, when learning a technique (with or without a partner) do you practice the same thing over and over or is it roughly described and you're expected to just get on with it? If the former, it's kata. Maybe a short one, but still.


Now, solo practice in grappling brings another variable. If I understand grappling even marginally then everything you do is dependent upon the action and reaction of another person - you can't choke thin air for example.

So in that case, longer multi move solo kata I can fully agree would be pretty pointless, there's just about nothing to gain there imo. Partner drills (two person kata) on the other hand, definitely useful.

There's a punch/turn/block combo in one of the very first TKD patterns that I maintain can be used as a throw - but until you add another person there's no way to develop that usage. You _need_ to practice into resistance, the weight and the reaction to make it happen.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 19, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> well, my earlier point i was referring to karate.
> now i am talking bout bjj. hardly moving goalposts. its apples and oranges.
> 
> shrimping into a sweep leg sweep.
> ...



Yeah, I have literally never done a sequence like that in Bjj. Typically what happens is that you do the shrimping drill up and down the mat, and you then apply the shrimp when you're rolling. I have never seen shrimping paired with a leg sweep in a drill. I don't even know if that's possible because there's no way to predict what your opponent is going to do after the shrimp so adding a sweep to the shrimp would be a waste of time. I'll grant you the possibility of a technical stand up, because all that requires is for you to be clear of your opponent, but I've never seen that drilled in sequence either.



> And a drill is a pattern. or form. when you do a series of drills in sequence that is kata. see the second video where the guy is flowing from drill to drill.



Yeah, a pre-arranged form or pattern. The second video is the guy doing a series of drills that is not pre-arranged. He's just doing them one after another. He could completely flip the order around and do different drills and it wouldn't matter. You can't do that in a Karate kata. Basai-dai for example has a set beginning, middle and end.



> and while historical "orthodox", fully formed, pre arranged forms exist, that is not exclusively kata.



That's exactly what it is in the context I was responding to. You're simply moving the goalpost now to include any physical drill that someone does, and we both know that's nonsense.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 19, 2019)

pdg said:


> They don't have to be historical, TKD tul aren't that much older than me.
> 
> They are simply prearranged moves.
> 
> ...



I have zero interest in playing this silly game where we stretch the meaning of kata to infinite levels because we ALL know exactly what kata is and isn't. The point I was responding to was the notion that a martial art throwing out their kata is tantamount to throwing out a computer or a mainframe and starting over with pens and pencils.


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I never saw kata in Judo, either. I don't know that it made much difference in Judo.



its interesting that a Korean judo champion who devised the formalized traditional  k-mma called Gongkwon Yusul has forms. a matched pair of them to be exact.


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 19, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> I have zero interest in playing this silly game where we stretch the meaning of kata to infinite levels because we ALL know exactly what kata is and isn't. The point I was responding to was the notion that a martial art throwing out their kata is tantamount to throwing out a computer or a mainframe and starting over with pens and pencils.



good.
I was.never.playing.with.you.
*waves byebye to ya*

frankly after 3 or 4 years of reading all your views on forms, I really get how you feel. you think their worthless.
I suspect that your in this thread to troll those who value them, rather then give thoughtful input into the group discussion, as you have, many times before when it comes to this subject.

by all means, please don't play silly games.

I was being ernest and serious. I meant what I posted. its not important to me to win debates or play semantic games. I am here for thoughtful dialogue, and fun camaraderie.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 19, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> good. I was.never.playing.with.you.



So then please explain how Bjj lost it's "mainframe" when it removed Judo kata from its system. Then please explain how Judo lost its "mainframe" when it removed hundreds of kata from the dozens of classical JJJ styles it absorbed.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

Hanzou said:


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


Because there are other ways to get the same result.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, a pre-arranged form or pattern. The second video is the guy doing a series of drills that is not pre-arranged. He's just doing them one after another. He could completely flip the order around and do different drills and it wouldn't matter. You can't do that in a Karate kata. Basai-dai for example has a set beginning, middle and end.


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.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 19, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> I suspect that your in this thread to troll those who value them, rather then give thoughtful input into the group discussion, as you have, many times before when it comes to this subject.



Um no. I'm in this thread because you made a crazy statement that you're now refusing to back up.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> its interesting that a Korean judo champion who devised the formalized traditional  k-mma called Gongkwon Yusul has forms. a matched pair of them to be exact.


If you're saying that because you think I was dismissing kata, you misread my post. I said removing them seems to have no effect on Judo. It doesn't improve it or weaken it, so far as I can tell. There are other ways to get to the same result, so kata can be used or can be replaced.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Um no. I'm in this thread because you made a crazy statement that you're now refusing to back up.


While I don't agree with his statement, I will acknowledge that he said that specifically about Karate, not about Judo/JJ.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> While I don't agree with his statement, I will acknowledge that he said that specifically about Karate, not about Judo/JJ.



Kata in JJJ had/has the exact same purpose as Karate kata. Also I believe that there's some Kyokushin descendant styles that have also removed the kata from their system as well.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> 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.



Well look at the example that TSD gave; Sequencing a shrimp to a leg sweep. The reason that is bonkers is because there's too many variables at play to sequence the movement in that fashion. All that you're going to end up doing is trying to go for that sweep after you shrimp over and over again, and its going to get you caught and actually retard your development. It's actually far better to drill the shrimp motion in isolation, use the motion in sparring, and then come up with follow-ups in a live environment that actually fit your needs in a given situation. 

That by the way is why I vehemently oppose kata bunkai.


----------



## Yokozuna514 (Sep 19, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> But at least in Shotokan, it's not just that we lacked this exact combination from kata, it's that even the components of it aren't in kata. Skipping front leg side kick? I'm not sure if that's in any kata. Same with spinning backfist. You can drill them in kihon (basics), in the air and in pads. You can utilize body control and power generation principles you learned in the katas. But I really really don't see kata as encyclopedias of everything the art has to offer.
> 
> Let me put it this way. Kyokushin is one form of "real karate," right?  And the axe kick is one of the signature kicks of kyokushin, right? Yet that technique doesn't appear in Kyokushin kata at all, does it? This isn't a problem if you just view kata as one of several training tools in the art. This is really hard to explain, though, if you view the forms as the sum total of what the art has to offer.


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


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Because there are other ways to get the same result.



its easier to believe that when the art is technique driven like jkd, draj, or bjj or judo.

But if you go back before Itosu mainstreamed karate, to when his master learned a kata named Channan on a beach in single afternoon.

The form was quick enough to learn (Bushi learned it in a single afternoon) if you were physically fit enough, and had enough wits about you.

But the form had so much to teach, that Itosu didn't just break it up into five separate forms.
a + b + c + d + e = channan

No, he created a family of forms (pinnans 1-5)that were approachable, but building in difficulty and they became the cliff notes for ShuriTe.
This was taught to elementary school kids, but opened them up to be able understand and perform even higher level karate.

Itosu's student Gichin Funakoshi... wound up having a son named Gigo Funakoshi. He took the pinnan kata series and distilled them down even further.

They became called the Taikyoku kata. they were three in total.

So how can 1 form that could be learned in 1 afternoon... have enough material to spawn 2 more generations of forms or 8 forms total?

Because there is a lot more going on than just a technique library of punch, block, step, kick, turn.

kata without understanding or realizing its meaning becomes dancing.
it is very interesting that in Mainland Japan the primary focus is on performance and perfecting it.
(Once again Gigo Funakoshi's impact.)
but in Okinawa the primary.focus is on "Imi" or the why of each movement. Te was/is a principle driven art. the techniques should be derived a coherent system of principles.

or as Jesse-san pointed out:

*10 Differences Between Okinawan Karate & Japanese Karate*
By Jesse Enkamp
Question:
Do you know the difference between Okinawan Karate & Japanese Karate?

_I didn’t._

Until I revisted Okinawa – the birthplace of Karate.

Since then, I’ve revisited the amazing island over a dozen times. I even lived there in 2009, studying Japanese at Okinawa University.

_So I can assure you…_

There are MANY differences between Okinawan and Japanese Karate.



*#2. “Why” Over “How”*

If you practice Karate in Okinawa, you will often hear the word _“imi”._

_“Imi”_ translates to _“meaning”_ in English.

Hence, in Okinawan Karate, the _meaning_ of a technique is often more stressed than _how_ the technique is actually executed.

The Why is more important than the How.

Japanese Karate, on the other hand, is often more focused on the How rather than the Why.

_How come?_

There are three main reasons for this:


The meaning of many techniques was lost during the historical transmission of Karate from Okinawa to Japan. _If you don’t know the Why, it’s more sensible to teach the How._
The purpose of Japanese Karate is not aligned with the purpose of Okinawan Karate anymore. Historically speaking, Japanese Karate was molded to suit the spiritual Way (“Karate-Do”) of contemporary martial arts like Judo, Kendo, Aikido etc., with the main purpose of developing the character of its participants (through the How). The purpose of Okinawan Karate has always been mainly self-defense oriented (the Why).
The level of martial knowledge , i.e. biomechanics of Budo, is much deeper in Japan. Many techniques of Japanese Karate are influenced by other, more established, Japanese martial arts where the optimal movement patterns are well-researched.
For example, a Japanese sensei will go very deep in details of a kata.

_(How to twist your hips, how to adjust your feet, how to shift your weight etc.)_

But an Okinawan sensei will often remind you of the purpose of a kata instead.

The “bunkai”.

_Get it?_


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> If you're saying that because you think I was dismissing kata, you misread my post. I said removing them seems to have no effect on Judo. It doesn't improve it or weaken it, so far as I can tell. There are other ways to get to the same result, so kata can be used or can be replaced.



 you have an interesting point.
which helps clarify this:
Judo kata has a far different role in judo, than karate kata has in karate.


----------



## pdg (Sep 19, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> I have zero interest in playing this silly game where we stretch the meaning of kata to infinite levels because we ALL know exactly what kata is and isn't. The point I was responding to was the notion that a martial art throwing out their kata is tantamount to throwing out a computer or a mainframe and starting over with pens and pencils.



From what I'm seeing, your view of what "we ALL" know to be kata is different to what the rest of "ALL" appear to view it as.

Oh, and the Oxford English dictionary has this to say:


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 19, 2019)

pdg said:


> From what I'm seeing, your view of what "we ALL" know to be kata is different to what the rest of "ALL" appear to view it as.
> 
> Oh, and the Oxford English dictionary has this to say:
> 
> View attachment 22475



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


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Well look at the example that TSD gave; Sequencing a shrimp to a leg sweep. The reason that is bonkers is because there's too many variables at play to sequence the movement in that fashion. All that you're going to end up doing is trying to go for that sweep after you shrimp over and over again, and its going to get you caught and actually retard your development. It's actually far better to drill the shrimp motion in isolation, use the motion in sparring, and then come up with follow-ups in a live environment that actually fit your needs in a given situation.
> 
> That by the way is why I vehemently oppose kata bunkai.


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).


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> its easier to believe that when the art is technique driven like jkd, draj, or bjj or judo.
> 
> But if you go back before Itosu mainstreamed karate, to when his master learned a kata named Channan on a beach in single afternoon.
> 
> ...


I haven't digested the whole post yet - trying to read between work tasks - but the first comment is one that always confuses me. What is "technique focused", and what is the opposite? 

If you mean technique-focused vs principle-focused, every style I've studied for even a brief period has techniques as its teaching mechanism and principles as its core. 

If you mean technique-focused vs kata-focused, I'm still not sure I buy that as a distinction. Kata is used (in part) to teach techniques (or at least movements used in them). In other styles, drills are used in that same purpose. Traditionally, JJJ "techniques" are actually forms (at least in the traditional methods I've seen) - they're just short forms, rather than long ones (though I have been led to understand that some JJJ actually had longer forms, as well). And there are layers within those short forms, as there are within Karatedo's kata.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> you have an interesting point.
> which helps clarify this:
> Judo kata has a far different role in judo, than karate kata has in karate.


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.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> 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 (Sep 19, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> 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 (Sep 19, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> 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 (Sep 19, 2019)

pdg said:


> 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 (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> 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 (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> 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 (Sep 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> 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?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


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 (Sep 19, 2019)

Yokozuna514 said:


> 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 (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> 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 (Sep 19, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> 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 (Sep 19, 2019)

skribs said:


> In our forms I have yet to see:
> 
> Axe kick
> Hook kick
> ...



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 (Sep 19, 2019)

pdg said:


> 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 (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> 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.



gpseymour said:


> 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 (Sep 19, 2019)

skribs said:


> 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 (Sep 19, 2019)

pdg said:


> 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 (Sep 19, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> 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 (Sep 19, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> 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 (Sep 19, 2019)

pdg said:


> 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.
> 
> ...


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


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 19, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> 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 (Sep 19, 2019)

skribs said:


> 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.


----------



## skribs (Sep 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> 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".
> 
> ...



Do you create a form that has one example of each?  Do you create a form for each, that has multiple examples of its use?


----------



## skribs (Sep 19, 2019)

pdg said:


> 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.



I think the biggest value is meditative and continuous improvement.  If you want to have perfect forms, it takes dedication and training.


----------



## pdg (Sep 19, 2019)

skribs said:


> 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 part...

No.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 19, 2019)

skribs said:


> Do you create a form that has one example of each?  Do you create a form for each, that has multiple examples of its use?


Both.

1. A form that record 30 different principles - only one example of each.
2. 30 forms that records all different usage.

For example, a single leg form that records all different ways to obtain the single leg, and also all different ways to finish it.

1. uniform stance single leg.
2. mirror stance single leg.
3. uniform stance crisscross single leg.
4. diagonal shaking single leg.
5. diagonal shaking arm dragging single leg.
6. knee striking single leg.
7. shoulder striking strike single.
8. foot sweep single leg.
9. foot scoop single leg.
10. shin bite single leg.
11. inner hooking single leg.
12. outer hook single leg.
13. arm guiding single leg.
14. ….

Of course if I have 20 ways to get and 10 ways to finish, I should have 20 x 10 = 200 ways to get it and finish it. By using video and store in computer, it can be done. we live in the 21th century. we no longer live in the ancient time. This database will be expanded through the future generation.

One day when I finish these forms, I will just record it on video. I won't train those forms. I won't ask my students to train those forms. Those forms are used for "recorded information" only.​


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

Hanzou said:


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


If you do them the same way every time, they are “choreographed”. That was my point.


----------



## skribs (Sep 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Both.
> 
> 1. A form that record 30 different principles - only one example of each.
> 2. 30 forms that records all different usage.
> ...



In that case I wouldn't call it forms.  I'd call it a table of contents and 30 chapters.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> 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,
> ...


Students don’t need to memorize the drills. Over time, those interested in teaching will need to gather the list of those they wish to use.



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


Yes. Phys Ed and Drama classes. More to the point l, I don’t recall a single class where all the information was in the textbook.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> 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".
> 
> ...


How do you record in a form the definitions of the principles? I find those break down even in 2-man forms.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Students don’t need to memorize the drills. Over time, those interested in teaching will need to gather the list of those they wish to use.


If you create that "drill list" and upload to the internet. Anybody can obtain it by using Google search engine. Will that be nice?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Both.
> 
> 1. A form that record 30 different principles - only one example of each.
> 2. 30 forms that records all different usage.
> ...


It sounds like you’re describing video demonstrations, rather than forms.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you create that "drill list" and upload to the internet. Anybody can obtain it by using Google search engine. Will that be nice?


Sure. Nice, but not necessary. My drills work okay, but there are probably better to be found.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> How do you record in a form the definitions of the principles? I find those break down even in 2-man forms.


You may need to record all possible application. this database will be expanded from generation to generation.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> It sounds like you’re describing video demonstrations, rather than forms.


Will it be nice that if we can have online discussion with video clip instead of words? I try to use as many video clips as possible (I have over 1000 MA video clips on my computer).


----------



## skribs (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> How do you record in a form the definitions of the principles? I find those break down even in 2-man forms.


Can you give an example of how those have broken down?


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 19, 2019)

an interesting development that happened to Japanese karate when researcher Patrick McCarthy started feeding HAPV data into the 2 man forms and the kata, and analyzing what happened.

Needless to say there were a lot of people in Japan who began to hate Patrick McCarthy because he was bringing a light to shine on flawed, but beautful and broken kata performance.


----------



## skribs (Sep 19, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> an interesting development that happened to Japanese karate when researcher Patrick McCarthy started feeding HAPV data into the 2 man forms and the kata, and analyzing what happened.
> 
> Needless to say there were a lot of people in Japan who began to hate Patrick McCarthy because he was bringing a light to shine on flawed, but beautful and broken kata performance.



What does any of this mean?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> You may need to record all possible application. this database will be expanded from generation to generation.


I don't actually think it's possible to record all possible applications. It's possible to record the most useful or fundamental ones, but some techniques simply have too many possibilities in them (for NGA's Arm Bar, there are 6 entire categories of applications, before we even get to the ground). And if we catalog an ever-expanding list of applications, people start trying to get through those, rather than focusing on the principles and figuring out how to get the best use out of the technique in question. I don't even care if I don't teach the same set of applications to each of my students - they can share and exchange ideas when they work together.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Will it be nice that if we can have online discussion with video clip instead of words? I try to use as many video clips as possible (I have over 1000 MA video clips on my computer).


I do think video clips are more useful than just words. Putting them together is probably the best method of preservation of teachings right now.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

skribs said:


> Can you give an example of how those have broken down?


All of NGA's  Classical techniques are taught with a Classical form - basically a 2-man, static-start version of the technique that is kept within tight constraints (angles, specific grips and stances, etc. - much like you're used to in your forms). These are grappling techniques (you'd recognize some from your Hapkido), so you'd think the principles would be easy to discover. I find people who've been working some of these techniques for years, who don't understand them. I know they don't because they take me aside and ask me if I can explain them, because they don't understand them. And some of them, even my understanding (30+ years in the art) feels incomplete. I feel certain someone with a good grounding in Daito-ryu could explain three of them better than me. That's information lost over 4 or 5 generations (depending whether NGA's founder had that information or not, and how you count the generations): Morita to Bowe to Weber to Wyndham to me.

I find different instructors teach the same technique dramatically differently, each emphasizing quite different principles - some of them in direct conflict. Why? Because the form doesn't really communicate the principles - it just gives a place to practice them.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> an interesting development that happened to Japanese karate when researcher Patrick McCarthy started feeding HAPV data into the 2 man forms and the kata, and analyzing what happened.
> 
> Needless to say there were a lot of people in Japan who began to hate Patrick McCarthy because he was bringing a light to shine on flawed, but beautful and broken kata performance.


I don't understand this post, TSD.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I don't actually think it's possible to record all possible applications.


I will let the computer to do that task for me. For example, if I have 8 kicks and 6 punches, how many kick, punch combos that I can come up with? By using computer, I can also eliminate those combos that don't flow well.

It's 21th century. MA and computer technology should be integrated.


----------



## skribs (Sep 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I will let the computer to do that task for me. For example, if I have 8 kicks and 6 punches, how many kick, punch combos that I can come up with? By using computer, I can also eliminate those combos that don't flow well.
> 
> It's 21th century. MA and computer technology should be integrated.



This is where concepts come in.  Don't do every possible punch and kick combo.  Do the principles of how they apply.  If you take these basic punches:

Straight punch
Hook
Uppercut
Underpunch
Body Hook
Teach how to generate power from lead hand, strong hand, and how to oscillate between them, you can create infinite possibilities with those 5 punches and 3 concepts.  If I show you how to generate power with a lead straight punch (jab) and a strong underpunch, you should also be able to generate power with a lead underpunch.  Also, when you pass 2 or 3 punches in the combination, it's really just several combinations chained together.  For example, in a lead straight - strong straight - lead hook - strong uppercut, it's really just a lead straight - strong straight, strong straight - lead hook, lead hook - strong uppercut.  Just overlap them enough and it becomes the longer combination.

That's how you oscillate a combination.  There's also:

Repeating (i.e. multiple lead straights)
Flowing (i.e. hook - backfist)
Spinning (i.e. hook - spinning elbow)
Simultaneous (more often used with a block or parry)
There's not much difference between a hook-spinning elbow as there is for roundhouse kick - back kick.  Except one uses your feet.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I will let the computer to do that task for me. For example, if I have 8 kicks and 6 punches, how many kick, punch combos that I can come up with? By using computer, I can also eliminate those combos that don't flow well.
> 
> It's 21th century. MA and computer technology should be integrated.


How can a computer determine what applications exist?


----------



## skribs (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> How can a computer determine what applications exist?



It works on Indeed.

Ba-dum-tsh.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 19, 2019)

skribs said:


> It works on Indeed.
> 
> Ba-dum-tsh.


You are an awful person. Simply awful.


----------



## skribs (Sep 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> You are an awful person. Simply awful.



I don't think many people on this forum would argue with you on that.


----------



## pdg (Sep 20, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Both.
> 
> 1. A form that record 30 different principles - only one example of each.
> 2. 30 forms that records all different usage.
> ...



I'm not sure I see an awful lot of use in this approach.

Showing a range of possible application, yes.

Trying to state that it's every possible application? Not so much.

It's dismissing the value or possibility of improvisation in a way.

What happens if you do all this, then you (or someone X number of generations forward) see someone do something different? Do you think "oh I missed one" or do you tell them that it's not part of the art or an incorrect application?

A generation or two down the line I foresee the latter becoming common.

Unless strict codification of the art is what you're aiming to achieve?


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 20, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> How can a computer determine what applications exist?



A question i have been researching for close to 18 years. Which hasn't yielded results yet.

I suspect AI will help us find connections between patterns of attack and unknown or lost responses (applications).

for an example, when human1 is in this position doing this thing, and traditions (kata interpretation) say a lowline kick by human2, while guarding upper body is what goes here.

but the ai looks at this same set of positions and recommends a specific sweep by underhooking with the (former guarding arms) and twisting the hips while keeping the (former kicking) leg straight.

And if no one has seen or heard of that response before, then thats a new discovery or a recovery of something that was known at the time the form was created but, was lost, in a failure of transmission.

The challenge is developing a comprehensive coding language that works using motion capture data (populated initially, from 2man and solo forms but could eventually use HAPV data) that can utilize a neural network.

It has to account for 3dspace, time, gravity and human kinematics.

I suspect that if we can have the neural network create billions of fights and apply form based responses to different attacks, and sort them between effective and ineffective... then we will have a lot of bunkai that is either new or lost and rediscovered.

Self driving cars are a thing, and the AI behind that is a step in the right direction.

There was a thing i was watching on a new Chess AI Google's AlphaZero that taught itself how to play chess in 4 hours. It didnt have a database of historical moves. after teaching itself by playing against itself billions of times., it was faced off with the best chess AIs (like stockfish) in the field and beat them handily, yeilding 0 loses, but a high number of draws.


----------



## dvcochran (Sep 20, 2019)

FWIW, I think adding the computer element will create a level of dependency that will have an adverse effect on learning a technique or MA. Yes, a computer can calculate and store a near infinite quantity of scenarios for a technique or form and it great for study or to brush up. 
The average human brain is running near infinite calculations on, who knows how many, Different things/topics at the same time. I get that we have a multiplex parallel processor but it is more about recall when you really need a technique to work. Getting the Physical repetition to establish rock solid muscle memory is paramount. Remember I said Physical repetition. I don't care is my sonal momtom makki is not grammatically perfect as a block as long as it works for the given attack. I do care that my recall is correct and it was the right choice of block. 
This is one of the greatest values of forms or partner drills or shadow boxing or however you do it. Techniques have to get engrained. Some people do it faster than others. Why? I wish I knew. I could make billions.

Historically speaking, I Love hearing how well versed some are in there MA history. It is truly a beautiful thing. I personally feel so much has changed in fight/war philosophy/method that some original method is irrelevant. A large component is that the opponents/attackers of today are smarter and more versed in battle/fight strategy today. So it is behovant for each of us to seek out what our MA learnings mean to ourselves and reconcile this with the educations of history and the understanding and opportunity of today.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 20, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> A question i have been researching for close to 18 years. Which hasn't yielded results yet.
> 
> I suspect AI will help us find connections between patterns of attack and unknown or lost responses (applications).
> 
> ...


Okay, that's driving from forms, and seems to require that the AI already knows what possible applications are for a technique (as opposed to a form movement).


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 20, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Okay, that's driving from forms, and seems to require that the AI already knows what possible applications are for a technique (as opposed to a form movement).



well it can infer from a database of actions. and figure out what can plug in, in a specific moment.
making an intuitive leap. perhaps even discover a new kick or strike or see power generation methods we have not used before.

The big issue is money and time resources to get the technology.

There is a very old saying that "there are no blocks in karate". Superficially, this is a lie. but that isn't the purpose of the statement.

The purpose is to teach you to reconsider everything that acts like a block in the forms. "is this a setup, an entry, a strike, a trapping action, a feint, a lever or fulcrum etc. ?"

And then plug in alternate actions in place of a "mere block" and test the results.

This become even more meta when strikes themselves are reexamined.

Kata is a many layered thing like an onion.
but AI doesn't have to be restricted to that paradigm alone. 


The fact that the ai can run through the permutations far faster, and 24 hours/365 days without stopping to eat, sleep, poop, or shower... shows us a lot of potential.


----------



## skribs (Sep 20, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> FWIW, I think adding the computer element will create a level of dependency that will have an adverse effect on learning a technique or MA. Yes, a computer can calculate and store a near infinite quantity of scenarios for a technique or form and it great for study or to brush up.
> The average human brain is running near infinite calculations on, who knows how many, Different things/topics at the same time. I get that we have a multiplex parallel processor but it is more about recall when you really need a technique to work. Getting the Physical repetition to establish rock solid muscle memory is paramount. Remember I said Physical repetition. I don't care is my sonal momtom makki is not grammatically perfect as a block as long as it works for the given attack. I do care that my recall is correct and it was the right choice of block.
> This is one of the greatest values of forms or partner drills or shadow boxing or however you do it. Techniques have to get engrained. Some people do it faster than others. Why? I wish I knew. I could make billions.
> 
> Historically speaking, I Love hearing how well versed some are in there MA history. It is truly a beautiful thing. I personally feel so much has changed in fight/war philosophy/method that some original method is irrelevant. A large component is that the opponents/attackers of today are smarter and more versed in battle/fight strategy today. So it is behovant for each of us to seek out what our MA learnings mean to ourselves and reconcile this with the educations of history and the understanding and opportunity of today.



There are some sci-fi movies that have taken this AI approach to martial arts.  Have you seen the movie Equilibrium?  The idea was they had taken footage from thousands of gunfights and analyzed the typical trajectories, and created a gun-kata based on this information.  

Of course, that was a movie about how everyone had their emotions forcibly taken away by the government, so maybe your point about it removing the soul from martial arts is a salient one!


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 20, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> well it can infer from a database of actions. and figure out what can plug in, in a specific moment.
> making an intuitive leap. perhaps even discover a new kick or strike or see power generation methods we have not used before.
> 
> The big issue is money and time resources to get the technology.
> ...


You've gone back to the dissection of the forms (which I don't think was KFW's suggestion - he was talking about cataloging applications to a technique). I think we're far from the day when a computer (or network) can start with a basic technique and determine the applications. It needs to learn (like a human) the basic principles, then the variables that influence them, etc. Then it could start to identify the basic applications on its own. It will take much AI learning time to get beyond the basic applications, I think - and more processing power.


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 20, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> You've gone back to the dissection of the forms (which I don't think was KFW's suggestion - he was talking about cataloging applications to a technique). I think we're far from the day when a computer (or network) can start with a basic technique and determine the applications. It needs to learn (like a human) the basic principles, then the variables that influence them, etc. Then it could start to identify the basic applications on its own. It will take much AI learning time to get beyond the basic applications, I think - and more processing power.



yes, yet i did say:

_"Kata is a many layered thing like an onion.
but AI doesn't have to be restricted to that paradigm alone."_

The deep learning neurologic of alphazero was based on rules (principles) not forms (programmable databases).

A bishop can only move diagonally on its assigned color. etc.

If you treat the body's joints like pieces, each with ranges of motion, and power generation chains. then it can learn how to move it.

if you assign attack values to different body stuctures, and damage values to others.

and let it fight itself, it will figure out how to attack and defend by fighting itself through millions of matches.

it doesnt need the input of kata to do that.
but my interest has been in leveraging computing power to decode kata, to discover forgotten or unknown 2man forms, and the related unseen applications.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 20, 2019)

If people can't figure a martial arts application then there is no way Ai would figure it out.  Ai can't even drive down the street without killing people.  You know who else can't do it?  Humans.  

There is more to applying techniques finding how many attacks are possible.  Ask people wow try to get robots to walk and run.  They'll tell you the she thing.  There's a lot more to walking than what we realiaze.


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 20, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> If people can't figure a martial arts application then there is no way Ai would figure it out.  Ai can't even drive down the street without killing people.  You know who else can't do it?  Humans.
> 
> There is more to applying techniques finding how many attacks are possible.  Ask people wow try to get robots to walk and run.  They'll tell you the she thing.  There's a lot more to walking than what we realiaze.



1st point. robotics is a seperate thing from what we are discussing. virtually moving bodies is done in 3d modeling all the time, for decades.
this isnt about piloting an artificial robot body in meatspace.


There are quite a few tesla cars driving on autopilot, not killing people, on the streets right now.
And its got amazing collision avoidance systems.





Amazon is dumping millions into self driving 18 wheelers, and the trucking industry is about to 180 from a driver shortage, to massive layoffs within the next 8-10 years.


----------



## skribs (Sep 20, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> yes, yet i did say:
> 
> _"Kata is a many layered thing like an onion.
> but AI doesn't have to be restricted to that paradigm alone."_
> ...



I prefer to think of a Kata like a parfait.  Everyone loves a parfait.  Ain't nobody say "no, I don't want a parfait, I don't like parfaits."


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 20, 2019)

skribs said:


> I prefer to think of a Kata like a parfait.  Everyone loves a parfait.  Ain't nobody say "no, I don't want a parfait, I don't like parfaits."



unless their lactose intolerant.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 20, 2019)

Q: What's wrong with the following "group" MA training pictures?
A: There are training form.
Q: Should they only train form when partners are not available?
A: They need to learn the form so they can train when they don't have partner.
Q: Should they spent their training time in partner drill training while partners are available?
A: ...

What's your answer for the last question?












Here are examples of partner drill training for both striking art and throwing art.


----------



## skribs (Sep 20, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Q: What's wrong with the following picture?
> A: There are training form.
> Q: Should they only train form when partners are not available?
> A: They need to learn the form so they can train when they don't have partner.
> ...



The image you're showing is foundational technique training.  It's a drill done together to build unity in the class, and to help teach you what to practice when you get home.  Training solo forms in class is so you can learn what to practice at home, and get feedback for when you are at home.

The image does not prove that they do NOT do partner drills.  The image only proves that they do solo forms.

This type of post is the exact type of response that is starting to become a pet peeve of mine in martial arts discussions.  To judge a curriculum on a single photo or video of a technical demonstration.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 20, 2019)

skribs said:


> The image you're showing is foundational technique training.  It's a drill done together to build unity in the class, and to help teach you what to practice when you get home.  Training solo forms in class is so you can learn what to practice at home, and get feedback for when you are at home.
> 
> The image does not prove that they do NOT do partner drills.  The image only proves that they do solo forms.
> 
> This type of post is the exact type of response that is starting to become a pet peeve of mine in martial arts discussions.  To judge a curriculum on a single photo or video of a technical demonstration.


My questions are:

1. Should you spend 100% of your group training time in partner drill?
2. Can you develop MA foundation and basic only through partner drill training?

For example, I don't teach form, but I teach a lot of partner drills. When students train partner drills without partner, they have solo drills. When they link solo drills, they have forms that they can train at home when partners are not available. I don't even teach MA stances. Students can learn the correct MA stances through the partner drill training.

IMO, this training method is more effective than the traditional MA training method.

partner drills -> solo drills -> forms

The advantage of this "partner drills base training method" is you understand exactly what you are doing when you train your solo form.


----------



## skribs (Sep 20, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> My questions are:
> 
> 1. Should you spend 100% of your group training time in partner drill?
> 2. Can you develop MA foundation and basic only through partner training?



No, and no.  At the very least, there are foundational things like rolls or falls that need to be practiced on your own before someone throws you down.  The basic footwork and some of the basic techniques, at the foundational level, will need to be trained by yourself before drilling with a partner.  Some of these apply more to grappling and some more to striking.

There's also things that are a waste of your partner's time for you to drill with your partner, or where you can get similar level of efficient training out of the drill solo.  If I can practice a drill shadowboxing or on a heavy bag, my partner would benefit from also doing that drill, instead of holding pads for me.

That's not to say the drills shouldn't ever be practiced with a partner.  But if you can practice an entry and throw in 3 seconds by yourself, or in 10 seconds with a partner (because you have to wait for him to stand back up and be ready), in a minute you can do 20 reps solo or 6 reps with a partner.  In 2 minutes, you can do 40 reps solo, or 6 reps with a partner (because now it's his turn).  So you mix and match, so you can get quantity of reps and quality.  

Even in our hapkido, which is all about pressure points and joint locks, I want to say I spend maybe 20% of class on solo work.  It gives my joints a bit of a rest from being a partner, and it lets me repeat over and over again the correction I got on my footwork or leverage, so that when I partner up again I can apply it easier.


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 20, 2019)

skribs said:


> I prefer to think of a Kata like a parfait.  Everyone loves a parfait.  Ain't nobody say "no, I don't want a parfait, I don't like parfaits."


But is an ogre like kata?


----------



## pdg (Sep 20, 2019)

skribs said:


> I prefer to think of a Kata like a parfait.  Everyone loves a parfait.  Ain't nobody say "no, I don't want a parfait, I don't like parfaits."



Do you mean an American style parfait or a real one?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 20, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> If people can't figure a martial arts application then there is no way Ai would figure it out.  Ai can't even drive down the street without killing people.  You know who else can't do it?  Humans.
> 
> There is more to applying techniques finding how many attacks are possible.  Ask people wow try to get robots to walk and run.  They'll tell you the she thing.  There's a lot more to walking than what we realiaze.


ha ha ha.. so many typos.  Auto correct screwing me up. That's what I get for using someone else's phone.. Here's the translation:

There is more to applying techniques than finding how many attacks are possible.  Ask people who try to get robots to walk and run.  They'll tell you the same thing.  "There's a lot more to walking than what we realize."

One thing I know for sure.  My Samsung Galaxy 4 phone Ai won't be teaching anything lol.  Maybe my new phone will be able to do better.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 20, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> virtually moving bodies is done in 3d modeling all the time, for decades.


 Same thing.  Program and code written by people who think driving has an limited amount of possibilities, and doesn't count for the almost infinite number of things that could make today different than the next day.

1. Pot holes - There is no pot hole that is the same as the one down the street, nor are they always in the same spot. Water filling it up, snow filling it up, a pot hole at the top of the hill, loose asphalt, trash, deep pot hole, shallow pothole.  All of this changes.  When the car in front swerves to avoid one, does the ai know to do the same, does the ai know that there may be something in the road that it should avoid, or does the ai stay on course. When cars go around into the on coming traffic to avoid one does the ai know to do the same or will it ride over the pothole.  

What's the protocol for this?





Or this?





Or this?





Or this?





You can put all of this into a 3D virtual environment and still get crap responses.  Wasn't it just recently where planes were crashing because of "virtual 3d environment calculations."  Their software gave all the "correct responses" in the 3D virtual environment and still failed in the real one.  The amazing thing about it is all of that is less complex than human movement, human reaction, timing of punches, anticipation.  Does the fighter pick up a tell-tale sign, which allows them to be successful with striking. 

Does the human movement deceive? For example, my big wheel punches always look as if there is an opening.  Put that in a virtual environment and a computer may say yes, there is an opening, but the problem is.  We don't have computers for a brain so unless a computer can compute things based on our perception then there's no way in the world it's going to be accurate in doing a lot of things.

You'll often find that computers do an excellent job when the environmental elements are limited.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 20, 2019)

This is awesome, but add some water to the service and you'll probably get a different result. Put in in a 3D virtual environment, make some calculations and the best you'll get is.  "If it's this much water" then you'll have a risk percentage of slipping.   Add some dirt or oil to that water mixture and your calculations are screwed.  
The reason why I say this is because dirt on your shoes, oil on your shoes, worn tread will affect how much or how little grip you'll have on the surface.





Those damn banana peels.  What's the slip ratio calculation for a banana peel to be tested in a virtual environment?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 20, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> There are quite a few tesla cars driving on autopilot, not killing people, on the streets right now.
> And its got amazing collision avoidance systems.


 That may be so if your are comparing it to other cars. Listen to his comments and you'll hear him bring up the environmental elements many of which wouldn't be factored into a virtual ai.





And this guy





And this guy.  My thoughts on this is that recognizing a pot hole would be much easier that calculating human movement and intention.  





If computers can't read this stuff in a real environment, then I would naturally think it would be the same in trying to calculate what's available for a martial arts application.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 20, 2019)

Video of someone trying to just get the the structure of martial arts movement





It think the best way to go about seeing what applications are available is to do simple video analysis of different fighters actually fighting and then feed it into the computer data analysis blender.  Fighters would need to actually wear sensors so I'm thinking skin tight suit with thin flexible sensors.  The suits would have to be able to communicate with each other as they collect data to see if there was an action that triggered a specific response.   

The problem with martial arts application analysis via computer at the moment is that you get people who are good at science but not in fighting.  Because of this they miss out on subtle but important details.  For  example in this video below.  They use a sound to measure response time.  But in reality fighters use visual cues to help determine what action should be taken.  The sooner you see the cue, the faster your reaction time will be in the context of someone attacking or defending.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 20, 2019)

To use the form to record technique, one long fist form has a punching combo as:

- hook punch,
- back fist,
- uppercut,
- hammer fist,
- jab,
- cross.

IMO, it's an excellent idea that one can just train this short drill and review all the possible punching techniques.


----------



## dvcochran (Sep 21, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Q: What's wrong with the following "group" MA training pictures?
> A: There are training form.
> Q: Should they only train form when partners are not available?
> A: They need to learn the form so they can train when they don't have partner.
> ...


That is not an example of partner drill training as I understand it.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 21, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> My questions are:
> 
> 1. Should you spend 100% of your group training time in partner drill?
> 2. Can you develop MA foundation and basic only through partner drill training?
> ...


I don't think there's a universal answer to #1, because it's a value judgment ("should").

As to #2, that depends. If students are expected to do their fitness training outside class, then yes, I think it's entirely possible. There are other methods that seem to speed up at least parts of the learning and serve multiple purposes (like the shrimping drill seen often in BJJ), but I've seen no evidence they're strictly necessary to fundamental development.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 21, 2019)

skribs said:


> No, and no.  At the very least, there are foundational things like rolls or falls that need to be practiced on your own before someone throws you down.  The basic footwork and some of the basic techniques, at the foundational level, will need to be trained by yourself before drilling with a partner.  Some of these apply more to grappling and some more to striking.
> 
> There's also things that are a waste of your partner's time for you to drill with your partner, or where you can get similar level of efficient training out of the drill solo.  If I can practice a drill shadowboxing or on a heavy bag, my partner would benefit from also doing that drill, instead of holding pads for me.
> 
> ...


While I don't think it is optimal, I have met instructors who don't teach falls without throws. Students' first exposure to falls is in partner throw/fall drills. This is the same "can" versus "need to" issue that comes up on the side of using forms.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 21, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> But is an ogre like kata?


I've been known to move like somewhat like an ogre in kata.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 21, 2019)

pdg said:


> Do you mean an American style parfait or a real one?


Why, you...just wait 'til I put down my bucket of coke and trash bag full of french fries...be right there, then I'll fix you!


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 21, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> To use the form to record technique, one long fist form has a punching combo as:
> 
> - hook punch,
> - back fist,
> ...


So, what happens if an instructor wants to add another to the repertoire? Do they now need to change the form? And then if they decide hammerfist isn't used enough to warrant continued focus? There's nothing wrong with using a form for this (with a limited number like that, it's kind of handy), so long as it doesn't become immutable.


----------



## KenpoMaster805 (Sep 21, 2019)

Kata and forms are the same thing no matter what kata is japanese form is english like in my karate class we call it forms instead of kata


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 21, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I've been known to move like somewhat like an ogre in kata.


more common than expected.


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 21, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> So, what happens if an instructor wants to add another to the repertoire? Do they now need to change the form? And then if they decide hammerfist isn't used enough to warrant continued focus? There's nothing wrong with using a form for this (with a limited number like that, it's kind of handy), so long as it doesn't become immutable.



ahh... the dirty secret of karate.

The old masters railed on about not changing the forms, while they in fact did change the forms, as did future generations.

Well, one way to go about doing it without breaking the rule is change the form but give it a new name.

Make sure you have about 3 or more changes to edit in. then you can just add a numeric designation and keep the old name but include shodan behind it.

Alternately, what is often done is the particular edit gets named after the editor.

For example There is a kata named Rohai
and later on there became a new one called Chibana no Rohai.

Make sure to document the new applications at the various places the edits have been made. This will prevent a lot of arguing over your intent in the future generations about 50-100 years later.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 21, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> So, what happens if an instructor wants to add another to the repertoire? Do they now need to change the form?


In the following form, the back hand punch at 0.30 was a double palms strike as at 0.29. My long fist teacher's teacher Han Chin-Tang changed it into back hand punch. The reason was, this form was used as the beginner level training. The whole form had leading hand punch but did have back hand punch which did not meet the requirement to be used as the entry level training form.

At 0.2 after the left palm strike, I added in a right back hand punch. The reason was, when my opponent drops his right arm to block my waist level palm strike, his face will be exposed for my punch.

So in the last 3 generations (my teacher's teacher generation and my generation), this form had been changed twice. Who knows that how many times this form will be changed in the future.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 21, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> That is not an example of partner drill training as I understand it.


Which clip (or picture) are you referencing to?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 21, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In the following form, the back hand punch at 0.30 was a double palms strike as at 0.29. My long fist teacher's teacher Han Chin-Tang changed it into back hand punch. The reason was, this form was used as the beginner level training. The whole form had leading hand punch but did have back hand punch which did not meet the requirement to be used as the entry level training form.
> 
> At 0.2 after the left palm strike, I added in a right back hand punch. The reason was, when my opponent drops his right arm to block my waist level palm strike, his face will be exposed for my punch.
> 
> So in the last 3 generations (my teacher's teacher generation and my generation), this form had been changed twice. Who knows that how many times this form will be changed in the future.


And I feel like forms should change. Even the best form won't fit every instructor's approach equally.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 21, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> And I feel like forms should change. Even the best form won't fit every instructor's approach equally.


Forms usually change based on what the teacher sees fit for the students to learn.  There are very few schools that try to keep it exactly the same.  If they do keep it exactly the same then it's usually more to preserve history and tradition more than anything else.   name a form and look for it on youtube and you'll see many variations of it.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 21, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> If they do keep it exactly the same then it's usually more to preserve history and tradition more than anything else.


1000 years from today, a form that's 1000 years old, or a form that's 1050 years old are both considered as "ancient". If you burry anything in your back yard, it will become antique 1000 years from today.

If you are old, and if you are also a Chinese, anything that you may say can be quoted as "
Old Chinese saying said …". 

Don't look down on yourself. You are part of the history.


----------



## dvcochran (Sep 21, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Which clip (or picture) are you referencing to?


You post yesterday at 1:34 showing groups of people doing forms together. I think of a partner drill as two people physically interacting with each other. The classic one-step sparring in TKD for example; one person executes an attack and the other person counters.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 21, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> You post yesterday at 1:34 showing groups of people doing forms together. I think of a partner drill as two people physically interacting with each other. The classic one-step sparring in TKD for example; one person executes an attack and the other person counters.


Here are examples of partner drill training for both striking art and throwing art.










[/QUOTE]​


----------



## dvcochran (Sep 21, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Here are examples of partner drill training for both striking art and throwing art.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


[/QUOTE]
Now we are talking partner drills.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 21, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> 1000 years from today, a form that's 1000 years old, or a form that's 1050 years old are both considered as "ancient". If you burry anything in your back yard, it will become antique 1000 years from today.
> 
> If you are old, and if you are also a Chinese, anything that you may say can be quoted as "
> Old Chinese saying said …".
> ...


It only becomes a part of history if someone continues your teachings.   If you teach me something. I learn it. But I decided that what you taught wasn't effective to learning how to fight.  Then your teachings will no longer have the option of being 1000 years old. But it will become forgotten.

If you bury anything in your back yard and I come by dig it up and decided that it's useless and only gets in the way of me growing my garden, then it will only become trash.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 21, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Don't look down on yourself. You are part of the history.


I'm only part of the history if I leave something behind, or leave something for someone to carry on.  Anything less than that, then I'll be forgotten like so many others, even history won't know me.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 21, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> It only becomes a part of history if someone continues your teachings.   If you teach me something. I learn it. But I decided that what you taught wasn't effective to learning how to fight.  Then your teachings will no longer have the option of being 1000 years old. But it will become forgotten.
> 
> If you bury anything in your back yard and I come by dig it up and decided that it's useless and only gets in the way of me growing my garden, then it will only become trash.


Only history will tell whether your form contribution have any value or not.

I hope someday someone will thank me for creating this short form to help that person to remember the 13 postures training.






My teacher had created a video with 11 postures training. My short form make it complete.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 22, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Only history will tell whether your form contribution have any value or not.


As long as you leave something behind.  A book or video sharing your knowledge.  That's about the best way to ensure a contribution of value.

How many times have we referenced old video footage and written books about fighting.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Sep 22, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I was stating an opinion. I wasn't trying to convince anyone. I've been down that road before. Karate is kata, kata is karate. They are inseparable. In my opinion. You may someday come to that realization yourself. Or not.


I could have used several other posts to intro mine, but this one is short and to the point (plus, I agree.)  Karate is sometimes taken as a broad term.  There are so many offshoots and self-started styles or lineages that the term can be ambiguous.  For me, "real" karate means what was taught in Okinawa for the past 200 years (though back then known by other terms), tweaking the imported Chinese styles. 

As originally developed, the kata was composed of kumite and kihon techniques.  Kihon + kumite + linking them into a set series = kata = karate.  But during the 20th century, these three elements diverged:  Kumite became sport adapted sparring (no throat and eye strikes and no breaks, etc); kihon became basic blocks, strikes and kicks; and kata became a bunch of moves to perform (half of which nobody really knew what they meant).  Recently, this has been changing thanks to some traditional veterans who have been researching and rediscovering "traditional" Okinawan karate. 

As a result, kata, kihon and combat kumite are becoming realigned.  Kumite and kihon are contained in the kata once again.  Once again, Karate = Kata.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Sep 22, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> And I feel like forms should change. Even the best form won't fit every instructor's approach equally.


Me think dat if it's oaky-dokey to chanj forms just to pleeze instructor's sence uv how to do (or spell) it, there B az many formz, and eventually stylz, az instructors.  Just becawz one has sertin way speaking doesn't mean they shood re-rite the dikshunary. 

I think it's better for the instructor to learn the true meaning/spelling/pronunciation of the form and adapt his teaching method (not the form) for a particular student.  If after this he thinks the form needs to be changed, maybe his style or form he learned is not what it should be.  Maybe this situation is the result of a prior instructor and the instructor before him changing what used to be a fully functional form because they thought it fit their personal approach better.  After a while, the form devolves and the template no longer works as well as it should.

Another metaphor:  My mother used to bake a pretty good banana bread.  But I didn't like a strong banana taste so I used only one banana.  My wife likes chocolate so she added a good amount of it.  My son liked chocolate a lot so he added even more.  My grandson hates bananas so he left out the one banana.  My other grandson like chewy stuff - that's his approach, so he used less egg and more oil.  Turns out he made delicious brownies, but his kids will never know what banana bread is.

The only exception, in my opinion, would be a _bona fide_ 8th or 9th degree, who has not promoted himself, intimately understands the true meaning of his forms as originally intended by former grandmasters, and is accepted by his peers as a master himself.  If this guy wants to change a move, OK by me.


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 23, 2019)

isshinryuronin said:


> For me, "real" karate means what was taught in Okinawa for the past 200 years (though back then known by other terms), tweaking the imported Chinese styles.



So what do you refer to karate styles like Kyokushin, 55 years old; very different than Okinawa styles; and with kumite, not kata, at its core? Hopefully not "fake karate"?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 23, 2019)

isshinryuronin said:


> Me think dat if it's oaky-dokey to chanj forms just to pleeze instructor's sence uv how to do (or spell) it, there B az many formz, and eventually stylz, az instructors.  Just becawz one has sertin way speaking doesn't mean they shood re-rite the dikshunary.
> 
> I think it's better for the instructor to learn the true meaning/spelling/pronunciation of the form and adapt his teaching method (not the form) for a particular student.  If after this he thinks the form needs to be changed, maybe his style or form he learned is not what it should be.  Maybe this situation is the result of a prior instructor and the instructor before him changing what used to be a fully functional form because they thought it fit their personal approach better.  After a while, the form devolves and the template no longer works as well as it should.
> 
> ...


You lost me entirely in the first paragraph.


----------



## dvcochran (Sep 23, 2019)

isshinryuronin said:


> I think it's better for the instructor to learn the true meaning/spelling/pronunciation of the form and adapt his teaching method (not the form) for a particular student. If after this he thinks the form needs to be changed, maybe his style or form he learned is not what it should be. Maybe this situation is the result of a prior instructor and the instructor before him changing what used to be a fully functional form because they thought it fit their personal approach better. After a while, the form devolves and the template no longer works as well as it should.


Maybe, maybe not is the simplest answer I can come up with. I do think I get what you are trying to say. 

There are/were tools used that simply do not fit the modern world. An example, when I was young (single digit) we still broke our 10 acre garden with a single harrow plow and horse. It was a MAJOR PITA and this was 40 plus years ago. (I don't know how the Amish still do it at large but I respect the hell out of them for doing it). What used to take 2 days can be done in about 3 hours now. So progression in all things is good as long as the MERITS of the past are withheld.

If I hate bananas and never have to eat them again, that is not a bad thing. Conversely, if I love chocolate to the point I over eat chocolate, that IS a bad thing. Same is true for anything. 

***Again: I hope no one takes this as bashing history. I love reading about it. We can learn just as much from our bad past as our good. Maybe more.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Sep 23, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> So what do you refer to karate styles like Kyokushin, 55 years old; very different than Okinawa styles; and with kumite, not kata, at its core? Hopefully not "fake karate"?


Mas Oyama, Kyokushin creator, got his 4th degree in Okinawan Shotokan and studied with Gichin Funakoshi, whom he referred to as his true teacher.  He further stated that of all the things he learned from him, KATA WAS THE MOST IMPORTANT.  (according to _www.historyoffighting.com_)  To be fair, maybe he meant that was the only worthwhile thing he learned from Funakoshi?

He also studied Goju with Yamaguchi for a number of years.  From what I have read, he did incorporate traditional katas from both these systems into his Kyokushin style.  Since his fame centered on his fighting ability, this was what was highlighted and promoted as his full contact tournaments became popular.  But after he died, several senior students claimed mastership and the style fragmented. 

Since these "youngbloods" were geared to the competitive fighting aspect of the style, and their claim to fame, it is natural that kata took a back seat.  Another generation of students will most likely see their kata disappear, leaving Kyokushin as a purely competitive (and no doubt effective) fighting art, but not a complete karate style in the usual sense - more of a separate category.


----------



## Buka (Sep 24, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> There has been some great discussion about whether there is any direct Martial/Fighting value in practicing forms.
> 
> What is your position, not just your opinion?
> If they are good and have purpose, explain why/how.
> ...



I’ve been on the road for a bit and and just now started a two week holiday in New England. But when I get back I want to answer in detail the last two questions in your OP.

In the meantime I hope everyone is well and safely training hard.

And now there’s this fancy Italian eatery that’s just calling my name......


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 24, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> Forms usually change based on what the teacher sees fit for the students to learn.  There are very few schools that try to keep it exactly the same.  If they do keep it exactly the same then it's usually more to preserve history and tradition more than anything else.   name a form and look for it on youtube and you'll see many variations of it.



Not in standardized styles like JKA Shotokan and Kukkiwon TKD. There's individual quality of performance, but it's still the same form. Like how two people can sing the national anthem and it doesn't sound identical, but they're singing the same song.


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 24, 2019)

isshinryuronin said:


> Mas Oyama, Kyokushin creator, got his 4th degree in Okinawan Shotokan and studied with Gichin Funakoshi, whom he referred to as his true teacher.  He further stated that of all the things he learned from him, KATA WAS THE MOST IMPORTANT.  (according to _www.historyoffighting.com_)  To be fair, maybe he meant that was the only worthwhile thing he learned from Funakoshi?


That's how I read it. The most important part of what he learned from Funakoshi, not the most important component of Kyokushin training.


----------



## skribs (Sep 24, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> Not in standardized styles like JKA Shotokan and Kukkiwon TKD. There's individual quality of performance, but it's still the same form. Like how two people can sing the national anthem and it doesn't sound identical, but they're singing the same song.



Except my experience with TKD forms is it's more like playing Bach.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Sep 24, 2019)

Mitlov said:


> Not in standardized styles like JKA Shotokan and Kukkiwon TKD. There's individual quality of performance, but it's still the same form. Like how two people can sing the national anthem and it doesn't sound identical, but they're singing the same song.


The fact that there are different types of TKD makes me think that this is probably not true.  The numerous Taekwondo associations makes me think the same thing.


----------



## Mitlov (Sep 24, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> The fact that there are different types of TKD makes me think that this is probably not true.  The numerous Taekwondo associations makes me think the same thing.



There are many styles of karate. JKA Shotokan is one of them, and all JKA Shotokan dojos use standardized kata. The fact that other karate styles do different katas, or different versions of these katas, does not change the standardization of JKA Shotokan.

There are many styles of TKD. Kukkiwon TKD is one of them, and all Kukkiwon dojangs use standardized forms. The fact that other TKD styles do different forms does not change the standardization of Kukkiwon TKD.


----------



## skribs (Sep 24, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> The fact that there are different types of TKD makes me think that this is probably not true.  The numerous Taekwondo associations makes me think the same thing.



There are numerous TKD associations, and most (to my knowledge) have separate forms.  An ITF school isn't going to train Taegeuk Il Jang different than a KKW school, because they aren't likely to train Taegeuk Il Jang.


----------

