# How do your forms/katas progress?



## skribs (Feb 11, 2018)

I've started a few discussions in the past on curriculums and how they progress, including advancement of patterns, what a white belt should know, and varying teaching styles.  I guess the concept of learning itself is fascinating to me.  Now, I'm curious about the progression of kata.

My understanding is that the purpose of kata, regardless of what art or style you practice, is to contain a progressive understanding of the material.  That a student who has learned all the katas in your art should have a pretty firm understanding of the art.

Now, katas themselves can vary widely.  In Taekwondo, for example, I think that training in hand techniques is generally left up to forms, but kicking techniques are taught separately as drills.  There are some kicks in the forms, but usually not nearly as many as Taekwondo uses in competitions and demonstrations.  However, my school has punch and kick combinations that are rote memorized drills, so you could consider those to be part of the kata, and then most of those techniques start to sound covered under kata.

However, I'm curious about kata themselves.  What is it that a kata teaches, and what is it that each kata in a curriculum teaches?

At my school, Basic Form #1 teaches the basic pattern.  Basic Forms #2 & 3 each take Form #1 and add new concepts to it.  These are taught at the same belt and you could almost reverse the order.  Basic Form #4 combines 2 & 3 together, and I kind of think of it as the first real form.  Like Forms #1-3 break down most of the concepts in Form #4.

After that form, meaning Basic Form #5 and Advanced Forms #1-8, each form adds a couple of new techniques, some new footwork, new concepts, and some increased level of complexity or intricacy.  For example, the basic forms all follow an A-B-A-B-A pattern, while Advanced Form #1 is more like A-B-A(2)-B(2)-A, Advanced Form #3 is A-B-C-D-E (but uses the same basic shape as the basic forms) and Advanced Form #7 has a completely different pattern and none of the parts repeat.

As to techniques, Basic Form #5 uses spinning footwork, Advanced Form #3 has backwards motion and different styles of direction change, and Advanced Form #5 has forward-backward wave-like motions.  The forms include new techniques, like Scissor Block, spear-hand thrust, supported 2-hand blocks, and more intricate striking combinations.

So, to summarize, I'd say that the way my school does katas, each kata builds on what the student already knows, by reinforcing old concepts and techniques, but also adding new ones.  Sort of like how in algebra class you still practice your basic addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division when you are trying to find X.  

However, I'm curious about other arts, or even Taekwondo schools that have different forms.  Do your forms teach isolated concepts, such as one form focused on footwork, another focused on defense, another focused on hand strikes, another on throws?  Does each form have its own theme, such as defense against certain types of attacks, or techniques of a particular variety?  Or do your forms build on each other and reinforce previous concepts while adding new ones?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 11, 2018)

skribs said:


> do your forms build on each other and reinforce previous concepts while adding new ones?


Each and every style should have at least 3 forms:

- beginner level,
- intermediate level,
- advance level.

You don't want to have 3 beginner level forms. To go through elementary school 3 times won't give you a PhD degree. You want to grow tall. You don't want to grow fat.

Take the simple punch for example. For the beginner level, you may just borrow force from the ground and punch while your feet are not moving. During the intermediate training, you may want to add in footwork. When you punch, your feet will slide forward. 

1. beginner level - static punch.
2. intermediate level - dynamic punch (running punch).
3. advance level - use kick/punch to set up punch

You may also separate different level forms in the following:

1. beginner level - offense skill.
2. beginner level - defense skill.
3. beginner level - combo skill (use move 1 to set up move 2).


----------



## JR 137 (Feb 11, 2018)

Traditional karate kata are generally more difficult as the student progresses through the ranks.  I guess a way to describe it is that through the kyu ranks, the movements become more awkward when you initially learn each one, if that makes sense.  Some build on each other in a way, but not as you’re describing here.  Most kyu rank kata that I’ve learned are typically 20 counts.  Some dan level kata are a lot longer, others are around 20 counts.

A lot of kyu level kata share the same embussen, or step pattern, but they don’t share the same movements.  Many are a capital I (I have how computer script makes that look like an L), and some are an upside down T.  Dan kata drifts further away from this.

Here’s an example of progression...


----------



## skribs (Feb 11, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Each and every style should have at least 3 forms:
> 
> - beginner level,
> - intermediate level,
> ...



I'm not seeing the connection to katas here.



JR 137 said:


> Traditional karate kata are generally more difficult as the student progresses through the ranks.  I guess a way to describe it is that through the kyu ranks, the movements become more awkward when you initially learn each one, if that makes sense.  Some build on each other in a way, but not as you’re describing here.  Most kyu rank kata that I’ve learned are typically 20 counts.  Some dan level kata are a lot longer, others are around 20 counts.
> 
> A lot of kyu level kata share the same embussen, or step pattern, but they don’t share the same movements.  Many are a capital I (I have how computer script makes that look like an L), and some are an upside down T.  Dan kata drifts further away from this.
> 
> Here’s an example of progression...



Is there sort of a different theme to each form?  Or is it just another list of techniques?

I do notice a lot of the techniques in the forms in this video are in our forms as well, just in a different order.


----------



## Midnight-shadow (Feb 11, 2018)

In the Chinese White Crane style I studied, there are 3 variations on the "San Zhan" (Sanchin for Karate practitioners). You have the basic "San Zhan", then you have "San Zhan Li Ma", then you have "San Zhan San". While each form follows the same basic pattern (3 steps forwards, 3 steps backwards doing the same hand techniques each time), each form gets progressively harder. Harder footwork, more complex hand techniques, etc.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 11, 2018)

skribs said:


> I'm not seeing the connection to katas here.


For the Baji system:

1. beginner level form - static punch.
2. intermediate level form - dynamic punch.

For the Preying mantis system:

1. beginner level form - speed training.
2. intermediate level form  - body pull/push limbs training.

For the long fist system:

1. beginner level form - 1 step 1 punch (power generation training).
2. intermediate level form - 1 step 3 punch (speed training).
3. advance level form  - 3 steps 1 punch (mobility training).


----------



## skribs (Feb 11, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> For the Baji system:
> 
> 1. beginner level form - static punch.
> 2. intermediate level form - dynamic punch.
> ...



This sounds like you're talking about the evolution of individual techniques, and not techniques that are strung together into a kata.


----------



## Hyoho (Feb 11, 2018)

The kata does not change. It's your understanding, or lack of it that changes. As you advance it hopefully gets better. Levels in kata? Real kata is a breakdown of a waza.

So I guess if you can make up kata, you can make up levels


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 11, 2018)

skribs said:


> I've started a few discussions in the past on curriculums and how they progress, including advancement of patterns, what a white belt should know, and varying teaching styles.  I guess the concept of learning itself is fascinating to me.  Now, I'm curious about the progression of kata.
> 
> My understanding is that the purpose of kata, regardless of what art or style you practice, is to contain a progressive understanding of the material.  That a student who has learned all the katas in your art should have a pretty firm understanding of the art.
> 
> ...


I'll speak to the kata I teach, which are different from most in a couple of ways. Most notably, they aren't historical - I created them, so I know the exact intention of their creator.

Here they are, as they currently exist in my mind (some of these aren't finalized, and one isn't yet created):

1st Set Classical kata. This moves through the 10 techniques in the 1st Classical set in NGA, flowing form one to the next in their Classical form (the short forms).
Core Non-Classical kata. This doesn't yet exist, and will focus on techniques not in the classical curriculum of NGA, and probably some strikes.
Single-stick kata. This uses a single stick (or club) for strikes, blocks, and locks.
Double-stick kata. This uses two sticks in a series of strikes and blocks.
Staff kata. This, yet again, uses the same movement pattern. It uses a staff (preferably a jo) for strikes, blocks, and sweep.
Flexible weapon kata. I haven't yet started developing this. It will focus on using a flexible improvised weapon (belt, towel, etc.) for blocks, locks, and throws.
The intent is for all to follow the basic movement pattern of the 1st Set Classical kata - nearly identical footwork and body position, and keeping the hand movements at least vaguely similar.

There isn't really a progression in the kata. The progression happens in when they learn each of these (the kata comes after they start learning the respective material, as a reinforcement). I am re-using the same movement pattern, to make it easier to learn the subsequent forms. The forms are not a repository of all knowledge, but a way to practice parts of the material. With the weapons, the point is to be able to practice a few moves over and over to get more comfortable with the weapons - that comfort is what leads to the improvisation that makes a weapon truly useful.

Of these, the first is finalized. 3-5 are thought out but not ready for delivery to students. 2 and 6 are not begun, and may never actually exist.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 11, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Each and every style should have at least 3 forms:
> 
> - beginner level,
> - intermediate level,
> ...


I don't agree that every style needs this progression. I could envision a style with 5 beginner forms, each addressing a different area of the art.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 11, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> Many are a capital I (I have how computer script makes that look like an L)


A capital H works when you have to work with a sans-serif font.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Feb 11, 2018)

Hyoho said:


> The kata does not change. It's your understanding, or lack of it that changes. As you advance it hopefully gets better. Levels in kata? Real kata is a breakdown of a waza.
> 
> So I guess if you can make up kata, you can make up levels


 maybe from the koryu view, you are correct, kata does not change.  but from my view when talking about karate it does and should.  karate kata is often an incomplete and misunderstood Chinese form.  the principals and concepts are often bastardized versions of the Chinese equivalent. so they are inherently flawed.  over the decades ones understanding deepens and that may cause different timings and target points. changes may be subtle or dramatic but they do happen.  i believe that after decades of study you make the kata your own.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 11, 2018)

Hyoho said:


> Real kata is a breakdown of a waza.


That is a valid use of kata, but not the only valid use IMO.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 11, 2018)

skribs said:


> This sounds like you're talking about the evolution of individual techniques, and not techniques that are strung together into a kata.


This is the beginner level Baji form. For each and every punch, the feet are not moving during the punch (static punch). It's used as the elementary school text book.






This is the intermediate level Baji form. For each and every punch, the feet are sliding on the ground (dynamic punch). It's used as the high school text book.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 11, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> I don't agree that every style needs this progression. I could envision a style with 5 beginner forms, each addressing a different area of the art.


Of course in elementary school, you can have different classes such as English, math, history, ... But the math that you may learn during the elementary school should be different from the math that you will learn in college. There is no way that you will learn "differential equation", or "category theory" in elementary school.

You may teach "back kick" to beginners. Bu you may only teach "jumping back kick" to more advanced students.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Feb 11, 2018)

@skribs
what you are asking is going to be very dependent on the style.  i think you know that but i am not sure you are aware of the width and scope of the differences.  the one constant across the many sources is that kata is a way of transmitting the "feel" of the style.  i always use music as a comparison.  there are only so many notes on a scale. there are scales that link matching notes together.  and yet there are diverse styles of music.  blues, rock, country or jazz  they all share the same notes.  but there is a feel to the music that is undeniablly distinct for each. they are separated by something that cannot be taught through a sheet of paper with lines and dots on it.  in the same way each martial art style has a distinct way of moving.  you cannot learn this feel by the segments of movement or "notes"  but only though the entire composition of a kata.
one purpose of kata is to teach the feel of the style. without the kata the feel will be lost and the heart of the style will die.
another facet of kata is to serve as a vehicle to pass on a catalog of technique / waza.  without a body of kata the techniques stand by themselves and the catalog is prone to additions and subtractions.  over time it would be inevitable that the original catalog would have been replaced. 
even with the advent of kata this area is a real week point for karate.  transmissions from teacher to student has been incomplete,  meanings have been lost. even complete kata have been lost to time. add to this that most karate is a hodge podge of stuff collected by one individual then mish mashed by the next and karate loses its viability to be a complete unit of coherent progression. the other issue here is American karate. William Chow never taught forms.  they were completely fabricated by others over time.  these forms were created and designed as a single stand alone unit not a coherent progression.  i will not delve into the complexity or depth of these forms, people can make up their own minds on that but if a form was created after only a few years of study it probably does not hold much depth.(or if the form was only created for the sake of giving students more things to learn to keep students longer,,,,which was often the case)  i should also mention the fact that Itosu created forms for school children and yet many styles use these forms as a standard to progress to black belt or created re hashed versions of these child focused forms for their own styles.


----------



## JR 137 (Feb 11, 2018)

skribs said:


> I'm not seeing the connection to katas here.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Those are the Pinan/Heian kata, depending on pronunciation.  They’re a very common series of kata.  Allegedly they were developed by (founder of Shotokan) Gichen Funakoshi’s teacher Itosu.  He took the kata Kanku/Kusanku apart and simplified them to teach to children and beginners.  If that thoery’s correct (there’s compelling evidence that it’s not entirely correct), then you could say the Pinan series is a progression leading to better performance and understanding of Kanku.

As far as the connection to your forms, a lot of TKD schools do those forms in one way or another.  It’s a long held belief that TKD came from Shotokan, so  if that’s correct then naturally those kata would make their way into TKD either outright or influentially.

Kyokushin and it’s offshoots (Seido is an offshoot) come from Shotokan and Goju Ryu, as Mas Oyama trained in both before forming Kyokushin.  The rest of the syllabus is pretty much all Goju Ryu kata with one or two others.  The Goju kata aren’t connected like the Pinan kata are, but many of them come from Goju’s founder Chojun Miyagi and his teacher Kanryo Higaonna.  There’s a progression in difficulty.  Look up Sanchin, Gekisai Dai, Tensho, Saiha/Saifa, Seiunchin, etc.  And as hoshin said, they’re not a progression per se, but they do get progressively more difficult and complex.  It’s only natural to teach the “easiest” ones first.


----------



## skribs (Feb 11, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> Those are the Pinan/Heian kata, depending on pronunciation.  They’re a very common series of kata.  Allegedly they were developed by (founder of Shotokan) Gichen Funakoshi’s teacher Itosu.  He took the kata Kanku/Kusanku apart and simplified them to teach to children and beginners.  If that thoery’s correct (there’s compelling evidence that it’s not entirely correct), then you could say the Pinan series is a progression leading to better performance and understanding of Kanku.
> 
> As far as the connection to your forms, a lot of TKD schools do those forms in one way or another.  It’s a long held belief that TKD came from Shotokan, so  if that’s correct then naturally those kata would make their way into TKD either outright or influentially.
> 
> Kyokushin and it’s offshoots (Seido is an offshoot) come from Shotokan and Goju Ryu, as Mas Oyama trained in both before forming Kyokushin.  The rest of the syllabus is pretty much all Goju Ryu kata with one or two others.  The Goju kata aren’t connected like the Pinan kata are, but many of them come from Goju’s founder Chojun Miyagi and his teacher Kanryo Higaonna.  There’s a progression in difficulty.  Look up Sanchin, Gekisai Dai, Tensho, Saiha/Saifa, Seiunchin, etc.  And as hoshin said, they’re not a progression per se, but they do get progressively more difficult and complex.  It’s only natural to teach the “easiest” ones first.



My understanding is that TKD came from Karate (I don't know enough about the Karate lineages to know which one).  Well, more specifically, TKD came from Tang Soo Do, which came from Karate.  So the Taekwondo of the mid-20th century was largely based on Karate, but has evolved into what it is today.  

So I guess that's kind of along the lines of what Hoshin was saying, that over time the kata change (in the case of Taekwondo, they simply created new katas) and the art evolves.


----------



## skribs (Feb 11, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> I don't agree that every style needs this progression. I could envision a style with 5 beginner forms, each addressing a different area of the art.



I don't know of any (which is why I asked).  But I was thinking there could be a kata that focuses on footwork, one on hand strikes, one on kicks, one on blocking techniques, and one on take-downs and throws.

Alternatively, there could be a kata focused on defenses against a punch, one on defenses against kicks, defenses against grabs, tactics against multiple opponents, and an aggressive kata.

As you progress in rank, there could be more advanced versions of those katas, or you could grow your understanding of the details of the kata or other applications of the kata (if your art is open to multiple interpretations of the same move in a kata).

The reason I made this thread is because I was thinking about how my school's first kata primarily teaches the footwork, and then I got started thinking on how many different ways there are to move.  For example, if I am in a front stance with my right foot forward, and I want to turn to the right, I can:

Move my right foot out to the right
Move my right foot across my front and spin left on my left foot
Move my right foot across my back and pivot right on my left foot
Move my left foot out to the left
Move my left foot across my front and pivot right on my right foot
Move my left foot across my back and spin left on my right foot
Then I was thinking of how I would block with each of those steps, as if someone was throwing a punch from my right, how I would I block, and what would my follow-up technique be?

There's also so many ways you can move forward, move back, turn when your other foot is forward, and that just got me started on this train of thought.

I often like to think of how I would do things, i.e. how I would do a curriculum, even if it's not something I'll ever make, it's a fun mental exercise.  Most of the time it's how I'd make a video game, but lately it's how I'd do a curriculum if I started from the ground up.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Feb 12, 2018)

skribs said:


> I often like to think of how I would do things, i.e. how I would do a curriculum, even if it's not something I'll ever make, it's a fun mental exercise. Most of the time it's how I'd make a video game, but lately it's how I'd do a curriculum if I started from the ground up.



And that my friend has been the crux of the problem for a long time now.
How many decades of training do you have? How many decades of teaching do you have? 
For yourself it is theoretical. But many people have made those decisions without much experience and those arts exist for better or worse.


----------



## Hyoho (Feb 12, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> maybe from the koryu view, you are correct, kata does not change.  but from my view when talking about karate it does and should.  karate kata is often an incomplete and misunderstood Chinese form.  the principals and concepts are often bastardized versions of the Chinese equivalent. so they are inherently flawed.  over the decades ones understanding deepens and that may cause different timings and target points. changes may be subtle or dramatic but they do happen.  i believe that after decades of study you make the kata your own.



What you say is not strictly true about koryu or waza. One could say that no two situations would ever be the same from a distance, position, timing etc. For this reason we have henka. We can do a particular waza with a specific variation. But that waza must still contain the fundamentals of a school. My school "always" does henka for public exibition/demonstrations. I do not allowed students to show the original as it still "mongai fushutsu". Not the be taught outside the gate. That's why we have the kata (the breakdown) To set in stone the fundamentals and possibly rearrage them. It's still X Ryu doing X Ryu. Not X Ryu making it up so that it's no longer X Ryu.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 12, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Of course in elementary school, you can have different classes such as English, math, history, ... But the math that you may learn during the elementary school should be different from the math that you will learn in college. There is no way that you will learn "differential equation", or "category theory" in elementary school.
> 
> You may teach "back kick" to beginners. Bu you may only teach "jumping back kick" to more advanced students.


Agreed. I just don’t think it is necessary to have a kata that goes beyond basics. It can be useful, but isn’t necessary.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 12, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> @skribs
> what you are asking is going to be very dependent on the style.  i think you know that but i am not sure you are aware of the width and scope of the differences.  the one constant across the many sources is that kata is a way of transmitting the "feel" of the style.  i always use music as a comparison.  there are only so many notes on a scale. there are scales that link matching notes together.  and yet there are diverse styles of music.  blues, rock, country or jazz  they all share the same notes.  but there is a feel to the music that is undeniablly distinct for each. they are separated by something that cannot be taught through a sheet of paper with lines and dots on it.  in the same way each martial art style has a distinct way of moving.  you cannot learn this feel by the segments of movement or "notes"  but only though the entire composition of a kata.
> one purpose of kata is to teach the feel of the style. without the kata the feel will be lost and the heart of the style will die.
> another facet of kata is to serve as a vehicle to pass on a catalog of technique / waza.  without a body of kata the techniques stand by themselves and the catalog is prone to additions and subtractions.  over time it would be inevitable that the original catalog would have been replaced.
> even with the advent of kata this area is a real week point for karate.  transmissions from teacher to student has been incomplete,  meanings have been lost. even complete kata have been lost to time. add to this that most karate is a hodge podge of stuff collected by one individual then mish mashed by the next and karate loses its viability to be a complete unit of coherent progression. the other issue here is American karate. William Chow never taught forms.  they were completely fabricated by others over time.  these forms were created and designed as a single stand alone unit not a coherent progression.  i will not delve into the complexity or depth of these forms, people can make up their own minds on that but if a form was created after only a few years of study it probably does not hold much depth.(or if the form was only created for the sake of giving students more things to learn to keep students longer,,,,which was often the case)  i should also mention the fact that Itosu created forms for school children and yet many styles use these forms as a standard to progress to black belt or created re hashed versions of these child focused forms for their own styles.


I’m not sure that’s universal. Is it necessarily true that kata give the few of the style? Perhaps they do, if they are important to the delivery of the curriculum, in that they actually influence the feel.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Feb 12, 2018)

Hyoho said:


> What you say is not strictly true about koryu or waza. One could say that no two situations would ever be the same from a distance, position, timing etc. For this reason we have henka. We can do a particular waza with a specific variation. But that waza must still contain the fundamentals of a school. My school "always" does henka for public exibition/demonstrations. I do not allowed students to show the original as it still "mongai fushutsu". Not the be taught outside the gate. That's why we have the kata (the breakdown) To set in stone the fundamentals and possibly rearrage them. It's still X Ryu doing X Ryu. Not X Ryu making it up so that it's no longer X Ryu.



i do understand what your saying. i might not have communicated well on my part about karate.  the meanings behind most of karate kata has been lost.(even though most will not admit it) perhaps they were never known by the Okinawans and certainly would be lost in transmission to the main land Japanese.  so where in Koryu you have the ability to differentiate between henka and uchi-soto (not sure if you actually use that term that way, but hope you get my meaning) in the waza.  the bunkai for karate is very subjective.  which can have drastic influence on the preformance.  no one within a Ryu can define definitively what the bunkai would be.  that is a big problem.


----------



## jobo (Feb 12, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> i do understand what your saying. i might not have communicated well on my part about karate.  the meanings behind most of karate kata has been lost.(even though most will not admit it) perhaps they were never known by the Okinawans and certainly would be lost in transmission to the main land Japanese.  so where in Koryu you have the ability to differentiate between henka and uchi-soto (not sure if you actually use that term that way, but hope you get my meaning) in the waza.  the bunkai for karate is very subjective.  which can have drastic influence on the preformance.  no one within a Ryu can define definitively what the bunkai would be.  that is a big problem.


i think there is a problem with the kata must have a bunkai application, i suspect that the " meaning "hasn't been lost to time, rather there never was one in the first place. Or the application is very apparent, if its not then its of no consequence. There are not secrets hidden in kata to be un covered. 

kata works as a means of learning/ re enforcing movement patterns, particularly the transition from one to another. Beyond that level of application it becomes a dance, a dance that becomes increasingly complex for no other reason than its more difficult to learn


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 12, 2018)

jobo said:


> i think there is a problem with the kata must have a bunkai application, i suspect that the " meaning "hasn't been lost to time, rather there never was one in the first place. Or the application is very apparent, if its not then its of no consequence. There are not secrets hidden in kata to be un covered.
> 
> kata works as a means of learning/ re enforcing movement patterns, particularly the transition from one to another. Beyond that level of application it becomes a dance, a dance that becomes increasingly complex for no other reason than its more difficult to learn


This is how I prefer to use and teach forms.


----------



## skribs (Feb 12, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> And that my friend has been the crux of the problem for a long time now.
> How many decades of training do you have? How many decades of teaching do you have?
> For yourself it is theoretical. But many people have made those decisions without much experience and those arts exist for better or worse.



By the time I make up my mind on how I'd do things, I will have decades of experience 

This is actually part of why I like doing the theoretical.  Because if I just come up with an idea on the spot, then it's going to suck, but if I spend years going over the theory in my head, and refining that theory as I learn more, then at some point I may have something really awesome.

Of course, my plan right now is that when I become a master, I use my Master's curriculum, with a few minor tweaks, i.e. add one punch to the basic punch list, move a jumping kick a belt later, a couple things like that.



gpseymour said:


> I’m not sure that’s universal. Is it necessarily true that kata give the few of the style? Perhaps they do, if they are important to the delivery of the curriculum, in that they actually influence the feel.



At my school, the kata definitely play into my Master's self defense strategy, which involves deeper stances for balance and power.  It does not reflect our sparring style at all.



jobo said:


> i think there is a problem with the kata must have a bunkai application, i suspect that the " meaning "hasn't been lost to time, rather there never was one in the first place. Or the application is very apparent, if its not then its of no consequence. There are not secrets hidden in kata to be un covered.
> 
> kata works as a means of learning/ re enforcing movement patterns, particularly the transition from one to another. Beyond that level of application it becomes a dance, a dance that becomes increasingly complex for no other reason than its more difficult to learn



I have had a hard time with this.  However, I've come to the conclusion that even if you won't use the particular technique in a form, the muscle memory you build can be useful for other techniques, and that something increasingly difficult to learn can be a good thing, too.

On the one hand, the muscle memory can be an important thing.  For example, there is a double punch technique in Taebaek Hyung (which is also in our version of Palgwe #4).  I've seen that used as a double-punch by Miesha Tate in MMA, I've also used a similar motion when doing an outside block and a punch, or a high block and a punch.  While I don't expect to use the double-punch itself, the technique isolates muscles that I would use with other techniques.

On the other hand, I feel that for people at the edge of our age ranges, meaning especially young kids (i.e. 4-8 years old) and our older students (50+) the complexity of the forms can be a good thing on its own.  It helps kids built study habits and it helps adults keep their brains active.


----------



## jobo (Feb 12, 2018)

skribs said:


> By the time I make up my mind on how I'd do things, I will have decades of experience
> 
> This is actually part of why I like doing the theoretical.  Because if I just come up with an idea on the spot, then it's going to suck, but if I spend years going over the theory in my head, and refining that theory as I learn more, then at some point I may have something really awesome.
> 
> ...


yes I'm with you NEARLY all the way, learning something, anything, is in its self a good thing, be they movement patterns from ma, movement patterns from playing music or just dates of battles. Good.

but movement patterns that have no practical application to ma, should be replaced with ones that do, or you might as well spend your time learning guitar as you will get much the same benefits.

if a double punch, is good for block and punch, then DO block and punch as that will be better again at muscle memory just as kicking a football is better practise than kicking a cardboard box if kicking footballs is what you are after.

you can't of course do that, as its not in that kata, so you have to follow what there even if its not optimum because of " tradition!

there is a double punch in one of the katas we do, where you invisible opponent, is on the floor and you squat down and double punch, this should be replaced by kicking them in the ribs, as its a far more practical and effective response. But ma in general seems lacking in kicking prone opponents


----------



## skribs (Feb 12, 2018)

jobo said:


> yes I'm with you NEARLY all the way, learning something, anything, is in its self a good thing, be they movement patterns from ma, movement patterns from playing music or just dates of battles. Good.
> 
> but movement patterns that have no practical application to ma, should be replaced with ones that do, or you might as well spend your time learning guitar as you will get much the same benefits.
> 
> ...



The motion for the block and the punch (of this type) is similar enough that it doesn't matter.  It would be more like a kicker working on his kicking motion and applying that to both kickoffs and field goals.

I'd also argue that punching their head into the concrete is going to be very effective, likely more effecting than kicking them in the ribs.


----------



## Midnight-shadow (Feb 12, 2018)

jobo said:


> there is a double punch in one of the katas we do, where you invisible opponent, is on the floor and you squat down and double punch, this should be replaced by kicking them in the ribs, as its a far more practical and effective response. But ma in general seems lacking in kicking prone opponents



Doing a Soccer kick to someone's ribs probably didn't seem "kungfu-y" enough for the kata compared to the double punch. Image is very important


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 12, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Of course in elementary school, you can have different classes such as English, math, history, ... But the math that you may learn during the elementary school should be different from the math that you will learn in college. There is no way that you will learn "differential equation", or "category theory" in elementary school.
> 
> You may teach "back kick" to beginners. Bu you may only teach "jumping back kick" to more advanced students.


Actually, anyone with some reasonable athletic skill can learn flashy moves like jumping spinning kicks.  Even a beginner in the martial arts.  It’s not an advanced technique.

I’ve seen kids come into capoeira as complete beginners, but they have the athletic ability to do all kinds of outlandish acrobatics.  But as a capoeirista, they are a complete beginner with no understanding of the fundamentals nor how to engage in the roda.


----------



## Midnight-shadow (Feb 12, 2018)

Flying Crane said:


> Actually, anyone with some reasonable athletic skill can learn flashy moves like jumping spinning kicks.  Even a beginner in the martial arts.  It’s not an advanced technique.
> 
> I’ve seen kids come into capoeira as complete beginners, but they have the athletic ability to do all kinds of outlandish acrobatics.  But as a capoeirista, they are a complete beginner with no understanding of the fundamentals nor how to engage in the roda.



Agreed, and often the difference between a beginner doing a technique and an advanced student doing a technique is the ability to apply that technique in combat. As a beginner Martial Artist I have no problem doing a Tornado Kick to thin air, but I doubt I could pull it off effectively in a fight. Some people might argue that the technique is just ineffective in real combat no matter who is using it, but there have been cases where a pro MMA fighter has used a flashy technique successfully in a match.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Feb 12, 2018)

jobo said:


> i think there is a problem with the kata must have a bunkai application, i suspect that the " meaning "hasn't been lost to time, rather there never was one in the first place.


we would have to have the input from a Chinese MA to answer that question.  the Okinawan kata were transposed from the Chinese.  some forms are identical others only exist as Okinawan styles now, the original Chinese versions being lost to time. as i study the Chinese versions more and more, at this time i am under the impression that every action has an application. i have also found that the Okinawan versions of the same actions are often distorted and that the application is nothing like the Chinese understanding.  within a kata,  the mere rotation of a hand 30 degrees could change the way an entire sequence of moves are interpreted.  if we look back on the beginnings of Okinawan karate, we see some very basic and rudimentary understandings.  its like comparing the old Irish fighters or Gentleman Jim Corbett with Mike Tyson or Floyd Mayweather.  in Choki Motobu's book he refers to forms as styles. this implies to me that just knowing one form was seen as something special.  karate in the beginning was not the complete art that we know today.  most likely an Okinawan was shown the superficial moves of forms and left on their own after that.  there are known exceptions to this but i think it applies to a large majority of what we have today. but that doesnt mean the Chinese didnt know what they were doing.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Feb 12, 2018)

if you look at Chinese forms and Okinawan forms. when you look at the same form from the two cultures there is a stark difference in the feel of how they are done.  there is a huge disconnect there. if we look at that double punch example,  that action does not really fit in with the rest of the body of work in the karate style. it seems a bit out of place.  but if we look at the Chinese styles it fits like a duck to water.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Feb 12, 2018)

karate.


----------



## skribs (Feb 12, 2018)

Midnight-shadow said:


> Agreed, and often the difference between a beginner doing a technique and an advanced student doing a technique is the ability to apply that technique in combat. As a beginner Martial Artist I have no problem doing a Tornado Kick to thin air, but I doubt I could pull it off effectively in a fight. Some people might argue that the technique is just ineffective in real combat no matter who is using it, but there have been cases where a pro MMA fighter has used a flashy technique successfully in a match.



There was a HUGE debate about this in the Taekwondo forums about the practicality of Taekwondo sparring techniques and tactics in a self defense situation.  My opinion is that it CAN be effective, but you can't use it expecting it to be like it is on the mat, where the ground may be different and the person you're kicking can grab your leg.



hoshin1600 said:


> in Choki Motobu's book he refers to forms as styles. this implies to me that just knowing one form was seen as something special. karate in the beginning was not the complete art that we know today. most likely an Okinawan was shown the superficial moves of forms and left on their own after that. there are known exceptions to this but i think it applies to a large majority of what we have today. but that doesnt mean the Chinese didnt know what they were doing.



I remember watching a lot of the very flowy Chinese forms and thinking it was more of a dance.  Having taken Hapkido for a few years, and then watching Chinese forms again, I see a lot of throwing motions.  However, they seem to be interpreted to the uninitiated (as I once was) as either a dance or some weird slaps and strikes.  I wonder if this is where part of the disconnect is.

With that said, I don't know that anyone is arguing that the Chinese don't know what they were doing.



hoshin1600 said:


> if you look at Chinese forms and Okinawan forms. when you look at the same form from the two cultures there is a stark difference in the feel of how they are done. there is a huge disconnect there. if we look at that double punch example, that action does not really fit in with the rest of the body of work in the karate style. it seems a bit out of place. but if we look at the Chinese styles it fits like a duck to water.



Care to elaborate?

Edit:  I see you've posted some videos (as I was writing this post).  However, they aren't loading for me right now...


----------



## jobo (Feb 12, 2018)

skribs said:


> The motion for the block and the punch (of this type) is similar enough that it doesn't matter.  It would be more like a kicker working on his kicking motion and applying that to both kickoffs and field goals.
> 
> I'd also argue that punching their head into the concrete is going to be very effective, likely more effecting than kicking them in the ribs.


that's not really a,sound, argument, first your assuming concrete, it could as,easily be a muddy field, the movement of kicking, is far more efficient than bending and punching, and should be harder, legs generaly be stronger and having more travel than punches, if it a max damage situation you want , a stamp to the head is still more efficient and more damaging than a punch, but there a man slaughter, charge in there if your unlucky

its hard to argue, though it seems you try, that doing something which is quite close to the movement you want, is as good for muscle memory as doing the exact movement to want to replicate from muscle memory?

there is,an old joke round these parts that goes... Would you hit a man when he is down? No id kick him its easier, seems to sum it up nicely


----------



## hoshin1600 (Feb 12, 2018)

what we are actually talking about here is realist art VS abstract art.
does the kata look like real fighting moves or are they abstractions of movement.  there is nothing wrong with abstraction . sometimes abstractions are more real.  but where i have a problem is when someone looks at the abstract art and says "oh see that..now that is clearly a painting of the Millennium Flacon"  when it was painted by Van gogh.


----------



## skribs (Feb 12, 2018)

jobo said:


> that's not really a,sound, argument, first your assuming concrete, it could as,easily be a muddy field, the movement of kicking, is far more efficient than bending and punching, and should be harder, legs generaly be stronger and having more travel than punches, if it a max damage situation you want , a stamp to the head is still more efficient and more damaging than a punch
> 
> its hard to argue, though it seems you try, that doing something which is quite close to the movement you want, is as good for muscle memory as doing the exact movement to want to replicate from muscle memory?



Kneeling down and punch and standing up is faster for me than to do a kick on the ground.

Kicking someone in the ribs is a different motion than the kicks I'm taught on standing opponents.  It involves bringing the leg back to generate the power.  If I were to kick someone in the ribs like I kick someone in a standing position there would be no momentum at all going into the kick.  Then they could grab my leg and trip me over.

The same applies to a kick down into the face.  We do use some of those, but we much more often teach the kneeling punch, because it can be very easy for someone to trip you from the prone position.  The kneeling stance is a much more stable platform to strike down from.

A downward kick also lacks the ability to generate power from the ground.  Of course, the same argument could be made for a downward punch, but it's easier to put your shoulder into a downward punch than your hip into a downward kick.

Many of our techniques on a downed attacker also occur after a take-down.  In many of those we end up knelt down and still have hold of them.  A kick wouldn't work from that position.  If we're standing, we're usually holding onto the wrist, and would prefer to break the wrist or elbow than kick to the ribs.

Basically, my "weak argument" is that I prefer a more stable platform where I still have hold of them and am less likely to be tripped.


----------



## jobo (Feb 12, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> if you look at Chinese forms and Okinawan forms. when you look at the same form from the two cultures there is a stark difference in the feel of how they are done.  there is a huge disconnect there. if we look at that double punch example,  that action does not really fit in with the rest of the body of work in the karate style. it seems a bit out of place.  but if we look at the Chinese styles it fits like a duck to water.


I'm not sure we are on different sides of this argument? 

with out the in-depth knowledge of some, id say that the transition from Chinese to Japanese ma is more cultural than lost techniques, the. Chinese being more fluid and dance like the Japanese being more stiff and powerful short movements.

i don't think one is superior to the other, just different, if there were lost skills, rather than forgotten as they didn't work in the new style, Chinese ma would be better and it's not


----------



## jobo (Feb 12, 2018)

skribs said:


> Kneeling down and punch and standing up is faster for me than to do a kick on the ground.
> 
> Kicking someone in the ribs is a different motion than the kicks I'm taught on standing opponents.  It involves bringing the leg back to generate the power.  If I were to kick someone in the ribs like I kick someone in a standing position there would be no momentum at all going into the kick.  Then they could grab my leg and trip me over.
> 
> ...


well it was squating and punching, kneeling is more complex again, fine if you find yourself in a kneeling position, but it would be very silly to go from standing to kneeling deliberately, he may have friends, sort of thing. 

yes that kick isn't used in ma, the argument is it should be, 

we have an on going debate about my kicking techneque, which is more football, ( soccer) than karate, it has its limitations barefooted, but works a treat with a pair of doc martins on. Which is far more likely on a trip to the pub


----------



## skribs (Feb 12, 2018)

jobo said:


> well it was squating and punching, kneeling is more complex again, fine if you find yourself in a kneeling position, but it would be very silly to go from standing to kneeling deliberately, he may have friends, sort of thing.
> 
> yes that kick isn't used in ma, the argument is it should be,
> 
> we have an on going debate about my kicking techneque, which is more football, ( soccer) than karate, it has its limitations barefooted, but works a treat with a pair of doc martins on. Which is far more likely on a trip to the pub



From a front stance, you pick up your rear heel and then put your knee on the ground.  Then you straighten you rear leg to stand up.

Kneeling is not very complex at all.

EDIT to clarify.  Kneeling is so simple I've never had to explain the technique before, so I'm not sure how you get that it's so difficult to do.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 12, 2018)

skribs said:


> There was a HUGE debate about this in the Taekwondo forums about the practicality of Taekwondo sparring techniques and tactics in a self defense situation.  My opinion is that it CAN be effective, but you can't use it expecting it to be like it is on the mat, where the ground may be different and the person you're kicking can grab your leg.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The legitimate Chinese forms that’s I have learned and seen have not been showy or flowery.  What you may have seen were examples of Modern Wushu, which was developed by the Chinese government in the 1950s as a cultural expression and performance and competition sport.  It is based on the older fighting methods, but was altered for aesthetic reasons and deliberately separated from useful combat applications.  Now it is essentially an acrobatics floor routine with a martial flavor. And that is what it is intended to be.


----------



## Midnight-shadow (Feb 12, 2018)

skribs said:


> I remember watching a lot of the very flowy Chinese forms and thinking it was more of a dance. Having taken Hapkido for a few years, and then watching Chinese forms again, I see a lot of throwing motions. However, they seem to be interpreted to the uninitiated (as I once was) as either a dance or some weird slaps and strikes. I wonder if this is where part of the disconnect is.
> 
> With that said, I don't know that anyone is arguing that the Chinese don't know what they were doing.



In some ways the traditional Chinese forms were specifically designed like this. My instructor told me that the old Chinese Masters were very protective of their more advanced techniques and so hid their "secret" moves in the forms and made the forms look more like dance than combat, so that only devoted students of the style could discover the more advanced techniques and fully utilise the form. He demonstrated such a technique that was hidden in the very first form I ever learned. The movement was a seemingly random circular motion with the arms that on the surface appeared to be just fluff, however it turns out that the movement was actually a type of joint lock.

One thing I found odd when I was training weapons is that the civilian forms followed the whole "flowery hidden secrets" concept, whereas the military forms were a lot more straightforward in their approach. For example, the Jian is a civilian's weapon and the form is almost like a dance, weaving back and forth with a lot of seemingly silly and pointless movements. By contrast, the Dao is a military weapon and the form reflects this with strikes and blocks that are very easy to understand and use.

EDIT: Here's an example of this in action. The first video is a variation on the standard Jian form, whereas the second is a military Dao form.











The differences in approach are very apparent, even taking into account the physical differences in the 2 weapons.


----------



## jobo (Feb 12, 2018)

skribs said:


> From a front stance, you pick up your rear heel and then put your knee on the ground.  Then you straighten you rear leg to stand up.
> 
> Kneeling is not very complex at all.
> 
> EDIT to clarify.  Kneeling is so simple I've never had to explain the technique before, so I'm not sure how you get that it's so difficult to do.



kneeling and punching its far more complex movement pattern, than simply kicking someone in ribs, you then of course need to stand up, which is more complex again, all that's. Complexity takes more time as well as more effort.

what easier AND more efficient, kicking a football or kneeling down and punching it. Replace football with person and its exactly the,same


----------



## hoshin1600 (Feb 12, 2018)

jobo said:


> I'm not sure we are on different sides of this argument?
> 
> with out the in-depth knowledge of some, id say that the transition from Chinese to Japanese ma is more cultural than lost techniques, the. Chinese being more fluid and dance like the Japanese being more stiff and powerful short movements.
> 
> i don't think one is superior to the other, just different, if there were lost skills, rather than forgotten as they didn't work in the new style, Chinese ma would be better and it's not


i think we agree on performance.  but what i see is that the Chinese seem to have a purposefull application for each movement where the Okinawan and Japanese are more vague about the reasons behind each movement.  but like i said i am not a Chinese expert so i am willing to be corrected on that.


----------



## skribs (Feb 12, 2018)

Midnight-shadow said:


> In some ways the traditional Chinese forms were specifically designed like this. My instructor told me that the old Chinese Masters were very protective of their more advanced techniques and so hid their "secret" moves in the forms and made the forms look more like dance than combat, so that only devoted students of the style could fully utilise the form. He demonstrated such a technique that was hidden in the very first form I ever learned. The movement was a seemingly random circular motion with the arms that on the surface appeared to be just fluff, however it turns out that the movement was actually a type of joint lock.



This is what I was talking about.  I tended to think of forms like Taekwondo, where a form is almost always a combination of blocks and strikes.  Yet in Kung Fu there are typically a lot of locks and throws.



jobo said:


> kneeling and punching its far more complex movement pattern, than simply kicking someone in ribs, you then of course need to stand up, which is more complex again, all that's. Complexity takes more time as well as more effort.
> 
> what easier AND more efficient, kicking a football or kneeling down and punching it. Replace football with person and its exactly the,same



You drop your knee to kneel.  You straighten your knee to stand up.  It's literally one body part moving for the process.

I've been teaching Taekwondo for 3 years now, and I've NEVER had someone say that kneeling is too complicated.  I have never once had a single person ask "how do I kneel?  Can you give me any pointers on how to kneel down and stand up?"

It is in all likelihood the simplest technique I've ever had to teach.  Kneeling and standing back up is simpler than any punch, any kick, any joint lock.  I've spent more time teaching proper breathing and proper kiyaps than I have kneeling.  I've taught 3.5-4-year olds how to count to 10, and they don't have a problem kneeling.

How in the world is it so complicated to put your knee down?


----------



## jobo (Feb 12, 2018)

skribs said:


> This is what I was talking about.  I tended to think of forms like Taekwondo, where a form is almost always a combination of blocks and strikes.  Yet in Kung Fu there are typically a lot of locks and throws.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


i didn't say it was to complicated at all, i said it was a more complex movement than kicking someone , which is a simple statement of fact, how many moving parts have you to kneel, punch and then stand again against just one kick

and that's still not addressing that the kick will deliver far more kinetic energy that the kneeling punch, and in a faster time, its just all round better, and you don't get you trousers dirty


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 12, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> what we are actually talking about here is realist art VS abstract art.
> does the kata look like real fighting moves or are they abstractions of movement.  there is nothing wrong with abstraction . sometimes abstractions are more real.  but where i have a problem is when someone looks at the abstract art and says "oh see that..now that is clearly a painting of the Millennium Flacon"  when it was painted by Van gogh.


Abstractions are a basis for improvising, rather than for specific repetition.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 12, 2018)

jobo said:


> well it was squating and punching, kneeling is more complex again, fine if you find yourself in a kneeling position, but it would be very silly to go from standing to kneeling deliberately, he may have friends, sort of thing.
> 
> yes that kick isn't used in ma, the argument is it should be,
> 
> we have an on going debate about my kicking techneque, which is more football, ( soccer) than karate, it has its limitations barefooted, but works a treat with a pair of doc martins on. Which is far more likely on a trip to the pub


I use (and teach) soccer-style kicks - they seem easier to lean and have some nice MA applications. 

I find use for both downward punches and stomps/kicks when they are on the ground. It just depends upon my body position and the situation.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 12, 2018)

skribs said:


> This is what I was talking about.  I tended to think of forms like Taekwondo, where a form is almost always a combination of blocks and strikes.  Yet in Kung Fu there are typically a lot of locks and throws.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You are confusing “complex” with “difficult”. They often correlate, but are not actually synonymous. If you are standing upright, kneeling and punching is more complex than a weight shift as kick. From a wide horse stance, it might be a wash. From a wide forward (deep) stance, kneeling and punching is less complex.


----------



## skribs (Feb 12, 2018)

jobo said:


> i didn't say it was to complicated at all, i said it was a more complex movement than kicking someone , which is a simple statement of fact, how many moving parts have you to kneel, punch and then stand again against just one kick
> 
> and that's still not addressing that the kick will deliver far more kinetic energy that the kneeling punch, and in a faster time, its just all round better, and you don't get you trousers dirty



I can kneel and punch faster than I can soccer kick, especially with no run-up.  If you're talking about dribbling, then yes a soccer kick would be faster, but it would have no power to speak of and I might as well be tickling them.

Kneeling is less complex than kicking, or heck even stepping.

If I was to teach the technique to kick to the ribs, I would have teach people to go _*against *_kicking training I've given them, because in a normal kick you bring the knee up instead of bringing the foot back.  With a soccer kick, it's the opposite.  With a kneel and a punch, every single student I've ever taught has figured out you put your knee down, you ball up your fist and punch just like if you were standing up.

I've spent a LOT of time teaching people to take someone down, but once they're down, kneeling and punching has been automatic, when I say "put your knee down and punch them".



gpseymour said:


> You are confusing “complex” with “difficult”. They often correlate, but are not actually synonymous. If you are standing upright, kneeling and punching is more complex than a weight shift as kick. From a wide horse stance, it might be a wash. From a wide forward (deep) stance, kneeling and punching is less complex.



Our self defense usually ends with:

Wide horse stance at a 45-degree angle, easy to put the nearer knee down
Front stance next to attacker, easy to put the knee down
Very rarely are we in an upright position, as we prefer to spread our base for balance and power.  The few times we are, we usually have a wrist lock and will go for a break instead of a strike.

If we're in an upright position it's usually because we've done something wrong.


----------



## jobo (Feb 12, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> I use (and teach) soccer-style kicks - they seem easier to lean and have some nice MA applications.
> 
> I find use for both downward punches and stomps/kicks when they are on the ground. It just depends upon my body position and the situation.


I'm not sure you are ever going to get much force in a downward punch? , you get some from dropping your body weight as you go in the squat,but the punch its self,? The mechanics are all wrong


----------



## jobo (Feb 12, 2018)

skribs said:


> I can kneel and punch faster than I can soccer kick, especially with no run-up.  If you're talking about dribbling, then yes a soccer kick would be faster, but it would have no power to speak of and I might as well be tickling them.
> 
> Kneeling is less complex than kicking, or heck even stepping.
> 
> ...


that only because you don't practise soccer kicks, if you did you would find it a vast improvement on you current thing,

its a,shame you don't live closer, we could have some fun, with you trying to kneel down and punch a ball, faster than i can kick the ball away from you, that should prove the point

or we could see if you can punch the ball 80 yards, that should sort out which is more powerful


----------



## skribs (Feb 12, 2018)

jobo said:


> I'm not sure you are ever going to get much force in a downward punch? , you get some from dropping your body weight as you go in the squat,but the punch its self,? The mechanics are all wrong



Our kids have an easier time breaking a board by kneeling and hammer-fisting than by kicking, and we only really do the hammer-fist during testing.  That tells me it's got decent power and it's pretty natural to do.



jobo said:


> that only because you don't practise soccer kicks, if you did you would find it a vast improvement on you current thing,
> 
> its a,shame you don't live closer, we could have some fun, with you trying to kneel down and punch a ball, faster than i can kick the ball away from you, that should prove the point
> 
> or we could see if you can punch the ball 80 yards, that should sort out which is more powerful



Yes, you can dribble the ball away faster than I can punch it.  Would that kick have much power?  You can also kick harder than I can punch.  But can you do that just as fast as I can kneel and punch?  You're making points I've already argued against.

We're usually kneeling down with a grip on their arm as part of the take-down.  So there's a level of control there as well as the finishing blow.

As I said, there's a difference between a kick to the ribs and a punch to the face, especially when that punch is going to bounce their head off the ground.


----------



## jobo (Feb 12, 2018)

skribs said:


> Our kids have an easier time breaking a board by kneeling and hammer-fisting than by kicking, and we only really do the hammer-fist during testing.  That tells me it's got decent power and it's pretty natural to do.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


no i can kick the ball hard enough to travel 80 yards faster than you can kneel down and punch it, i could just as easily kick them in the head, but its a bad idea as the deceleration injuries you foot, i know this from hard experience ribs are better


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 12, 2018)

Midnight-shadow said:


> In some ways the traditional Chinese forms were specifically designed like this. My instructor told me that the old Chinese Masters were very protective of their more advanced techniques and so hid their "secret" moves in the forms and made the forms look more like dance than combat, so that only devoted students of the style could discover the more advanced techniques and fully utilise the form. He demonstrated such a technique that was hidden in the very first form I ever learned. The movement was a seemingly random circular motion with the arms that on the surface appeared to be just fluff, however it turns out that the movement was actually a type of joint lock.
> 
> One thing I found odd when I was training weapons is that the civilian forms followed the whole "flowery hidden secrets" concept, whereas the military forms were a lot more straightforward in their approach. For example, the Jian is a civilian's weapon and the form is almost like a dance, weaving back and forth with a lot of seemingly silly and pointless movements. By contrast, the Dao is a military weapon and the form reflects this with strikes and blocks that are very easy to understand and use.
> 
> ...



ok, you’ve attached videos for a Chen Taiji sword form and compare with a Korean dao instead of a Chinese dao, so it’s not an exactly accurate comparison.  What you will see in manny examples is both jian and dao done in the context of Modern Wushu as I explained earlier.  Both weapons have their Modern variation and can be very different from the proper combative methods.

The issue is less straight forward than that.  A dao is easier to learn so was easier to train troops with.  However, that does not mean that the jian is not a military weapon.  A sword was a sidearm, meaning it was a backup weapon.  The bulk of troops would be carrying polearms, they are much cheaper and easier to make and require far less training.  So when equipping and training the masses for your army, that is where you get the most bang for your buck.  But the sword still had a place on the battlefield even if it was carried by the officers or those of wealth or higher social rank.

There is also a difference between a civilians jian and a military jian.  The civilian could carry a lighter weapon as personal defense was less likely to need to defeat an armored enemy.  A military jian was more robust and needs to survive the rigors of the battlefield and be able to defeat armor.  Techniques and methods would also vary accordingly.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Feb 12, 2018)

i was going to address these comments but it seems @Flying Crane beat me to it.



skribs said:


> I remember watching a lot of the very flowy Chinese forms and thinking it was more of a dance.





jobo said:


> id say that the transition from Chinese to Japanese ma is more cultural than lost techniques, the. Chinese being more fluid and dance like the Japanese being more stiff and powerful short movements.





Flying Crane said:


> The legitimate Chinese forms that’s I have learned and seen have not been showy or flowery.  What you may have seen were examples of Modern Wushu, which was developed by the Chinese government in the 1950s as a cultural expression and performance and competition sport.  It is based on the older fighting methods, but was altered for aesthetic reasons and deliberately separated from useful combat applications.  Now it is essentially an acrobatics floor routine with a martial flavor. And that is what it is intended to be.



the only thing i would add is that we need to remember that karate is a branch of a much older form of Chinese fighting. specifically pre- boxer rebellion.  these arts were not flowery like we see today.  also that when Flying crane says it was developed by the government there is the other side of the coin which is that other arts where suppressed almost to the point of extinction.   this makes the study of history all the more difficult.  even in the 1980's there were combative arts that many masters would not admit they knew.   i also believe this is in part why there is ans was so much secrecy about actual applications.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 12, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> i was going to address these comments but it seems @Flying Crane beat me to it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And to reiterate, any form that I have seen from a legitimate method of Chinese combatives has not been flowery or showy.  I have only seen flowery and showy in the context of Modern Wushu.

I do believe that Chinese forms can contain subtleties that may mean that not all applications are obvious.  They can also be stylized with the purpose of training certain movement patterns through what could be called “exaggerated” movements, but I still do not agree that those are showy or flowery.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Feb 12, 2018)

skribs said:


> This is what I was talking about. I tended to think of forms like Taekwondo, where a form is almost always a combination of blocks and strikes.


i do not mean to be condescending in any way  but to view forms as a string of blocks, kicks and punches is the most superficial way to view them.  that is not your fault.   it is the way TKD approaches their art.  there can be so very much more going on in them.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Feb 12, 2018)

Flying Crane said:


> I do believe that Chinese forms can contain subtleties that may mean that not all applications are obvious.


agreed.
in the 1984 the head of the American Uechi- Ryu George Mattson took a group of people to China to dig deeper into the roots of Uechi - Ryu.  they didnt find what they were looking for.  there was a feeling that combative Kung fu was still very secretive and forbidden.   George made a comment that _we may have very well met some of the people we were looking for but no one would admit it in public under the eye of the government_.  
here is some home video of the trip. at about 1:50 in the are in the public square, notice the dress of everyone there...it is still very much Mao's Communist China.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 12, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> agreed.
> in the 1984 the head of the American Uechi- Ryu George Mattson took a group of people to China to dig deeper into the roots of Uechi - Ryu.  they didnt find what they were looking for.  there was a feeling that combative Kung fu was still very secretive and forbidden.   George made a comment that _we may have very well met some of the people we were looking for but no one would admit it in public under the eye of the government_.
> here is some home video of the trip. at about 1:50 in the are in the public square, notice the dress of everyone there...it is still very much Mao's Communist China.


Yes, it was a very ugly time in China when people spied on their neighbors and people disappeared for not complying with government mandates.  Mandates included not training traditional fighting methods.

There were other, older reasons for secrecy as well, pre-dating the Cultural Revolution.  Your fighting skills could actually save your life, so you did not show them to the public or to those you did not trust by very well.  It is only in the modern age when our fighting skills are not generally needed to save our lives, when we can feel free to openly share them with the public.

Some people still have an attitude that “it isn’t for sale” and so feel no need to share it openly.  If they don’t want to share it with you, then you simply will not see it.  Our culture has a hard time with that, we tend to feel we have the right to get anything we want.  It ain’t so.


----------



## Midnight-shadow (Feb 12, 2018)

Flying Crane said:


> ok, you’ve attached videos for a Chen Taiji sword form and compare with a Korean dao instead of a Chinese dao, so it’s not an exactly accurate comparison.  What you will see in manny examples is both jian and dao done in the context of Modern Wushu as I explained earlier.  Both weapons have their Modern variation and can be very different from the proper combative methods.
> 
> The issue is less straight forward than that.  A dao is easier to learn so was easier to train troops with.  However, that does not mean that the jian is not a military weapon.  A sword was a sidearm, meaning it was a backup weapon.  The bulk of troops would be carrying polearms, they are much cheaper and easier to make and require far less training.  So when equipping and training the masses for your army, that is where you get the most bang for your buck.  But the sword still had a place on the battlefield even if it was carried by the officers or those of wealth or higher social rank.
> 
> There is also a difference between a civilians jian and a military jian.  The civilian could carry a lighter weapon as personal defense was less likely to need to defeat an armored enemy.  A military jian was more robust and needs to survive the rigors of the battlefield and be able to defeat armor.  Techniques and methods would also vary accordingly.



Yeah I couldn't be bothered going through all the shaolin dao forms waving flimsy pretend swords around and so settled on the first video that vaguely resembled what I meant. Even though it is Korean, the movements are very similar to the dao form I learned. 

I haven't seen any evidence of Jian being used by soldiers at all, even by officers.  I always assumed Jian were the Chinese equivalent of European Rapiers, used by upper class gentlemen for self-defence and dueling but rarely used on the battlefield. I believe the Jian and Dao forms were created afterwards to reflect their usual purpose.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Feb 12, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Abstractions are a basis for improvising, rather than for specific repetition.


i am not sure i follow what you are saying here. let me explain how i see abstraction.
 as example ....in the kata there may be a left hand upward rising action.  this could be utilized for a wide variety of things. so i could agree it may have a link to improvisation but the action, by not defining it, is an abstraction of movement. it could be seven or more different things.  but the principal of movement is the same across all of these many applications  so the lesson in the abstraction is not "when this happens do this move" but rather this is how the unit of the body should work for actions like this one. the abstraction points to the principal not the application.

EDIT:   but then how would you know what was application and what was abstract principal unless your where one of the select few who was taught "The secrets"


----------



## skribs (Feb 12, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> i do not mean to be condescending in any way  but to view forms as a string of blocks, kicks and punches is the most superficial way to view them.  that is not your fault.   it is the way TKD approaches their art.  there can be so very much more going on in them.



I don't think you are being condescending.  It's something I've struggled with.  Even when I look at the other forms, and I see more than just punches and kicks, I see grappling moves...but not much more than that.

I do wish I connected to the forms themselves a bit better.  However, the forms are not the entirety of the curriculum.  We also do punch combinations, kicking techniques, and train scenario-based self defense and Olympic-style sparring.  If it was just the forms I'd feel it was lacking.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 12, 2018)

Midnight-shadow said:


> Yeah I couldn't be bothered going through all the shaolin dao forms waving flimsy pretend swords around and so settled on the first video that vaguely resembled what I meant. Even though it is Korean, the movements are very similar to the dao form I learned.
> 
> I haven't seen any evidence of Jian being used by soldiers at all, even by officers.  I always assumed Jian were the Chinese equivalent of European Rapiers, used by upper class gentlemen for self-defence and dueling but rarely used on the battlefield. I believe the Jian and Dao forms were created afterwards to reflect their usual purpose.


I saw a book once, can’t remember the title or author, that discussed the difference between civilian and soldier jian.  There is an inherent hint in the fact that jian come in a variety of levels of robustness.  And I am excluding the Modern Wushu toys from my assessment.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 12, 2018)

skribs said:


> I don't think you are being condescending.  It's something I've struggled with.  Even when I look at the other forms, and I see more than just punches and kicks, I see grappling moves...but not much more than that.
> 
> I do wish I connected to the forms themselves a bit better.  However, the forms are not the entirety of the curriculum.  We also do punch combinations, kicking techniques, and train scenario-based self defense and Olympic-style sparring.  If it was just the forms I'd feel it was lacking.


In my opinion, not all forms are created equally.  Some are poorly or superficially designed.  

That is not a criticism aimed at TKD, as I have not studied the method and do not know the forms.

My forms have a lot of inherent rooting and grounding coupled with technique practice.  But of course you need to understand how that works in order to practice it properly.  Even the very “best” form could be butchered into superficiality if one does not know how to approach the practice properly.


----------



## skribs (Feb 12, 2018)

Flying Crane said:


> In my opinion, not all forms are created equally.  Some are poorly or superficially designed.
> 
> That is not a criticism aimed at TKD, as I have not studied the method and do not know the forms.
> 
> My forms have a lot of inherent rooting and grounding coupled with technique practice.  But of course you need to understand how that works in order to practice it properly.  Even the very “best” form could be butchered into superficiality if one does not know how to approach the practice properly.



What is "rooting and grounding"?


----------



## Midnight-shadow (Feb 12, 2018)

Flying Crane said:


> I saw a book once, can’t remember the title or author, that discussed the difference between civilian and soldier jian.  There is an inherent hint in the fact that jian come in a variety of levels of robustness.  And I am excluding the Modern Wushu toys from my assessment.



Interesting. I guess that makes sense in a way. Do you remember if the book discussed a particular period in history?


----------



## Hyoho (Feb 12, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> i do understand what your saying. i might not have communicated well on my part about karate.  the meanings behind most of karate kata has been lost.(even though most will not admit it) perhaps they were never known by the Okinawans and certainly would be lost in transmission to the main land Japanese.  so where in Koryu you have the ability to differentiate between henka and uchi-soto (not sure if you actually use that term that way, but hope you get my meaning) in the waza.  the bunkai for karate is very subjective.  which can have drastic influence on the preformance.  no one within a Ryu can define definitively what the bunkai would be.  that is a big problem.


Yes I understand what you mean. With me mostly doing sword arts now its more clearly defined.

Some founders were good enough to have even written about the philosophical values that we should adopt as well. so our accent has always been on preservation. Its essential to learn a fundamental, 'then' add character to it as you advance and not the other way round.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 12, 2018)

Midnight-shadow said:


> Interesting. I guess that makes sense in a way. Do you remember if the book discussed a particular period in history?


Sorry, I do not remember.  Saw it in a bookstore (remember those?) and didn’t buy it for some reason which was strange because I was buying lots of martial arts books at the time.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 12, 2018)

skribs said:


> What is "rooting and grounding"?


Understanding how to “dig” your feet into the ground and use the strength of your legs to brace the body and drive torso rotation as a way to power your techniques, and such.  It prevents your punches from only being driven by the arm and shoulder, and harnesses the greater strength of the legs and full body.

Our method relies on that a lot, so we are always doing that in our forms, no matter what else is going on.  It is a way of practicing that foundational stuff in a mobile context, which is more difficult than simply throwing the same punch over and over from a static position.  so one issue in practicing forms is that it raises the level of difficulty to the next level, as your skill increases.  Rooting is easy if it is just one technique.  But if you are doing 100 movements in a form where you are stepping for every move, making that adjustment and still being able to root with your technique becomes more difficult.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 12, 2018)

skribs said:


> I can kneel and punch faster than I can soccer kick, especially with no run-up.  If you're talking about dribbling, then yes a soccer kick would be faster, but it would have no power to speak of and I might as well be tickling them.
> 
> Kneeling is less complex than kicking, or heck even stepping.
> 
> ...


Then we agree on that latter point. Position can change the relative complexity of moves. Like you, I can’t think of many times I’d be in good kicking position after grappling. The mechanics of structure for grappling make it unlikely.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 12, 2018)

jobo said:


> I'm not sure you are ever going to get much force in a downward punch? , you get some from dropping your body weight as you go in the squat,but the punch its self,? The mechanics are all wrong


You can generate a lot of downward force with the weight drop. Good timing lends that to the punch.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 12, 2018)

jobo said:


> that only because you don't practise soccer kicks, if you did you would find it a vast improvement on you current thing,
> 
> its a,shame you don't live closer, we could have some fun, with you trying to kneel down and punch a ball, faster than i can kick the ball away from you, that should prove the point
> 
> or we could see if you can punch the ball 80 yards, that should sort out which is more powerful


If you are both in a low grappling (takedown finish) position, he’ll generate power faster than you.


----------



## jobo (Feb 12, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> If you are both in a low grappling (takedown finish) position, he’ll generate power faster than you.


why would i be in a low grappling position? . My opoinent is lying on the floor?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 12, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> i am not sure i follow what you are saying here. let me explain how i see abstraction.
> as example ....in the kata there may be a left hand upward rising action.  this could be utilized for a wide variety of things. so i could agree it may have a link to improvisation but the action, by not defining it, is an abstraction of movement. it could be seven or more different things.  but the principal of movement is the same across all of these many applications  so the lesson in the abstraction is not "when this happens do this move" but rather this is how the unit of the body should work for actions like this one. the abstraction points to the principal not the application.
> 
> EDIT:   but then how would you know what was application and what was abstract principal unless your where one of the select few who was taught "The secrets"


Actually, you said pretty much what I meant. Since it’s abstract, it is just training movement patterns for future improvisation. That actually frees it from being tied to a specific application.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 12, 2018)

jobo said:


> why would i be in a low grappling position? . My opoinent is lying on the floor?


You just put them there. If by grappling, that often ends with bodyweight low, in either a wide stance or kneeling. That’s far from ideal for getting off a kick.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 12, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> in the 1984 the head of the American Uechi- Ryu George Mattson took a group of people to China to dig deeper into the roots of Uechi - Ryu.


This remind me about that time (1984?), I helped Ronald Lindsey (9th Dan) to translate a white crane book for him. Later on he gave me a Japanese stick/sword that I still love it very much. Ronald believed his Karate had strong influence from the Chinese white crane system. That was about 34 years ago.


----------



## jobo (Feb 13, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> You just put them there. If by grappling, that often ends with bodyweight low, in either a wide stance or kneeling. That’s far from ideal for getting off a kick.


my instinct, from hard experiance, is being on the floor is a bad idea, if i end up there its a mistake and one that should quickly be rectified, maintain mobility at all costs. I could certainly take the opportunity to punch him from a kneeling position, but there's not stopping power. In the punch from that position, and his hands are likely in the way, mess up his nose perhaps, but id be better punching th groin if I've got a choice.. So punch , stand up and kick or just stand up and  kick, the kicks the man stopper, , so the sooner the better.

you could certainly find your body position is less than idea for a kick, but the very skill of the soccer kick is adjusting your body position quickly so you can deliver, it matters not if the first kick lays him out, as long as its hard enough to knock the wind out of him, you then have plenty of time to deliver any num.e r of kicks from any position you choose,,
he is on the floor I'm stood up, that is not going to be allowed to change


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 13, 2018)

jobo said:


> my instinct, from hard experiance, is being on the floor is a bad idea, if i end up there its a mistake and one that should quickly be rectified, maintain mobility at all costs. I could certainly take the opportunity to punch him from a kneeling position, but there's not stopping power. In the punch from that position, and his hands are likely in the way, mess up his nose perhaps, but id be better punching th groin if I've got a choice.. So punch , stand up and kick or just stand up and  kick, the kicks the man stopper, , so the sooner the better.
> 
> you could certainly find your body position is less than idea for a kick, but the very skill of the soccer kick is adjusting your body position quickly so you can deliver, it matters not if the first kick lays him out, as long as its hard enough to knock the wind out of him, you then have plenty of time to deliver any num.e r of kicks from any position you choose,,
> he is on the floor I'm stood up, that is not going to be allowed to change


Again, it's positional. I can kick quickly and powerfully with a soccer kick. Sometimes it's just not the right answer. If I'm in a deep stance, I'm not controlling him during the transition to the kick, and may not have access to a good kicking target. If the better control and/or target is for the punch, I'll punch. If it's for the kick, I'll kick (sometimes a soccer kick, sometimes a front kick).


----------



## jobo (Feb 13, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Again, it's positional. I can kick quickly and powerfully with a soccer kick. Sometimes it's just not the right answer. If I'm in a deep stance, I'm not controlling him during the transition to the kick, and may not have access to a good kicking target. If the better control and/or target is for the punch, I'll punch. If it's for the kick, I'll kick (sometimes a soccer kick, sometimes a front kick).


from even a deep stance, you are always going to be up substantialy quicker than some one who is prone, unless you are unluck enough to meet one of those rare people who can just spring to their feet or your knees are nackered and even then you should be quicker by a bit.

any target is good, someone getting off the floor is going to present multiple targets, kick them up the rear, kick them in the ribs, the belly the head, take you pick, and as above you can do both, if you want to waste time with a less effective techneque


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 13, 2018)

jobo said:


> from even a deep stance, you are always going to be up substantialy quicker than some one who is prone, unless you are unluck enough to meet one of those rare people who can just spring to their feet or your knees are nackered and even then you should be quicker by a bit.


Which has nothing to do with my post.



> any target is good, someone getting off the floor is going to present multiple targets, kick them up the rear, kick them in the ribs, the belly the head, take you pick, and as above you can do both, if you want to waste time with a less effective techneque


Not so much. A weak kick to their leg is unlikely to be useful, unless it knocks them off-balance. Same for a weak kick to the trunk of the body, unless you get lucky. I'll take a well-aimed, punch with power over a weak-*** kick to a vague target any day.

You've played football/soccer - you know that people can get kicked (sometimes pretty hard) with no immediate effect, depending upon where they are hit.


----------



## jobo (Feb 13, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Which has nothing to do with my post.
> 
> 
> Not so much. A weak kick to their leg is unlikely to be useful, unless it knocks them off-balance. Same for a weak kick to the trunk of the body, unless you get lucky. I'll take a well-aimed, punch with power over a weak-*** kick to a vague target any day.
> ...


it has everything to do with your post, your claim was you cant kick from a deep stance, which is probably true, though I'm sure some people can, BUT you can address that issue quicker than your target can stop being a target, so it's if no consequence

why have you suddenly started with WEAK kick, there is no reason the kick will be WEAK, it may nit be full power, but that doesn't make it WEAK. a weak anything is generaly useless, if you punch and its WEAK, that doesn't help either, even then a weak kick will carry more energy than a weak punch, if both are at say 10% of max,, id invite you to try punching a soccerball against a kick to assertion the relative power of each


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 13, 2018)

jobo said:


> it has everything to do with your post, your claim was you cant kick from a deep stance, which is probably true, though I'm sure some people can, BUT you can address that issue quicker than your target can stop being a target, so it's if no consequence


Only if you assume his only possible response is to stand up. Which is rarely the first response to someone standing over you who just knocked you down.



> why have you suddenly started with WEAK kick, there is no reason the kick will be WEAK, it may nit be full power, but that doesn't make it WEAK. a weak anything is generaly useless, if you punch and its WEAK, that doesn't help either, even then a weak kick will carry more energy than a weak punch, if both are at say 10% of max,, id invite you to try punching a soccerball against a kick to assertion the relative power of each


If you take the time to set up a strong kick, you give up a chance to control. Sometimes that's the right choice, sometimes it's not. If I can't control AND set up a strong kick, I'll skip the weak kick (the one that's immediately available), and take the punch.

The soccer ball won't tell the whole story. You're forgetting surface area of the strike. But you've dragged this far enough off topic now. More than one person has pointed out that low punches like in that kata can have application. Continue your assertion that every kick in that situation is better than every punch. You'll continue to be wrong, but my pointing that out won't help you, so I'll let you have at it.


----------



## jobo (Feb 13, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Only if you assume his only possible response is to stand up. Which is rarely the first response to someone standing over you who just knocked you down.
> 
> 
> If you take the time to set up a strong kick, you give up a chance to control. Sometimes that's the right choice, sometimes it's not. If I can't control AND set up a strong kick, I'll skip the weak kick (the one that's immediately available), and take the punch.
> ...


the surface area of the strike has no bearing on how much kinetic energy is contained or released on contact( assuming full contact). THe issue with kick punch thing that the muscles in the leg and buttocks are,a) bigger and b much stronger, the leg is also heavier, particularly with a pair of big boots on

there are only a limited number of things,a person who has been knocked over can do, they are mostly, get up, curl up, they could do that sliding round the floor thing, were they keep their legs between me and them, just booting their legs repeatedly is good and if they say on the floor I'm happy enough


----------



## skribs (Feb 13, 2018)

jobo said:


> the surface area of the strike has no bearing on how much kinetic energy is contained or released on contact( assuming full contact). THe issue with kick punch thing that the muscles in the leg and buttocks are,a) bigger and b much stronger, the leg is also heavier, particularly with a pair of big boots on
> 
> there are only a limited number of things,a person who has been knocked over can do, they are mostly, get up, curl up, they could do that sliding round the floor thing, were they keep their legs between me and them, just booting their legs repeatedly is good and if they say on the floor I'm happy enough



You can scissor-kick the legs, you can kick for the groin.  You can ankle pick and push on the knee to take someone down.  I'm pretty sure there's an entire art where the practitioners are in their element in that position.


----------



## jobo (Feb 13, 2018)

skribs said:


> You can scissor-kick the legs, you can kick for the groin.  You can ankle pick and push on the knee to take someone down.  I'm pretty sure there's an entire art where the practitioners are in their element in that position.


only if a, they are in range and b stop kicking you long enough to catch hold of the leg, you need to be daft enough to put you line in side their line, but anyway them lying on the floor is a win for me, they can stay there all day, they cant hurt me, if they try to get up they get kicked


----------



## Midnight-shadow (Feb 13, 2018)

skribs said:


> You can scissor-kick the legs, you can kick for the groin.  You can ankle pick and push on the knee to take someone down.  I'm pretty sure there's an entire art where the practitioners are in their element in that position.



Yep. Dog Style Kung Fu (Dishu Quan) specialises in takedowns and ground fighting using mainly the feet and legs to trap and control your opponent. That said, it's a pretty rare style and I doubt your average lout on the street would know more than just flailing their legs at you when they are down.











Dishu Quan is actually a really fascinating style to study, as it gives you a completely different take on ground fighting.


----------



## jobo (Feb 13, 2018)

Midnight-shadow said:


> Yep. Dog Style Kung Fu (Dishu Quan) specialises in takedowns and ground fighting using mainly the feet and legs to trap and control your opponent. That said, it's a pretty rare style and I doubt your average lout on the street would know more than just flailing their legs at you when they are down.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


that looks more like a buster Keaton thing than a serious demo,


----------



## Midnight-shadow (Feb 13, 2018)

jobo said:


> that looks more like a buster Keaton thing than a serious demo,



You're right, it does. The style is anything but a joke though


----------



## Balrog (Feb 13, 2018)

skribs said:


> However, I'm curious about other arts, or even Taekwondo schools that have different forms.  Do your forms teach isolated concepts, such as one form focused on footwork, another focused on defense, another focused on hand strikes, another on throws?  Does each form have its own theme, such as defense against certain types of attacks, or techniques of a particular variety?  Or do your forms build on each other and reinforce previous concepts while adding new ones?


In Songahm Taekwondo, every rank has specific basics.  You learn the basics and you practice them with the one-steps and the form.  The next rank adds in new basics and raises the complexity of the one-steps and the forms.  Etc.  Each form has a mixture of blocks, strikes and kicks, with no particular emphasis on a specific aspect.


----------



## skribs (Feb 13, 2018)

jobo said:


> only if a, they are in range and b stop kicking you long enough to catch hold of the leg, you need to be daft enough to put you line in side their line, but anyway them lying on the floor is a win for me, they can stay there all day, they cant hurt me, if they try to get up they get kicked



If you're in range to kick, you're in range to get swept.  If you're kicking, the other leg is usually standing still.


----------



## jobo (Feb 13, 2018)

skribs said:


> If you're in range to kick, you're in range to get swept.  If you're kicking, the other leg is usually standing still.


no in pretty sure i can kick someone on the leg whilst my standing leg is at least two foot out of range( you do remember they are lying down, don't you), but i have got long legs, i could also jump whilst kicking let's see them sweep that from under me


----------



## skribs (Feb 13, 2018)

jobo said:


> no in pretty sure i can kick someone on the leg whilst my standing leg is at least two foot out of range( you do remember they are lying down, don't you), but i have got long legs, i could also jump whilst kicking let's see them sweep that from under me



The angle is a lot different when you're kicking at a target that's a few feet above or below your hips than something on the same level as your hips.  I have to get a lot closer for headshots than for body shots.


----------



## jobo (Feb 13, 2018)

skribs said:


> The angle is a lot different when you're kicking at a target that's a few feet above or below your hips than something on the same level as your hips.  I have to get a lot closer for headshots than for body shots.


i you mean about the height of a football, i can kick that with my standing leg two foot away?


----------



## skribs (Feb 13, 2018)

jobo said:


> i you mean about the height of a football, i can kick that with my standing leg two foot away?



I mean if you are kicking a low target with your leg at a 45 degree angle down, you only have about half the reach as you do if you are on the ground doing a scissor kick straight to the side.

The other aspect is if you are at the extreme end of your reach you will be basically poking the target.  You don't have nearly the same reach when you're going for power.  Whereas with a scissor take-down, it's more about the leverage and the joints than the strength of the kick.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 13, 2018)

Two feet away from your target. Are you kicking their feet?


----------



## jobo (Feb 13, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Two feet away from your target. Are you kicking their feet?


I'm kicking what ever is two foot away from me


----------



## jobo (Feb 13, 2018)

skribs said:


> I mean if you are kicking a low target with your leg at a 45 degree angle down, you only have about half the reach as you do if you are on the ground doing a scissor kick straight to the side.
> 
> The other aspect is if you are at the extreme end of your reach you will be basically poking the target.  You don't have nearly the same reach when you're going for power.  Whereas with a scissor take-down, it's more about the leverage and the joints than the strength of the kick.


my legs,are three foot long,I've just taken a Football and my dog in the park, marked two foot, and toe ended the ball the length of the Football field, the dog brings it back , I'm not sure what you are having difficulty with, you spin on the,standing foot,(all i need is he ability to have my feet two foot apart, which even i can manage), which remain steadfast at two foot away, you can work it out if you do a bit of Pythagoras


----------



## skribs (Feb 13, 2018)

jobo said:


> my legs,are three foot long,I've just taken a Football and my dog in the park, marked two foot, and toe ended the ball the length of the Football field, the dog brings it back , I'm not sure what you are having difficulty with, you spin on the,standing foot, which remain steadfast at two foot away, you can work it out if you do a bit of Pythagoras



Then you're in range of a scissor kick.

Unless you're fighting Tyrion Lannister or an 8 year old.


----------



## jobo (Feb 13, 2018)

skribs said:


> Then you're in range of a scissor kick.
> 
> Unless you're fighting Tyrion Lannister or an 8 year old.


how am i in  i in range, I'm two foot away , has this person got telescopic legs


----------



## skribs (Feb 13, 2018)

jobo said:


> how am i in  i in range, I'm two foot away , has this person got telescopic legs



How many people do you know with legs shorter than 2 feet long?

You yourself said your legs are three feet long.  You also said you have long legs.  Are your legs twice as long as anyone else's?

Even then, maybe you've answered your own original question.  If your legs are so outlandishly long that you can kick someone while out of range of a scissor kick, then maybe it's a tactic unique to you.  Just like the tactic of pick-them-up-and-throw-them is unique to bodybuilders.  Schools aren't going to teach tactics that only apply to people with legs outside the statistical norm.


----------



## jobo (Feb 13, 2018)

skribs said:


> How many people do you know with legs shorter than 2 feet long?
> 
> You yourself said your legs are three feet long.  You also said you have long legs.  Are your legs twice as long as anyone else's?
> 
> Even then, maybe you've answered your own original question.  If your legs are so outlandishly long that you can kick someone while out of range of a scissor kick, then maybe it's a tactic unique to you.  Just like the tactic of pick-them-up-and-throw-them is unique to bodybuilders.  Schools aren't going to teach tactics that only apply to people with legs outside the statistical norm.


I'm two foot away from the nearest point


----------



## oftheherd1 (Feb 13, 2018)

Midnight-shadow said:


> Yep. Dog Style Kung Fu (Dishu Quan) specialises in takedowns and ground fighting using mainly the feet and legs to trap and control your opponent. That said, it's a pretty rare style and I doubt your average lout on the street would know more than just flailing their legs at you when they are down.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There's some really great stuff in there.  Thanks for posting.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Feb 13, 2018)

jobo said:


> that looks more like a buster Keaton thing than a serious demo,



I suggest you go back and take another look.  Multiple replays of the attack and response may help you see what you are missing.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 13, 2018)

oftheherd1 said:


> There's some really great stuff in there.  Thanks for posting.


What I like about this style is the fast get back up from the ground skill that's missing in the most MA systems training.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 13, 2018)

jobo said:


> I'm kicking what ever is two foot away from me


My point is, unless you are kicking the ends of his arms or legs, you're within reach of his hands and feet.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 13, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> What I like about this style is the fast get back up from the ground skill that's missing in the most MA systems training.


I'm not enamored of that kind of get back up. I prefer a tactical approach, which is harder to interrupt and doesn't require the sheer athleticism of most of this.


----------



## skribs (Feb 13, 2018)

jobo said:


> I'm two foot away from the nearest point



If you're 2 feet away from my ribs, I can scissor kick you.

You don't seem to understand that the person on the ground will have BETTER reach than you, because their path from their hip to your ankle and knee is basically a straight line, while from your hip to their ribs is the hypotenuse.


----------



## _Simon_ (Feb 14, 2018)

Great thread, a little off topic goodness, but tends to be some value in that at times 



skribs said:


> I've started a few discussions in the past on curriculums and how they progress, including advancement of patterns, what a white belt should know, and varying teaching styles.  I guess the concept of learning itself is fascinating to me.  Now, I'm curious about the progression of kata.
> 
> My understanding is that the purpose of kata, regardless of what art or style you practice, is to contain a progressive understanding of the material.  That a student who has learned all the katas in your art should have a pretty firm understanding of the art.
> 
> ...



There definitely seems to be progression in complexity of kata as ranks increase, but what's odd is the way that sometimes higher ranking kata can be placed earlier in the curriculum, and vice versa. I've seen Sanchin placed from the start at 10th kyu level, and elsewhere at 4th kyu (my previous style started it from here, or needing to know it for your 4th kyu grading). Seen Saifa taught at 7th kyu, and others for your 1st Dan. Seiunchin at 3rd kyu and elsewhere 3rd dan. There's really quite a discrepancy huh!

So it really does depend on the style, and how the kata are viewed. But I do wonder how they classify them and decide which ones are more complex or are more of a progression than others? Because there's quite a difference in placement of curriculum.. and also with katas being performed slightly differently in each style whether this has any bearing on why..



Hyoho said:


> The kata does not change. It's your understanding, or lack of it that changes. As you advance it hopefully gets better. Levels in kata? Real kata is a breakdown of a waza.
> 
> So I guess if you can make up kata, you can make up levels



I like that, definitely one's understanding of kata deepens over time, so you can even see it as progression occurring just within the individual katas, rather than having a need to progress to different ones. Even doing something as simple as Taikyoku Ichi, I'm constantly finding new depths to it.

It's as though you get the bare bones basics of the mechanics, then work on the subtleties, then see how those subtleties affect other sequences within it, and work on the interplay, transitions and flows.

My first style had for most grades each kata repeated for two grades, with a new one learned every second grade. It was expected that performing it for the first grading would be the basics of it, and the next grade you should be showing deeper understanding, progression and improvement from the other grading. I thought that was pretty cool. But not sure that was recorded or monitored.


----------



## _Simon_ (Feb 14, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> @skribs
> what you are asking is going to be very dependent on the style.  i think you know that but i am not sure you are aware of the width and scope of the differences.  the one constant across the many sources is that kata is a way of transmitting the "feel" of the style.  i always use music as a comparison.  there are only so many notes on a scale. there are scales that link matching notes together.  and yet there are diverse styles of music.  blues, rock, country or jazz  they all share the same notes.  but there is a feel to the music that is undeniablly distinct for each. they are separated by something that cannot be taught through a sheet of paper with lines and dots on it.  in the same way each martial art style has a distinct way of moving.  you cannot learn this feel by the segments of movement or "notes"  but only though the entire composition of a kata.
> one purpose of kata is to teach the feel of the style. without the kata the feel will be lost and the heart of the style will die.
> another facet of kata is to serve as a vehicle to pass on a catalog of technique / waza.



This was an awesome post, thanks for that hoshin1600, really made me think. Kata is a way of transmitting the "feel" of the style, I quite like that .



skribs said:


> I don't know of any (which is why I asked).  But I was thinking there could be a kata that focuses on footwork, one on hand strikes, one on kicks, one on blocking techniques, and one on take-downs and throws.
> 
> Alternatively, there could be a kata focused on defenses against a punch, one on defenses against kicks, defenses against grabs, tactics against multiple opponents, and an aggressive kata.



Yeah I'm not too sure if there are kata that are that specific, well I haven't found many, but I know kata like Tsuki No kata really focus on stance transition and has mostly punches (only one kick), and kata like Yantsu has quite a few wrist grab escapes.

They do certainly seem to have themes, even the translations of names utterly fascinates me. And whilst I'm sure a lot here may think it's a bit 'woo-woo', I quite like the specific names and interpretations, and also trying to embody the spirit of that particular theme/emotion/attitude for that kata, brings a whole new life to it I reckon (Sanchin: 3 battles, Seiunchin: grab and pull in battle, Kururunfa: Holding Ground / Forever Stops, Peacefulness and Tearing)


----------



## jobo (Feb 14, 2018)

skribs said:


> If you're 2 feet away from my ribs, I can scissor kick you.
> 
> You don't seem to understand that the person on the ground will have BETTER reach than you, because their path from their hip to your ankle and knee is basically a straight line, while from your hip to their ribs is the hypotenuse.


i think you need to try this real world, you can flail you legs about, but you not going to get any notable power lay on your back, you can make yourself a difficult target,by  trying to keep you legs between us, but i can move as well either to the side. To continue kicking your ribs or back wards out of range, being kicked on the soles of your feet/ ankles is both painful and debilitating, if that's the only target you present.

I've demonstrated how limited the techneque your suggesting is, by simple expedient of jumping over the attempted scissor kick and landing with both feet on my oppoinent chest,

, if thats what they are teaching you its fantasy ma your learning,


----------



## jobo (Feb 14, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> My point is, unless you are kicking the ends of his arms or legs, you're within reach of his hands and feet.


by end of his arms and legs do you mean hands and feet, ? Both of those are good, pain full and effective targets

id point out that the alternative you suggested of the low/ kneeling punch very much brings you in to range of hands and feet, only then you have far less mobility to dodge them


----------



## jobo (Feb 14, 2018)

oftheherd1 said:


> I suggest you go back and take another look.  Multiple replays of the attack and response may help you see what you are missing.


its literally, an entertainment out on to entertain an audience, with a very compliant partner putting him self in the exact position for the next move and falling on command. in that context its extremely well done,

the effectiveness in any other context is extremely debatable, I'm sure some of those moves will work some of the time against some people. I am definitely sure that all of them won't work all of the time against most people.

if they don't work you find your self lay on the floor in the middle of a fight, which is not the best place to be. The very best you can say for it, is it's a fairly high risk strategy


----------



## oftheherd1 (Feb 14, 2018)

jobo said:


> its literally, an entertainment out on to entertain an audience, with a very compliant partner putting him self in the exact position for the next move and falling on command. in that context its extremely well done,
> 
> the effectiveness in any other context is extremely debatable, I'm sure some of those moves will work some of the time against some people. *I am definitely sure that all of them won't work all of the time against most people.*
> 
> if they don't work you find your self lay on the floor in the middle of a fight, which is not the best place to be. The very best you can say for it, is it's a fairly high risk strategy



Are you saying that this is the only set of techniques in any accepted art that " ...
all of them won't work all of the time against most people?"  And that there is no chance of practice making them work against people, who even if trained well in their art, are not trained in those defenses shown?

Are there techniques in your art that in are perhaps not highly effective in all circumstances, but are very useful in some circumstances if you are well trained in them?


----------



## oftheherd1 (Feb 14, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> I'm not enamored of that kind of get back up. I prefer a tactical approach, which is harder to interrupt and doesn't require the sheer athleticism of most of this.



I can agree, but I suppose if you continually train, you may be able to pull that off.  What worries me most is the breakfalls being done.  I mean if that is the best you can accomplish given the way you were thrown, so be it.  But coming down on the toe of one foot, and on the elbow in another breakfall scares me.  But as I said, he seems to make it work, so perhaps all people could with enough conditioning and practice.


----------



## jobo (Feb 14, 2018)

oftheherd1 said:


> Are you saying that this is the only set of techniques in any accepted art that " ...
> all of them won't work all of the time against most people?"  And that there is no chance of practice making them work against people, who even if trained well in their art, are not trained in those defenses shown?
> 
> Are there techniques in your art that in are perhaps not highly effective in all circumstances, but are very useful in some circumstances if you are well trained in them?


yes that's very much what I'm saying, though there,a variations on theme. If a techneque isn't going to work all of the time against most people OR most of the time against all people, then its of very limited practical use. if it's failure also outs you in a most disadvantaged position, then it's down right dangerous to attempt anywhere were the consequences of failure are getting your head kicked in, rather then just losing a points match.

yes there are any number of techniques in my art that i did miss as fantasy, if I'm in,doubt i ask the instructor to demonstrate then on me, whilst i resist, if they don't work when exercised by a black belt on me, then i can be fairly sure they won't work reliably enough to stake my life on them no matter how much i practise


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 14, 2018)

jobo said:


> by end of his arms and legs do you mean hands and feet, ? Both of those are good, pain full and effective targets


Both of those are also pretty easy to move out of the way. Much easier than the big jump to the chest you suggest for avoiding a scissors (and putting yourself even better in their range if you don't manage to stomp their chest).



> id point out that the alternative you suggested of the low/ kneeling punch very much brings you in to range of hands and feet, only then you have far less mobility to dodge them


But I can control them from there. Again, it depends upon the situation. You want it to be an absolute, but it is not. Sometimes the kick is the better answer. Sometimes it is not. Any attempt to argue otherwise requires a counter to every single position and situation...and is fantasy.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 14, 2018)

oftheherd1 said:


> I can agree, but I suppose if you continually train, you may be able to pull that off.  What worries me most is the breakfalls being done.  I mean if that is the best you can accomplish given the way you were thrown, so be it.  But coming down on the toe of one foot, and on the elbow in another breakfall scares me.  But as I said, he seems to make it work, so perhaps all people could with enough conditioning and practice.


It works quite well, but would break down pretty easily, too, under the chaos of real fighting. I've trained a few breakfalls that I would probably only ever use in the dojo, because they make things softer. In the street, they are too easily disrupted.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Feb 14, 2018)

jobo said:


> yes that's very much what I'm saying, though there,a variations on theme. If a techneque isn't going to work all of the time against most people OR most of the time against all people, then its of very limited practical use. if it's failure also outs you in a most disadvantaged position, then it's down right dangerous to attempt anywhere were the consequences of failure are getting your head kicked in, rather then just losing a points match.
> 
> yes there are any number of techniques in my art that i did miss as fantasy, if I'm in,doubt i ask the instructor to demonstrate then on me, whilst i resist, if they don't work when exercised by a black belt on me, then i can be fairly sure they won't work reliably enough to stake my life on them no matter how much i practise



I don't agree with your first paragraph.  It is confusing.  Not work all the time against most or most of the time against all is not good logic, the little I remember about logic.  But I think I understand what you are trying to say.  Still, unless you can say that everything you try in sparing or actual combat succeeds every time, you aren't presenting a good argument against the techniques in the videos.

As to techniques in your art, I think you are short changing your art and yourself.  I was taught a knife defense that required I take only about a half step outside the jab to my abdomen while striking down with my same side forearm, then strike the forearm muscle of the knife arm with my other arm.  I was capable of doing the technique, but didn't really like it too much, not seeing it as safe as some others.  One day I was thinking about it and suddenly realized that if my back were to a wall, that would be one of the best defenses I could use.

The point being, we need to think why would a technique be in an art if it wasn't useful, and we just need to think it through against different attacks.  I would also point out a couple of other things; knowing what a defense will be makes it easier to successfully attack against.  Also for as long as you believe a defense (or attack) will not work for you, it won't.  But if you keep practicing and trying to make it work, likely you will find you can make it work, and therefore it will be useful at least in enough circumstances to keep practicing it.

I don't recall, but what art do you practice that has "any number" of fantasy moves?  Another reason I think you are shortchanging yourself.


----------



## skribs (Feb 14, 2018)

jobo said:


> by end of his arms and legs do you mean hands and feet, ? Both of those are good, pain full and effective targets
> 
> id point out that the alternative you suggested of the low/ kneeling punch very much brings you in to range of hands and feet, only then you have far less mobility to dodge them



As gpseymour pointed out, those are easier to move out of the way.

When I'm kneeling next to someone I've usually taken them down and have a controlled position.  i.e. I have their pinned behind their head where if they try to scissor kick me they'll have to contort their body to do so.  As opposed to standing a few feet away where all they have to do is roll on their side and kick.


----------



## Hyoho (Feb 14, 2018)

_Simon_ said:


> Great thread, a little off topic goodness, but tends to be some value in that at times
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Related to this: So many time have I seen people go on an extensive seminar, then return to a dojo to relate what they have been shown. At the next seminar they do something that seems to be different. They will say to the sensei, "Ah, its changed". They will then be told, "No, nothing has changed. You didnt understand what you were shown on the last seminar. all this stuff takes time and years of 'repitition' Nowhere as simple as 'punch here, kick there' etc. It's not, "If you do this I will do that". Its doing something so many times and so well, it becomes a natural reaction.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 14, 2018)

_Simon_ said:


> There definitely seems to be progression in complexity of kata as ranks increase, but what's odd is the way that sometimes higher ranking kata can be placed earlier in the curriculum, and vice versa. I've seen Sanchin placed from the start at 10th kyu level, and elsewhere at 4th kyu (my previous style started it from here, or needing to know it for your 4th kyu grading). Seen Saifa taught at 7th kyu, and others for your 1st Dan. Seiunchin at 3rd kyu and elsewhere 3rd dan. There's really quite a discrepancy huh!
> 
> So it really does depend on the style, and how the kata are viewed. But I do wonder how they classify them and decide which ones are more complex or are more of a progression than others? Because there's quite a difference in placement of curriculum.. and also with katas being performed slightly differently in each style whether this has any bearing on why..
> .


Well, our beginner level forms are longer and arguably more complex than our intermediate and advanced forms.  Two of them are quite long indeed, an aerobic challenge just to get through them.

I would argue that there is something in the intention of the forms, in what they are designed to teach, that makes the distinction, and there is a degree of subtlety in the distinction.

Beginner level forms teach and drill the broad fundamental principles through a variety of manifestations on technique and combinations of technique.  This is why they are so long:  those fundamentals are drilled through the use of a lot of material, giving a wide vision of what is possible.  We tend to view the content of our forms and the rest of the curriculum as representing possibilities of how you CAN apply them, and not as solutions that you definitely MUST master as application.  Understanding how to creatively and spontaneously apply the principles through the medium of our techniques is what we are aiming for, even to the point where one does not need to use a “proper” technique at all, so long as the principles underlie and support what is being done.  It can be seen as an education in how to move and use the body efficiently and with great effect.

Intermediate forms are not as long and aerobically demanding, but they are meant to be done with a faster pace, while keeping intact those fundamentals that were developed with the beginner level forms.  Doing so at a faster speed is more difficult and is considered a higher level of skill.

Advanced forms continue with that theme, but there can be some additional subtlety in how the principles manifest, with movement that is more refined and less obvious to the uneducated eye.

So my view of our system is that what makes a form advanced is definitely NOT simply a matter of being lengthy and taxing or being complex, but rather developing a refinement of skill to be able to execute at a high level while under more demanding circumstances, and to apply our methods with greater subtlety.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 14, 2018)

Hyoho said:


> Related to this: So many time have I seen people go on an extensive seminar, then return to a dojo to relate what they have been shown. At the next seminar they do something that seems to be different. They will say to the sensei, "Ah, its changed". They will then be told, "No, nothing has changed. You didnt understand what you were shown on the last seminar. all this stuff takes time and years of 'repitition' Nowhere as simple as 'punch here, kick there' etc. It's not, "If you do this I will do that". Its doing something so many times and so well, it becomes a natural reaction.


My best takeaways from seminars, every time, are ideas rather than techniques. I'll see an arm lock a certain way, and see how I could get that joint to lock from a position I know. Or they'll explain a principle using an approach I haven't heard or thought of, and it will give me an idea of how to apply that principle differently.

Every now and then, I walk away with a usable technique. It's probably not "correct" to how they would apply it, but I interpret it through the filter of what I already know and find a use for it. More often, it's the concepts, though.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 14, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> My best takeaways from seminars, every time, are ideas rather than techniques. I'll see an arm lock a certain way, and see how I could get that joint to lock from a position I know. Or they'll explain a principle using an approach I haven't heard or thought of, and it will give me an idea of how to apply that principle differently.
> 
> Every now and then, I walk away with a usable technique. It's probably not "correct" to how they would apply it, but I interpret it through the filter of what I already know and find a use for it. More often, it's the concepts, though.


That’s the best way to approach a seminar.  A seminar meant to teach a form, for example, is usually a waste of time, especially if the attendees have no prior training in the system and have no understanding of the system’s fundamentals and overarching methodologies.  It just becomes collecting another dance routine.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 14, 2018)

Flying Crane said:


> That’s the best way to approach a seminar.  A seminar meant to teach a form, for example, is usually a waste of time, especially if the attendees have no prior training in the system and have no understanding of the system’s fundamentals and overarching methodologies.  It just becomes collecting another dance routine.


Agreed. I could only see learning a form in a seminar if it was all material I knew (a form based entirely on techniques I already know). I don't know how that would happen.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 14, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Agreed. I could only see learning a form in a seminar if it was all material I knew (a form based entirely on techniques I already know). I don't know how that would happen.


Yeah, and then there is an argument that you have no real need to learn it, if it does not give you some benefit greater than the sum of its parts.


----------



## _Simon_ (Feb 14, 2018)

Flying Crane said:


> Well, our beginner level forms are longer and arguably more complex than our intermediate and advanced forms.  Two of them are quite long indeed, an aerobic challenge just to get through them.
> 
> I would argue that there is something in the intention of the forms, in what they are designed to teach, that makes the distinction, and there is a degree of subtlety in the distinction.
> 
> ...



Well said, and makes sense


----------



## jobo (Feb 15, 2018)

oftheherd1 said:


> I don't agree with your first paragraph.  It is confusing.  Not work all the time against most or most of the time against all is not good logic, the little I remember about logic.  But I think I understand what you are trying to say.  Still, unless you can say that everything you try in sparing or actual combat succeeds every time, you aren't presenting a good argument against the techniques in the videos.
> 
> As to techniques in your art, I think you are short changing your art and yourself.  I was taught a knife defense that required I take only about a half step outside the jab to my abdomen while striking down with my same side forearm, then strike the forearm muscle of the knife arm with my other arm.  I was capable of doing the technique, but didn't really like it too much, not seeing it as safe as some others.  One day I was thinking about it and suddenly realized that if my back were to a wall, that would be one of the best defenses I could use.
> 
> ...


there is a major disconnect between ma and reality, there is a  major disconnection between many posters on here and reality.

the reality of violence is you are in REAL danger of sustaining life changing injuries. Laying on the floor being booted by a pair of size nine steel toe caps, is a bad time to find that you scissor kick to the standing leg doesn't work( and it won't). That you think it might only shows you have never been kicked about like a football after making the mistake of intentionally going to ground. Life doesn't work like a Jackie Chan film

arts are full of u tried techniques, that is the people teaching them have never used them in a life or death situation, quite a lit are never used against anything but a falling over stooge. They, you and i have no idea if they will work or not, but i know that if they don't, then a trip to critical care is a,strong possibility.

would you dangle of a cliff on equipment that had no guarantee of working, that largely what you are doing if you blindly accept that a techneque wouldnt be included if it didn't work. ?

and Then knife fighting, you have a techneque that's just right for a back against the wall attack??????
have you ever been in a knife fight? There is one and only one techniques that works, and that is being substantially quicker than your attacker, ether quicker running away or quicker in the attack . That's it, two slow and you get a slice across your belly like i have, i was,about a tenth of a,second slow. If someone,could lay a punch on you, they can stab you, have you ever been punched?, yes, then your not fast enough, your knife defence probably won't work

you don't need a whole tool box of untested techniques, that might come in handy, you need a few that you absolutely would stake you life on working, coz that's what you are,about to do


----------



## jobo (Feb 15, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Both of those are also pretty easy to move out of the way. Much easier than the big jump to the chest you suggest for avoiding a scissors (and putting yourself even better in their range if you don't manage to stomp their chest).
> 
> 
> But I can control them from there. Again, it depends upon the situation. You want it to be an absolute, but it is not. Sometimes the kick is the better answer. Sometimes it is not. Any attempt to argue otherwise requires a counter to every single position and situation...and is fantasy.


why do you keep putting random adjectives in? It's not a BIG jump, is not even a medium jump, its a small jump


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 15, 2018)

jobo said:


> there is a major disconnect between ma and reality, there is a  major disconnection between many posters on here and reality.
> 
> the reality of violence is you are in REAL danger of sustaining life changing injuries. Laying on the floor being booted by a pair of size nine steel toe caps, is a bad time to find that you scissor kick to the standing leg doesn't work( and it won't). That you think it might only shows you have never been kicked about like a football after making the mistake of intentionally going to ground. Life doesn't work like a Jackie Chan film
> 
> ...


You've been switching the situation for a while, Jobo. You've gone from "stand and kick" vs "kneel and strike" to "stand and kick" vs "intentionally lay down and get kicked". That's not anyone's approach.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 15, 2018)

jobo said:


> why do you keep putting random adjectives in? It's not a BIG jump, is not even a medium jump, its a small jump


Okay, a small jump means your legs stay within reach the entire jump. You think someone's laying there just letting you do that? They only have to grab and roll - you're bringing the legs right to them. High reward, but higher risk, IMO.


----------



## Hyoho (Feb 16, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> My best takeaways from seminars, every time, are ideas rather than techniques. I'll see an arm lock a certain way, and see how I could get that joint to lock from a position I know. Or they'll explain a principle using an approach I haven't heard or thought of, and it will give me an idea of how to apply that principle differently.
> 
> Every now and then, I walk away with a usable technique. It's probably not "correct" to how they would apply it, but I interpret it through the filter of what I already know and find a use for it. More often, it's the concepts, though.


Most kata in Japan comes from a manual. Not much room for free interpretation or for that matter free expression. If someone is not too sure about something.....They get out the manual.

It's what drove me away from association based budo towards koryu. It was also the constant comments of, "What grade are you taking next?


----------



## jobo (Feb 16, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> You've been switching the situation for a while, Jobo. You've gone from "stand and kick" vs "kneel and strike" to "stand and kick" vs "intentionally lay down and get kicked". That's not anyone's approach.


no I'm responding to others posts, particularly the one i quoted and that's reference to a conversation,about the throwing yourself on the ground video, posted


----------



## hoshin1600 (Feb 16, 2018)

Hyoho said:


> Most kata in Japan comes from a manual. Not much room for free interpretation or for that matter free expression. If someone is not too sure about something.....They get out the manual.


It's a cultural difference.  The Japanese seem to prefer conformity while America prefers individuality.  Positive and negative in both approaches. The Okinawans seem to me to be in the middle.


----------



## jobo (Feb 16, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Okay, a small jump means your legs stay within reach the entire jump. You think someone's laying there just letting you do that? They only have to grab and roll - you're bringing the legs right to them. High reward, but higher risk, IMO.


and the jump is in response to some one trying to kick or leg sweep me, they cant leg sweep me and grab my leg with their hand at the same time, even then you are not pulling some one over at two foot distance, you would need to wrap your arm around the leg, just grabbing an ankle is not enough purchase


----------



## oftheherd1 (Feb 16, 2018)

jobo said:


> there is a major disconnect between ma and reality, there is a  major disconnection between many posters on here and reality.
> ...
> 
> and Then knife fighting, you have a techneque that's just right for a back against the wall attack??????
> ...



Have you considered there may be a major disconnect between you and reality?  Why do you study MA?  Do you think that only you and your art are of any worth?  I wouldn't agree with that if you do.  But you are welcome to you opinion.

And as to knife fighting ...  I hope I never have to defend myself against a knife attack.  But if I do, I am happy to know I won't just have to stand there and be sliced and diced.  Will every technique work every time against every opponent?  No guarantees.  But in Hapkido we are accustomed to having to be fast and accurate.  We tend to move into an attack; fast and accurate are much needed.  Sorry you got cut, that couldn't have been any fun.  Also sorry you had no defenses and lacked the speed then to defend yourself. 

Have you considered studying another art?


----------



## _Simon_ (Feb 16, 2018)

To Johnny... "..... sweep the leg."

XD


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 16, 2018)

Hyoho said:


> Most kata in Japan comes from a manual. Not much room for free interpretation or for that matter free expression. If someone is not too sure about something.....They get out the manual.
> 
> It's what drove me away from association based budo towards koryu. It was also the constant comments of, "What grade are you taking next?


Neither of those sound like they'd attract me, either. Interesting how different the non-koryu (I've forgotten the term, dangit) seems to be between the US and Japan.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 16, 2018)

jobo said:


> and the jump is in response to some one trying to kick or leg sweep me, they cant leg sweep me and grab my leg with their hand at the same time, even then you are not pulling some one over at two foot distance, you would need to wrap your arm around the leg, just grabbing an ankle is not enough purchase


A jump from kicking distance to someone's chest isn't small. And if they are already grabbing at your leg, then grabbing at your leg is pretty much the same thing.


----------



## jobo (Feb 16, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> A jump from kicking distance to someone's chest isn't small. And if they are already grabbing at your leg, then grabbing at your leg is pretty much the same thing.


3,foot or so is a small jump, i can clear 10 with a standing jump at my age


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 16, 2018)

jobo said:


> 3,foot or so is a small jump, i can clear 10 with a standing jump at my age


Ah, you're considering it versus a maximum jump. Not unreasonable.


----------



## jobo (Feb 16, 2018)

oftheherd1 said:


> Have you considered there may be a major disconnect between you and reality?  Why do you study MA?  Do you think that only you and your art are of any worth?  I wouldn't agree with that if you do.  But you are welcome to you opinion.
> 
> And as to knife fighting ...  I hope I never have to defend myself against a knife attack.  But if I do, I am happy to know I won't just have to stand there and be sliced and diced.  Will every technique work every time against every opponent?  No guarantees.  But in Hapkido we are accustomed to having to be fast and accurate.  We tend to move into an attack; fast and accurate are much needed.  Sorry you got cut, that couldn't have been any fun.  Also sorry you had no defenses and lacked the speed then to defend yourself.
> 
> Have you considered studying another art?


I've expressed my feelings about ma being ,faith based rather than sciences based before. the reality of fighting is its science, as such you must be able to prove that something works and be able to quantify its effectiveness against known variables.  Here is a limit to how far you can take that with out some study and a lab but certainly you can critically assess the techneque and classify it by reliability, effectiveness and by consequence if it fails.

clearly all techniques will work against some people, the old, the chronic  unfit, the blind, but you need to be,a bit more discerning than that, before you put faith in it and at least envisage some average strong fit healthy person as an adversary , if a techneque isn't very reliable, very effective and low risk against that class of person, ie most people, then all your dedication has made you no better than average.

I'm old being average is a good standard for me and that's why i do ma, to keep my self above average, techniques that don't do that are no use to me


----------



## oftheherd1 (Feb 16, 2018)

jobo said:


> *I've expressed my feelings about ma being ,faith based rather than sciences based before.* the reality of fighting is its science, as such you must be able to prove that something works and be able to quantify its effectiveness against known variables.  Here is a limit to how far you can take that with out some study and a lab but certainly you can critically assess the techneque and classify it by reliability, effectiveness and by consequence if it fails.
> 
> clearly all techniques will work against some people, the old, the chronic  unfit, the blind, but you need to be,a bit more discerning than that, before you put faith in it and at least envisage some average strong fit healthy person as an adversary , if a techneque isn't very reliable, very effective and low risk against that class of person, ie most people, then all your dedication has made you no better than average.
> 
> I'm old being average is a good standard for me and that's why i do ma, to keep my self above average, techniques that don't do that are no use to me



Fortunately I seem to have missed the bolded and underlined part.


----------



## jobo (Feb 16, 2018)

oftheherd1 said:


> Fortunately I seem to have missed the bolded and underlined part.


it was amongst others, in the ma is a cult discussion, your cult leader tells you it works and you believe him, despite obvious evidence to the contrary, much the sane with flat earthers


----------



## oftheherd1 (Feb 16, 2018)

jobo said:


> it was amongst others, in the ma is a cult discussion, your cult leader tells you it works and you believe him, despite obvious evidence to the contrary, much the sane with flat earthers



You're kidding right?!  You think there is evidence against a flat earth?


----------



## KenpoMaster805 (Feb 16, 2018)

I do Kenpo Karate so we have different Kata like we have short one and long one and short 2 long 2 then short 3 long 3 each kata is diiferent


----------



## Headhunter (Feb 16, 2018)

KenpoMaster805 said:


> I do Kenpo Karate so we have different Kata like we have short one and long one and short 2 long 2 then short 3 long 3 each kata is diiferent


Yes but they're progressive


----------



## jobo (Feb 19, 2018)

oftheherd1 said:


> You're kidding right?!  You think there is evidence against a flat earth?


i find flat earthers fascinating, they post videos of themselves,giving their views and justifcations to those views, most don't seem educationally  subnormal, quite the opposite, they seem like normal everyday people with houses that suggest they had a reasonable income and therefore responsible jobs. 

its just somehow they have,convinced themselves that physics is wrong and they can therfore discount any,scientific principle that doesn't agree with their view, they seem to have taken particular exception to gravity, but all and every science law, theory or hypothesis that doesn't support them is wrong and to compensate they just make up their own that,agree with a) the bible and or what they can experience themselves, they don't feel the world turning, therefore it doesn't turn.

there is more than a passing resemblance to ma, in that it starts of with a belief that the old masters were right and that any pesky law of motion that throws doubt on that can be ignored


----------



## ThatOneCanadian (Nov 15, 2021)

We have 5 basic katas that are short collections of useful techniques. We then have around 16 or so advanced katas that each cover different concepts, all of which are physically demanding in their own way. The remaining few are advanced yet physically less demanding, suitable for older practitioners and usually only required for higher dan tests.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Nov 15, 2021)

jobo said:


> resemblance to ma, in that it starts of with a belief that the old masters were right and that any pesky law of motion that throws doubt on that can be ignored


I agree with most of your post, but the quoted conclusion above is flawed as it misses a couple of points.  I will say it's true when talking about some self-styled "masters" that abound these days.  Not so true about the old, true, masters at least re: Okinawan karate.  It may be true that other MA's were designed to harmonize with philosophical or commercial considerations, but I'm not addressing those and will stick with what I know best.

Those real karate experts learned from professional warriors and they did not train for sport or hobby.  Their techniques were designed for combat and were pressure tested in that context.  Choki Motobu and others were in many street fights.  The problem (and I'm not denying it exists) you are describing should not be attributed to those masters or their fighting system.  _The fault lies in the interpretation and execution of those techniques by those who do not understand them_.

As karate went public, the emphasis on teaching switched from fighting to general exercise.  The advent of competitive sport karate further removed the originally designed application of moves from the system to favor those that score points.  Some important stuff was left behind, or at least, not properly taught and passed on.

By now, Jobo, you (should) have learned enough, here, about kata and their techniques, to realize that their design and function are misunderstood by many. Much like the "flat earthers" you talk about.  Four or five hundred years, everyone thought the earth was flat and the center of the universe.  But once the solar system's true nature was understood, they began to see the correct application of natural laws in it and changed their perception.  We should all be so open minded.  Just because we don't understand something doesn't mean it ain't so.


----------

