# When I was a kid I said forms were stupid



## Xue Sheng (Feb 14, 2017)

When I was a kid I said forms were stupid - Blog

I can still remember a conversation with my friend Dave, during jujutsu class in the early 70s, when we both completely agreed that forms were stupid..... but the TV show Kung Fu was really cool


----------



## Dirty Dog (Feb 14, 2017)

I have to agree. When I was a kid, I thought sparring and breaking were fun (and I still do...) but I did just enough forms to get my next promotion.
It wasn't until adulthood that I realized just how much you could learn from forms.


----------



## Juany118 (Feb 14, 2017)

Dirty Dog said:


> I have to agree. When I was a kid, I thought sparring and breaking were fun (and I still do...) but I did just enough forms to get my next promotion.
> It wasn't until adulthood that I realized just how much you could learn from forms.



My Sifu says, "if you ever run into someone who claims they have transcended forms, don't walk away, run"


----------



## drop bear (Feb 14, 2017)

Forms are stupid.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 14, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Forms are stupid.


Said the guy who needs people to train.


----------



## Buka (Feb 15, 2017)

Two people hitting each other is stupid.


----------



## Juany118 (Feb 15, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Forms are stupid.




If serious I think people don't really get what a form is.  In boxing, JKD and some more modern things I see people talk about doing "sets" on their own, whether against a bag, shadow boxing etc.  That is for all practical purposes a form.  It is not as "formalized" as a form or kata, but it is performing the same function and in a similar manner.


----------



## Headhunter (Feb 15, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Forms are stupid.


So you don't do shadow boxing then


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 15, 2017)

You can't move like a jungle cat, unless you practice moving like a jungle cat.


----------



## drop bear (Feb 15, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> If serious I think people don't really get what a form is.  In boxing, JKD and some more modern things I see people talk about doing "sets" on their own, whether against a bag, shadow boxing etc.  That is for all practical purposes a form.  It is not as "formalized" as a form or kata, but it is performing the same function and in a similar manner.



Forms really are a different animal to drills.

 Drills are created by function. So you take from fighting and train in repetition those movements.

Forms are created by ritural. Trained in repetition and then used in fighting.

Some people like ritural. And so will think forms are not stupid.

Some dont like ritural and think forms are stupid.

Both arguments are valid.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 15, 2017)

Touch Of Death said:


> You can't move like a jungle cat, unless you practice moving like a jungle cat.


Yeah, but who moves like a jungle cat?


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 15, 2017)

Flying Crane said:


> Yeah, but who moves like a jungle cat?


Roar.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 15, 2017)

I am a proponent of forms, until you have too many.

If you have a bunch, and you still don't "get it", then learning more will not help you, and will only clutter your training.  You are simply missing something fundamental.

If you have a few and you do "get it" then you have no need for any more.  They have fulfilled their purpose and you do not need to clutter your training.

The trick is, figuring out what it is you are trying to "get" and then determining if you've "got it".  And figuring out if you have learned the appropriate forms and the foundational material that will help you.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 15, 2017)

When I was 11, my brother in law taught me an open hand form and a pole form. One day I got into a fight and I couldn't use what he taught me. I complained to him. He stopped teaching me any more form. For the next 3 years, he forced me to train "1 step 3 punches".

Even today, I still like his teaching method. If you can knock your opponent down/out within 3 punches, you don't need anything else.


----------



## Juany118 (Feb 15, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Forms really are a different animal to drills.
> 
> Drills are created by function. So you take from fighting and train in repetition those movements.
> 
> ...



I totally, as someone who originally trained to be a teacher, understand the idea of a preference between different teaching methods.  In a substantive debate, I totally get the idea that different arguments are valid.

That said I don't think any argument that simply boils down to "that's stupid" is a valid one.  Again, let me make clear there is certainly room for debate, however that debate has to start with first talking about they why of the differences, perhaps more importantly how big are the differences.  Example, boxing is one thing, JKD is another thing.  JKD says "we are beyond forms" but they have chi sau, hubud, and dummy forms etc.  It's a lot more complicated and "that's stupid" seems to avoid the how and whys that make the real debate.

Hell I just realized I wrote like a teacher and I havent done that in 20 years lol.


----------



## Juany118 (Feb 15, 2017)

Flying Crane said:


> I am a proponent of forms, until you have too many.
> 
> If you have a bunch, and you still don't "get it", then learning more will not help you, and will only clutter your training.  You are simply missing something fundamental.
> 
> ...




That is one of the things I like about WC.  The number of forms is very limited.  Until you get to weapons you have, in my WC, 4 unarmed forms, 1 wooden dummy form.  The unarmed forms appear long, but for the most part it's simply duplicating the same techniques right and left because you are supposed to be able to use both sides of your body equally.  However I have seen other arts that have 10, 15 even more forms for whatever reason. There asking the question you ask becomes a lot more complicated.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 15, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> That is one of the things I like about WC.  The number of forms is very limited.  Until you get to weapons you have, in my WC, 4 unarmed forms, 1 wooden dummy form.  The unarmed forms appear long, but for the most part it's simply duplicating the same techniques right and left because you are supposed to be able to use both sides of your body equally.  However I have seen other arts that have 10, 15 even more forms for whatever reason. There asking the question you ask becomes a lot more complicated.


I am in a system that has about a dozen and a half empty hand forms and a dozen or so weapons forms.  I have learned maybe half of them, more-or-less.  I am in no hurry to learn more.  I actually believe that I've got it.  That doesnt make me perfect or excellent or even particularly good.  It just means that I understand the point of the methodology and I know what to focus on in my training.


----------



## Juany118 (Feb 15, 2017)

Flying Crane said:


> I am in a system that has about a dozen and a half empty hand forms and a dozen or so weapons forms.  I have learned maybe half of them, more-or-less.  I am in no hurry to learn more.  I actually believe that I've got it.  That doesnt make me perfect or excellent or even particularly good.  It just means that I understand the point of the methodology and I know what to focus on in my training.


Oh I don't doubt you can "get it" without knowing all of the forms.  Imo some arts have so many forms because as time goes on a Master thinks "let me add this!" When I spoke of complication I was referring more to those "outside looking in."


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 15, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> That is one of the things I like about WC.  The number of forms is very limited.


How long can you keep your students with only 3 open hand forms? I have 30 open hand forms and I can keep my student 10 times longer than you can.


----------



## Juany118 (Feb 15, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> How long can you keep your students with only 3 open hand forms? I have 30 open hand forms and I can keep my student 10 times longer than you can.



Well, they aren't my students, I am just one of the students others sometimes look to for advice and hints.  

That said, first each form has 108 movements, however they are largely duplicated left and right.  The first one is also one that should not only be done at "normal speed" but also what I, for simplicity's sake, refer to as "Qi Gong" or "Tai Chi" speed.  Then after the forms of the day we spend a lot of time in cooperative drills.


----------



## JR 137 (Feb 15, 2017)

"Stupid is as stupid does."
- Forrest Gump

Doing forms for stupid reasons makes doing forms stupid.  Stupid reasons include, but are not limited to:

Requiring them for the sole sake of filling a curriculum
Doing them to fill class time
Doing them without knowing why
Doing them without trying to figure out why
Doing them and thinking you can take on multiple attackers
Doing them and thinking you're a good fighter because your performance looks pretty
Doing them and thinking you're a good fighter while forgetting your opponent will most likely resist
Doing them and thinking you'll pull off every cool move exactly as you do the form
Doing them because they look cool

This list isn't exhaustive, but it got a bit exhausting.  Feel free to add to it.


----------



## Juany118 (Feb 15, 2017)

JR 137 said:


> "Stupid is as stupid does."
> - Forrest Gump
> 
> Doing forms for stupid reasons makes doing forms stupid.  Stupid reasons include, but are not limited to:
> ...


Exactly, however, and maybe this is just my Sifu, we a specific reason for doing one form at the beginning of class, SLT, regardless of rank.

SLT has many translations.  Little mind, Little imagination etc.  The idea behind it though is this.  By focusing on that, if you do it properly, you clear your mind or "empty your cup" so to speak.  So in doing the form not only do you reinforce the basic alphabet of Wing Chun but you leave the headache waiting for you at work the next day, the argument you had with your significant other, at the door.  Then real training can begin.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 15, 2017)

JR 137 said:


> This list isn't exhaustive, but it got a bit exhausting.  Feel free to add to it.


- MA is 2 persons art. It cannot be done "solo".
- MA involves timing, opportunity, angle, force, balance. Without opponent, timing, opportunity, and angle have no meaning.
- You may be able to punch an invisible opponent because a punch or a kick is just "1 point contact". You can't throw an invisible opponent because a throw is "2 or 3 points contact".


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 16, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> How long can you keep your students with only 3 open hand forms? I have 30 open hand forms and I can keep my student 10 times longer than you can.


To me, that is irrelevant.


----------



## JR 137 (Feb 16, 2017)

Flying Crane said:


> To me, that is irrelevant.



I think, or at least hope, he was being sarcastic.  Implying the mentality of chasing rank and learning a bunch of new forms for each of the dozens ranks keeps students around longer and therefore making more money.  But maybe I'm wrong.  Wouldn't be the first time.


----------



## JR 137 (Feb 16, 2017)

On another note, if I started my own school, it would be one kata for each rank.  Actually one kata for every two ranks - learn a kata and some very simple applications for the first rank (say white belt/10th kyu), then learn more in-depth application and proving use of it against a reasonably resisting opponent for the next rank (advanced white belt/9th kyu).  After that, repeat with a new kata.  So in a 10 kyu ranks system, you'd learn and apply 5 kata total before 1st dan.  Kyu rank kata aren't too long and intricate compared to black belt kata.  At the dan level, same principle would apply - 1 kata, and in-depth knowledge and application against resistance before you promote.

In my fantasyland school, kata and application wouldn't be the only criterion for promoting though.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 16, 2017)

JR 137 said:


> I think, or at least hope, he was being sarcastic.


I was sarcastic in that post. Once I visited a preying mantis school in China. I asked the instructor whether he taught the 3 major preying mantis forms, Ben-Bu, Lan-Je, and Zai-Yao. He said, "Those are important PM forms. You just don't teach those forms to anybody." I then asked him which forms does he teach. He told me a list of over 30 PM forms. He asked me how many PM forms do I teach. I told him that I only teach 3 PM forms. He then asked me, "How long can you keep your students for only 3 forms?" Even today, I still feel his statement is kind of funny."

IMO, you want to grow "tall" and you don't want to grow "fat". To learn 10 forms that belong to the same level is like to go through elementary school 10 times. It won't earn you a PhD degree. If you have

- 1 beginner level form,
- 1 intermediate level form,
- 1 advance level form,

that should be enough.

Someone once asked me, "Can you put 3 baskets in front of you, label it beginner, intermediate, and advance. You then take each and every move out of your forms and put into these 3 baskets?"

That question was asked back in 1978. Today, I'm still working on it.


----------



## drop bear (Feb 17, 2017)

JR 137 said:


> On another note, if I started my own school, it would be one kata for each rank.  Actually one kata for every two ranks - learn a kata and some very simple applications for the first rank (say white belt/10th kyu), then learn more in-depth application and proving use of it against a reasonably resisting opponent for the next rank (advanced white belt/9th kyu).  After that, repeat with a new kata.  So in a 10 kyu ranks system, you'd learn and apply 5 kata total before 1st dan.  Kyu rank kata aren't too long and intricate compared to black belt kata.  At the dan level, same principle would apply - 1 kata, and in-depth knowledge and application against resistance before you promote.
> 
> In my fantasyland school, kata and application wouldn't be the only criterion for promoting though.



Shouldn't they be designed to teach an aspect of fighting? So it probably would not work as a progression.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 17, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Forms really are a different animal to drills.
> 
> Drills are created by function. So you take from fighting and train in repetition those movements.
> 
> ...


That's an assumption. Most forms are based on function. They took from the fighting and developed forms to build the habits. It's like someone practicing combinations on a heavy bag or focus mitts. Those combinations are repetition. They are based upon movements useful in fighting they want to ingrain. The primary difference is that drills (as you and I use the term) are specific to a single aspect. When training combinations, you're not doing a set of movements that also does something else by design. It's a more focused approach, but doesn't have the same breadth of use in training. It's the primary difference between "classical" and "modern" training, IME.

Forms tend to pack in more principles, movements from several aspects, and longer series before repetition. They are often repeated more exactly than drills. There are good reasons for that precision, though it's by no means a necessity. Once a student knows a form, I encourage them to create variations in it - pivot further, don't step on that move, etc. - so it becomes a bit more like shadow-boxing.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 17, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> Oh I don't doubt you can "get it" without knowing all of the forms.  Imo some arts have so many forms because as time goes on a Master thinks "let me add this!" When I spoke of complication I was referring more to those "outside looking in."


Indeed, I could teach NGA without any of the forms. I've actually added long forms (originally only short forms), because they fill a training need for the students. I doubt there's any art that couldn't be taught without forms, and I doubt there's any art that can't use forms effectively. It's a training tool that can be used well, or "not used" well.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 17, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> - MA is 2 persons art. It cannot be done "solo".
> - MA involves timing, opportunity, angle, force, balance. Without opponent, timing, opportunity, and angle have no meaning.
> - You may be able to punch an invisible opponent because a punch or a kick is just "1 point contact". You can't throw an invisible opponent because a throw is "2 or 3 points contact".


Actually, we throw invisible opponents in our long forms.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 17, 2017)

JR 137 said:


> On another note, if I started my own school, it would be one kata for each rank.  Actually one kata for every two ranks - learn a kata and some very simple applications for the first rank (say white belt/10th kyu), then learn more in-depth application and proving use of it against a reasonably resisting opponent for the next rank (advanced white belt/9th kyu).  After that, repeat with a new kata.  So in a 10 kyu ranks system, you'd learn and apply 5 kata total before 1st dan.  Kyu rank kata aren't too long and intricate compared to black belt kata.  At the dan level, same principle would apply - 1 kata, and in-depth knowledge and application against resistance before you promote.
> 
> In my fantasyland school, kata and application wouldn't be the only criterion for promoting though.


Mine is the opposite. I have only 4 kyu ranks (including white belt), and all forms are learned prior to the last one, so 8 forms in 3 kyu ranks. But they are not very long, and 5 are learned as they learn the techniques (so the form will be given out over about 6-8 weeks).


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 17, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Shouldn't they be designed to teach an aspect of fighting? So it probably would not work as a progression.


Why wouldn't that work? There are aspects of fighting that a beginning student isn't ready for yet, and those could be held for the later forms.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 17, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I was sarcastic in that post. Once I visited a preying mantis school in China. I asked the instructor whether he taught the 3 major preying mantis forms, Ben-Bu, Lan-Je, and Zai-Yao. He said, "Those are important PM forms. You just don't teach those forms to anybody." I then asked him which forms does he teach. He told me a list of over 30 PM forms. He asked me how many PM forms do I teach. I told him that I only teach 3 PM forms. He then asked me, "How long can you keep your students for only 3 forms?" Even today, I still feel his statement is kind of funny."
> 
> IMO, you want to grow "tall" and you don't want to grow "fat". To learn 10 forms that belong to the same level is like to go through elementary school 10 times. It won't earn you a PhD degree. If you have
> 
> ...


I appreciate the clarification.  In my opinion, there are a lot of cluttered curricula out there.  It doesn't need to be so cluttered.  If financial profit is the motivation for keeping extra material in the curriculum, that is a real problem, it's deceptive and dishonest.


----------



## drop bear (Feb 17, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Why wouldn't that work? There are aspects of fighting that a beginning student isn't ready for yet, and those could be held for the later forms.



Like?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 17, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Like?


If I wanted to create a form for absolute beginners, I'd leave out things like defense against a kick. I could include those concepts in an intermediate form. I might have a simple single-leg or double-leg in a beginner's form, but probably not drop seoi nage.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 17, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> If I wanted to create a form for absolute beginners, I'd leave out things like defense against a kick.


Many MA styles don't teach defense techniques in the first 2 years. You want your students to attack, attack, and still attack.

In Chinese wrestling, we encourage students to "attack and lose" than to "defense and win". If all you can do is when your opponent tries to throw you, you use "pull guard" to drag him down, you will never be able to learn any throwing skill. You throwing skill development will have no future.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 17, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> If I wanted to create a form for absolute beginners, I'd leave out things like defense against a kick. I could include those concepts in an intermediate form. I might have a simple single-leg or double-leg in a beginner's form, but probably not drop seoi nage.


For a beginner form, I recommend it work fundamental techniques as the embodiment of principles of movemement and good body mechanics.  That form is then a staple practice tool for the rest of the students martial career.  It's taught to beginners, but is trained constantly, for ever.  You don't outgrow something like that. 

Applications can come later


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 17, 2017)

Flying Crane said:


> For a beginner form, I recommend it work fundamental techniques as the embodiment of principles of movemement and good body mechanics.  That form is then a staple practice tool for the rest of the students martial career.  It's taught to beginners, but is trained constantly, for ever.  You don't outgrow something like that.
> 
> Applications can come later


The draw back for this approach is since the students don't see the goal. they may quit before reaching to it.

I like to use "single leg" to take my student down during day one (application first). Since they can see the effectiveness of this technique, when I teach them the foundation required for "single leg" (such as line up back foot with opponent's both feet), they will pay attention and spend time to develop it. In AI, this approach is called "backward search". You define the goal first, you then find a path to get there. During the beginner training stage, students won't be able to understand the usage of "good body mechanics".

Ancient Chinese liked to tell their children that "there are gold and pretty women in book". This way kids will have the motivation to study. It's the same psychology approach.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 17, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The draw back for this approach is since the students don't see the goal. they may quit before reaching to it.
> 
> I like to use "single leg" to take my student down during day one (application first). Since they can see the effectiveness of this technique, when I teach them the foundation required for "single leg" (such as line up back foot with opponent's both feet), they will pay attention and spend time to develop it. In AI, this approach is called "backward search". You define the goal first, you then find a path to get there. During the beginner training stage, students won't be able to understand the usage of "good body mechanics".
> 
> Ancient Chinese liked to tell their children that "there are gold and pretty women in book". This way kids will have the motivation to study. It's the same psychology approach.


Oh, there is definitely applications in the fundamentals too.


----------



## JR 137 (Feb 17, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Shouldn't they be designed to teach an aspect of fighting? So it probably would not work as a progression.



Depends on the kata being used.  There's a definite progression in the complexity of the Pinan 1-5 series.  They're short - 20 counts/movements each - and they're simple enough for beginners to intermediate students to get a good foundation before moving on to more complex stuff.  Pinan 1-5...






After those, move on to the longer more intricate forms, such as Kanku Sho...






While it may not seem like it on the surface, there's a lot more going on than just block-punch-kick in those forms.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 17, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Many MA styles don't teach defense techniques in the first 2 years. You want your students to attack, attack, and still attack.
> 
> In Chinese wrestling, we encourage students to "attack and lose" than to "defense and win". If all you can do is when your opponent tries to throw you, you use "pull guard" to drag him down, you will never be able to learn any throwing skill. You throwing skill development will have no future.


I don't agree that teaching a defense means you'll never develop an attack. I teach defense first (a simple block), because it's something they can do with little practice, and sets up opportunities to counter an attack. They still learn later to counter without the block, when appropriate.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 17, 2017)

Flying Crane said:


> For a beginner form, I recommend it work fundamental techniques as the embodiment of principles of movemement and good body mechanics.  That form is then a staple practice tool for the rest of the students martial career.  It's taught to beginners, but is trained constantly, for ever.  You don't outgrow something like that.
> 
> Applications can come later


All of my forms are full techniques. The second one they learn (very early) is nothing but application. 

The post was in response to DB's comment that there should be fighting principles in a form, and asking how those could be provided in a progression. This is part of what I do in my forms, though it's not a strict progression (it's partly tied to the classical curriculum of the art).


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 17, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The draw back for this approach is since the students don't see the goal. they may quit before reaching to it.
> 
> I like to use "single leg" to take my student down during day one (application first). Since they can see the effectiveness of this technique, when I teach them the foundation required for "single leg" (such as line up back foot with opponent's both feet), they will pay attention and spend time to develop it. In AI, this approach is called "backward search". You define the goal first, you then find a path to get there. During the beginner training stage, students won't be able to understand the usage of "good body mechanics".
> 
> Ancient Chinese liked to tell their children that "there are gold and pretty women in book". This way kids will have the motivation to study. It's the same psychology approach.


This is why the forms come after they learn the techniques. The forms are for practice, not for learning the technique.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 17, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> I don't agree that teaching a defense means you'll never develop an attack. I teach defense first (a simple block), because it's something they can do with little practice, and sets up opportunities to counter an attack. They still learn later to counter without the block, when appropriate.


The striking art is different from the throwing art. To counter a hip throw, all you need to do is to sink down your body. It's much easy to develop that "sinking" than to develop that hip throw. When you are good in sinking, you may think that nobody can throw you with hip throw, you may think hit throw is useless.


----------



## Juany118 (Feb 20, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The striking art is different from the throwing art. To counter a hip throw, all you need to do is to sink down your body. It's much easy to develop that "sinking" than to develop that hip throw. When you are good in sinking, you may think that nobody can throw you with hip throw, you may think hit throw is useless.



That reminds me of something my Sifu's Master says when it comes to dealing with some grappling attacks, "Sometimes you just have to sit down."  The beauty of it is that sometimes, if done correctly, it amounts to a reversal and you aren't simply preventing yourself from  being taken down but you instead take down your opponent.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 20, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> That reminds me of something my Sifu's Master says when it comes to dealing with some grappling attacks, "Sometimes you just have to sit down."  The beauty of it is that sometimes, if done correctly, it amounts to a reversal and you aren't simply preventing yourself from  being taken down but you instead take down your opponent.


Indeed, one of my favorite applications to one of our few_ sutemi waza_ (sacrifice techniques) is against a basic leg sweep (_osoto gari_). When they have you in position, weight back, you just sit and the technique falls into place.


----------



## Danny T (Feb 20, 2017)

I like form...Forms not so much. 
Form is extremely important for high level. Set pattern of forms...not so much.
A lot of low level fighters have poor form. A lot of intermediate level fighters have poor form. Most high level fighters have good form.
Knowing and doing a lot of Forms doesn't necessarily make good fighters but makes them good at doing forms.
Some people enjoy doing Forms...Great. 
Some don't enjoy doing Forms...Great.
I prefer drills using good form for attribute and skill development others like forms...Great.


----------



## Nobody Important (Feb 24, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Forms really are a different animal to drills.
> 
> Drills are created by function. So you take from fighting and train in repetition those movements.
> 
> ...


To a great many this is true, but it is also a misnomer. Legitimate forms (Kata/Taolu/Hyung/Juru etc.) are devoid of esoteric or erroneous movement, IMO. Because of the influence of Wushu, tournament competition, demonstrations etc. the idea of "form" has been transformed.

All movements in forms should have a realistic, practical and un-convoluted relationship to real fighting application.

A form should be a collection of like principles, applications, mechanics etc. All to which can be extrapolated. There should be no vague conceptual premise. Forms are merely composed of San Sik (drills) of similar or related function. It is merely a method of collection.

Over time, understanding of what is present within a form and/or alteration to make more aesthetically pleasing has become common place, and relegated "forms" to little more than dance. The old timers, of which very few are still around, used to preach, one form equals one style.

If you truly know a fighting form inside and out, all of its principles, mechanics, applications etc. There is no need to collect more.

I practice many forms, but truly only study one in great depth. It contains all I will ever need to effectively defend myself using the methods of Ti, Da, Shuai, & Na. Understanding, truly understanding, the qinna/bunkai theory as developed within a form is forgone by many in this day and age as people pursue rank by accumulating "forms" simply as a means of progression, instead of understanding.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 24, 2017)

The following clip shows:

1. roundhouse kick,
2. side kick,
3. downward separate hands,
4. double under hooks,
5. knee strike,
6. outer hook.

Why can't I find this drill in any form? Why do I have to create this drill myself?


----------



## Nobody Important (Feb 24, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The following clip shows:
> 
> 1. roundhouse kick,
> 2. side kick,
> ...


Are you looking for the exact sequence, or those specific techniques?

Because those are fairly common techniques. The purpose of forms is to break them down to individual movements that can be combined to create sequences or used solo. Choreography of a form is not important.


----------



## drop bear (Feb 24, 2017)

Nobody Important said:


> To a great many this is true, but it is also a misnomer. Legitimate forms (Kata/Taolu/Hyung/Juru etc.) are devoid of esoteric or erroneous movement, IMO. Because of the influence of Wushu, tournament competition, demonstrations etc. the idea of "form" has been transformed.
> 
> All movements in forms should have a realistic, practical and un-convoluted relationship to real fighting application.
> 
> ...



No form is devoid of esoteric and erroneous movement. You can't physically create a form that is perfect.

Assuming a form is right and the rest of reality just doesn't understand it well enough.  Is the difference between a form and a drill. And in my opinion backwards. 

A martial arts evolution is driven by its practitioners and students. Not its founders.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 24, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The following clip shows:
> 
> 1. roundhouse kick,
> 2. side kick,
> ...


Every form was created by someone who saw a need for it. It's likely (simple probability) someone created a form that had a similar sequence, but maybe it didn't survive. If you think it's a needed form, create it.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 24, 2017)

drop bear said:


> No form is devoid of esoteric and erroneous movement. You can't physically create a form that is perfect.
> 
> Assuming a form is right and the rest of reality just doesn't understand it well enough.  Is the difference between a form and a drill. And in my opinion backwards.
> 
> A martial arts evolution is driven by its practitioners and students. Not its founders.


Agreed. Every form will likely have some motion in it that was there just to get to the next "thing", or to keep it more compact for practice, or to get it to end facing the direction the creator wanted, or something. And every form has some movement in it that could be done better (to fit the current usage of some related techniques). Forms shouldn't be seen as sacred and immutable. They should evolve with the art, which should evolve with circumstances and the needs of the students.


----------



## Nobody Important (Feb 24, 2017)

drop bear said:


> No form is devoid of esoteric and erroneous movement. You can't physically create a form that is perfect.
> 
> Assuming a form is right and the rest of reality just doesn't understand it well enough.  Is the difference between a form and a drill. And in my opinion backwards.
> 
> A martial arts evolution is driven by its practitioners and students. Not its founders.



Just because something isn't perfect doesn't mean it is esoteric, erroneous or obtuse. A true fighting form is simply a collection of drills put together in a long drill as a method of remembering individual components that number too greatly to retain as individual pieces.

The idea of "forms" today in TCMA as stylized, written in stone rituals is a product of turn of the 20th century British influenced Hong Kong, opera stuff. Traditional TCMA "forms" we're linked drills and referred to as frame training.

Drills contain movement, posture, principle, mechanics etc. Real forms do the same, only in greater number. A real form contains all the pertinent & salient information of a developed method. It's basics, strategy, mechanics, principles etc. It is simply a linked collection of drills as compared to possessing 50 or more loose ones. This is for ease of remembrance and as reference. They can be performed in a variety of manners.

There are many reasons as to why forms are misunderstood, mostly due to ignorance of what it truly is. Most practitioners misinterpret or really don't understand what they are doing and make things up or outright ignore the issue, clinging to tradition. A form in no way dictates how one should "act" in realistic application. Too many strive to mimic the choreography of a form thinking that the way presented is the way it must be in order for it to be correct. In example, the Seisan Kata, at its base it is composed of 13 techniques. Depending on the system the choreography, number of other techniques, repetition, footwork etc. is different, but they all share the 13 methods from which the form derives its name. How those methods are linked is due to personal interpretation, innovation, evolution etc. of the choreographer.

In times past, the teacher would instruct the student in the 13 methods, & and the student would develop a "form" based on their understanding of those methods as a way of remembering them.

A fighting form is an encyclopedia of drills, and should be nothing more. A vast collection of different methods isn't necessary for self defense. Professional boxing uses about 7 strikes, most MMA practitioners employ less than 20 different techniques when fighting, most Olympic judoka use less than 15 techniques in competition.

The sad truth is most martial artists who practice forms have no real inkling about what they are doing. Many rely on creating or collecting "drills" from elsewhere to compensate for the lack of understanding. Chalk it up to ignorance, rank chasing, money bilking, mcdojo, or poor instruction, whatever, this doesn't mean forms are useless.

Instruction through drills is essentially a form, especially if those drills are repeatedly used because they garner results.

Evolving and devolving go hand in hand, convolution of practicality and simplicity often lead to confusion. Founders leave an idea of their understanding of a method for future generations via forms. Ideally over time real systems accumulate more forms due to evolution of an idea, specialization or integration. Mcdojos have a variety to win medals at tournaments and impress with acrobatics in demos. This is why some systems have a plethora of forms. Pick one that agrees with your ideas, forget the others, advanced knowledge of numerous methods of combat isn't necessary for practical defense. A Jack of all trades is a master of none.


----------



## Buka (Feb 25, 2017)

drop bear said:


> A martial arts evolution is driven by its practitioners and students. Not its founders.



That's pretty God damn profound. I might even carve that in my table or something.


----------



## beastie (Feb 25, 2017)

In my art, forms have a very important role. Hand and leg techniques with the accompanying stances and/or stepping patterns are the basics. The longer we train in a form. the more flow the movements take on, the intricacies of power generation become more apparent. But that's not just it. We find out that within the basic techniques, there are variations that can be added. From throws to joint locks to weapons to double weapons to other things ad infinitum. By that time, movements become less "staccato" (I call it kung fu by numbers) and more fluid. Less distinct and separate techniques and more fluid. Less effort or external manifestation of power but more destructive. Without proper training in forms, almost everybody looks like they fight like a "generic" kickboxer when I watch inter-style sparring; can't tell one style from another. Forms can refine movements so a martial artist moves can't be read by the opponent.


----------



## drop bear (Feb 26, 2017)

Buka said:


> That's pretty God damn profound. I might even carve that in my table or something.



I can't go around saying profound stuff.  I will lose my rep. 






MMA rules!!!!!!


----------



## Paul_D (Feb 26, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> - MA is 2 persons art. It cannot be done "solo".


Depending on your art, it cannot be done, correctly, with a partner.  You cannot practice joint manipulation full speed with a partner, as pretty soon you will have now partners left.  Similarly you cannot perform many throws as truly intended as they will similarly injure you partner.  The only time you can practice these things correctly, or at full speed/power is on your own.


----------



## Buka (Feb 26, 2017)

_"MA is 2 persons art. It cannot be done "solo"._

Amen.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 26, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> Depending on your art, it cannot be done, correctly, with a partner.  You cannot practice joint manipulation full speed with a partner, as pretty soon you will have now partners left.  Similarly you cannot perform many throws as truly intended as they will similarly injure you partner.  The only time you can practice these things correctly, or at full speed/power is on your own.


Many joint manipulation can be done full-speed and full-range (or nearly so, at least) with a partner. You just need a good partner who can recognize the lock early and drop out of it, rather than resist, so you can complete the movement without damaging them.

With throws, there's a trade-off on both sides. With a partner, it's best to not go full-speed often. Without that partner, you don't have their mass as ballast for your movement, so the movement must be altered somewhat.


----------



## Paul_D (Feb 26, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Many joint manipulation can be done full-speed and full-range (or nearly so, at least) with a partner. You just need a good partner who can recognize the lock early and drop out of it, rather than resist, so you can complete the movement without damaging them.
> 
> With throws, there's a trade-off on both sides. With a partner, it's best to not go full-speed often. Without that partner, you don't have their mass as ballast for your movement, so the movement must be altered somewhat.


You can't drop out of locks that manipulate joins upwards, and Throws aren't about speed, they are about how your partner is supposed to land, hence you have to do them incorrectly so they land safely.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 26, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> You can't drop out of locks that manipulate joins upwards, and Throws aren't about speed, they are about how your partner is supposed to land, hence you have to do them incorrectly so they land safely.


When I say "drop out", I use that as a generic for moving past the control plane. In most cases, it's an actual drop (which is how I got into the habit of the term). Locks that manipulate upwards can sometimes be stepped through to change the plane. There are some that you can't step out of if your partner has the control points right, which is why I said "many".


----------



## drop bear (Feb 26, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> Depending on your art, it cannot be done, correctly, with a partner.  You cannot practice joint manipulation full speed with a partner, as pretty soon you will have now partners left.  Similarly you cannot perform many throws as truly intended as they will similarly injure you partner.  The only time you can practice these things correctly, or at full speed/power is on your own.



But solo kill ninja arm breaks is pretending. At least if you practice the version that is modified you are practicing an honest technique. With honest feedback.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 26, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> they are about how your partner is supposed to land, hence you have to do them incorrectly so they land safely.


This is the difference between "sport" and "combat". In sport, you want to protect your partner. In combat, you want to hurt your partner. You may develop bad habit through sport training and has to be removed in combat training.

If you want to hurt your opponent in throwing, all you will need to do is to "throw him 1/2 way". This way, your opponent's body can only rotate 1/2 way and land with head down first.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 26, 2017)

drop bear said:


> But solo kill ninja arm breaks is pretending. At least if you practice the version that is modified you are practicing an honest technique. With honest feedback.


Well, anything done without a partner (including shadow boxing) requires some pretending. There's some merit to practicing the full range of motion on destructions that have to be truncated in live practice.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 26, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This is the difference between "sport" and "combat". In sport, you want to protect your partner. In combat, you want to hurt your partner. You may develop bad habit through sport training and has to be removed in combat training.
> 
> If you want to hurt your opponent in throwing, all you will need to do is to "throw him 1/2 way". This way, your opponent's body can only rotate 1/2 way and land with head down first.


That's not true of all throws. For some throws, "1/2 way" means you stop while his weight is upon you, or you stop before you add force to the throw. Sometimes, going for the injury means simply throwing more "down", adding more of your weight and/or muscle, or simply completing the throw with full extension.


----------



## DanT (Feb 26, 2017)

For the most part, forms are useful for combat only if you break them down. In my opinion, forms can be placed in two categories:

1. Forms that contain techniques that are useable in combat

2. Forms that improve certain skills that will be useful in combat

Take for example the second form in Wing Chun (Chum kiu). The form contains a number of techniques that can be adapted for combat, but for the most part, this form falls into the second category (improving skills that are useful in combat). Practicing Chum kiu helps build hip power and helps maintain balance while moving and stepping.

If we look at let's say a random form from Monkey Style, and it goes like this:

1. Step forward, double punch,
2. Step back, round kick
3. Forward roll, triple side kick
4. Duck, double hook punch
5. And so on

It is important for the practitioner of that style to not only do the whole form, but break the form down into those combinations and practice them and then apply them in sparring. He should for example take the "duck, double hook combination" and practice it on the bag, and with a compliant partner, and then with a non compliant partner in sparring. Otherwise, you'll get really good at dancing, not at fighting.


----------



## drop bear (Feb 26, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Well, anything done without a partner (including shadow boxing) requires some pretending. There's some merit to practicing the full range of motion on destructions that have to be truncated in live practice.



Anything never done with a partner is pretending.

"This throw that I have never actually done will break your arm. I know because I learned it off a guy who has never done it and he told me"

Just a shadow boxer. Has that conotation.






Have you ever wondered why you never see that leg sissor from the other thread used in any sort of live situation?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 26, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Anything never done with a partner is pretending.
> 
> "This throw that I have never actually done will break your arm. I know because I learned it off a guy who has never done it and he told me"
> 
> ...


Those same techniques are done with a partner, just not at the same speed and to the same finish. It's pretty easy to tell what locks will do damage. If you take them to a certain point and your partner REALLY doesn't want you to take it a bit further, it will do some damage. Will it destroy the joint? If nobody has ever actually tried it to completion, we won't know that. If someone actually has, then we know it is capable of destroying the joint if we go far enough. 

As for that scissor being used in a live situation, there are usually better options, and certainly in a situation with a well-trained opponent (as opposed to a common attacker). I lump techniques like that into the "gap filler" category. They fit in between the most useful techniques, fitting into specific situations. I've actually used it in the dojo in a medium-violence attack from behind (after I hit the ground), but it's a rarity even there (outside practicing the actual technique).


----------



## Juany118 (Mar 1, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Those same techniques are done with a partner, just not at the same speed and to the same finish. It's pretty easy to tell what locks will do damage. If you take them to a certain point and your partner REALLY doesn't want you to take it a bit further, it will do some damage. Will it destroy the joint? If nobody has ever actually tried it to completion, we won't know that. If someone actually has, then we know it is capable of destroying the joint if we go far enough.
> 
> As for that scissor being used in a live situation, there are usually better options, and certainly in a situation with a well-trained opponent (as opposed to a common attacker). I lump techniques like that into the "gap filler" category. They fit in between the most useful techniques, fitting into specific situations. I've actually used it in the dojo in a medium-violence attack from behind (after I hit the ground), but it's a rarity even there (outside practicing the actual technique).




This actually reminds me of a seminar we ran on Saturday.  The seminar was focused on ground fighting with edged weapons ("traditional" knives and karambits) and "combat" grappling/take downs.  I put combat in quotes because it was based on the idea that unlike say LE or Security in self defense you want to break joints and tear muscles so you can escape.  It was an amalgam of Chin Na, Kali and Silat techniques.

I actually got a tad frustrated at one point.  I was partnered with a person when it came time to perform a technique that controlling the arm, hyperextensions the shoulder while using head control to take the person down.  My partner insisted on keeping their feet planted until I had hyper extended their shoulder to the point they were literally shouting..."ow ow ow my shoulder, my shoulder, my shoulder."

Eventually, politely but firmly (to hide my frustration) I said, 

"in a real fight I wouldn't have stopped when you cried out.  I had control, you didn't and so you would have had only two choices. 1. Go with the flow and to the ground where yes I will have even greater control. 2. Have me dislocate your shoulder, and still end up on the ground and now I DEFINITELY have greater control. We arent simply learning today how to perform the takedown.  We are also learning how to properly go with the flow so that if someone does it to you, you still have a chance of defending yourself."

Now with that particular technique if I apply the correct leverage I can, if I wish to be brutal, virtually dislocate the shoulder at will. The simple fact it was almost happening because of a rigid uke makes that almost a certainty.  I get that the Sifu put me with them because he knew I had the control not to hurt them (they had apparently been doing that all day in one shape or another) but it was still frustrating as hell because when I train I like to train hard.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 1, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> This actually reminds me of a seminar we ran on Saturday.  The seminar was focused on ground fighting with edged weapons ("traditional" knives and karambits) and "combat" grappling/take downs.  I put combat in quotes because it was based on the idea that unlike say LE or Security in self defense you want to break joints and tear muscles so you can escape.  It was an amalgam of Chin Na, Kali and Silat techniques.
> 
> I actually got a tad frustrated at one point.  I was partnered with a person when it came time to perform a technique that controlling the arm, hyperextensions the shoulder while using head control to take the person down.  My partner insisted on keeping their feet planted until I had hyper extended their shoulder to the point they were literally shouting..."ow ow ow my shoulder, my shoulder, my shoulder."
> 
> ...


This is something that some students take a while to learn. Sometimes we need to be compliant (as uke) to protect ourselves. I sometimes get new students who think they should provide rigid resistance (not actually realistic resistance, just a general tensing of muscles) at all times. I have to explain to them the principles of ukemi:

Protect yourself. For most throws, the more relaxed you are, the easier the fall is. For most locks, the more you resist, the more likely you are to get injured.
Simulate the situation being practiced. It does nobody any good if you push when the attack being simulated is grabbing by the lapel and pulling in for a punch. If we are practicing responses to a specific situation, do that.
When providing resistance, provide realistic resistance. Someone pulling you in will rarely lock their arm rigidly at 90 degrees. Someone punching will rarely lean in an use a stiffened arm to try to push a block slowly down with strength. Someone shoving will rarely hold their weight back over center.
Don't invent resistance. When we are practicing a technique that we would only do once we've destroyed structure, we don't do that technique if any resistance is present (we use a different technique), so don't invent resistance to "test" the technique. If you do that, the appropriate response for your partner is to change techniques, probably by using a strike to "soften" you.
These are fairly common problems in training when someone doesn't actually commit to the practice (simulated) attack.


----------



## Juany118 (Mar 1, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> This is something that some students take a while to learn. Sometimes we need to be compliant (as uke) to protect ourselves. I sometimes get new students who think they should provide rigid resistance (not actually realistic resistance, just a general tensing of muscles) at all times. I have to explain to them the principles of ukemi:
> 
> Protect yourself. For most throws, the more relaxed you are, the easier the fall is. For most locks, the more you resist, the more likely you are to get injured.
> Simulate the situation being practiced. It does nobody any good if you push when the attack being simulated is grabbing by the lapel and pulling in for a punch. If we are practicing responses to a specific situation, do that.
> ...



I think the problem is a confluence of multiple dynamics.  First the school is "safe".  Second some students feel they must "resist" to make it real but don't understand that in a real fight you must resist indeed but in a way that still allows you to remain "combat effective." Third, understanding your last point.  I am not going to try a technique like the one we were training unless my attacks had "discombobulated" the opponent.  I am not going to discombobulate a training partner.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 1, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> I think the problem is a confluence of multiple dynamics.  First the school is "safe".  Second some students feel they must "resist" to make it real but don't understand that in a real fight you must resist indeed but in a way that still allows you to remain "combat effective." Third, understanding your last point.  I am not going to try a technique like the one we were training unless my attacks had "discombobulated" the opponent.  I am not going to discombobulate a training partner.


I tend to use the term "realistic resistance" a lot, to remind them that resistance supplied when simulating an attack should have a purpose for the attacker, and should be realistic to the situation.


----------

