Flashy, Stylized and Useless

[clfsean]

Well, okay. But they're a large part of many TMA schools. Doesn't this cede the point that forms are useless in combat, and by extension that TMAs do in fact teach useless, stylized techniques?

Not so much IME & HO. They're (forms) the encyclopedia of your "X" flavor of TMA. The same basics movements are repeated in different order, patterns, stances, sequences, etc... not to teach you to respond in "ABCD" fashion, but to teach your body how to respond with these techniques without it having to be in this stance, from this direction, etc...

I'm not going to use the same IF...THEN...ELSE statement I learned in college because the syntax & subsequent processing is different than the simple programs I started off writing. However, it laid the base to apply the IF...THEN...ELSE logic to any situation where it I need it to fit. If it doesn't fit, I have other choices to pull from. It's not static & wrote... it's fluid & dynamic.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Okay. There is a circular kind of logic being applied here guys. In this thread so far, the argument is basically that TMAs don't train anything that is flashy, useless or stylized because any techniques that are flashy, useless or stylized aren't TMA.

Actually it is not circular it is saying that the accusation that TMA are flashy is based on something the is not TMA such as contemporary Wushu and kung fu theater movies

We're in a very grey area here, IMO, where anything can be justified. For example, forms/kata were brought up by tallgeese. I share his opinion that forms aren't useful in combat. The response was that forms aren't trained for combat. Xue Sheng said, "I am not flaming you here but I doubt there is anyone in TMA that believes that a form is a pattern to follow when attacked or to attack. Therefore I would respond with it is not an unrealistic attack sequence since none that train it would use it as such."

Well, okay. But they're a large part of many TMA schools. Doesn't this cede the point that forms are useless in combat, and by extension that TMAs do in fact teach useless, stylized techniques?
.

No it does not cede a thing it goes again to a lack of understanding as to what forms are.

Forms are useless in combat but the postures that make up those forms are not and it is a training tool and those tools are expanded upon which to me means they are not stylized and useless but a tool, albeit a tool that is usually misunderstood. No one is ever going to go through a form from beginning to end in an attack or defense but parts of that are and no one is going to use that from beginning to end any more than someone can use what is learned in a drill as it is trained in the order that it is trained in all confrontations. A fight is rather fluid and can’t be put in a box any better by either side of this discussion/argument

But whether or not you agree, disagree or argue for or against doesn’t really matter as I said in my first post I know what I train and I will add to that I know it works and I do not feel the need to prove that point or argue it at all.

And, sadly, since this is likely to turn into a my style is better than your style post (not necessarily from you) I do not think I will be in it much longer since what this appears to be degenerating in a bad direction and once again into what has been done to death on MT.

 

[Steve]

First, I'm happy to address your points, Bill, but I don't want to go too far into whether kata is a good or bad thing. Simply put, I believe that it's fine if you like it, but there are better ways to learn technique, IMO.

I don't think I follow your logic here. We do self-defense techniques and quite often, sensei will ask - what kata is this move out of?

I see your point. I don't, however, see how this makes it a better (or even good) way to learn a technique. I've never said that kata are useless. Only that they aren't the most effecient way to synthesize a technique.

Put it this way. There are four basic levels of understanding: knowledge, comprehension, application and synthesis. Knowledge is where you can define a term or idea, or in an MA context, execute a basic technique. Consider it to be the multiple choice level of understanding. Kata is, in my opinion, strictly a knowledge level learning tool.

Comprehension is where you can begin to identify something in multiple contexts. If knowledge level understanding is a multiple choice question, comprehension would be an essay test. For MA, this would be executing the technique correctly in multiple contexts... integrating the technique into lockflow, working solo or partner drills. That sort of thing.

Application is exactly what the name implies: an application level understanding where you can actually perform the action in context. Sparring, competition, self defense scenarios... anything that integrates the technique into a larger system.

Synthesis is a level where you can apply the idea or ability at a mastery level... ie, where you could begin to mentor or teach others.

It becomes easy to see that the moves we learn in various kata are valid self-defense moves.

Never meant to imply that they aren't.

Granted one would not run 'seisan' on an attacker. But the side blocks are side blocks. The kicks are kicks. The foot trap is a foot trap. What's more efficient than rote memorization of necessary body mechanics that you want your body to become very, very, proficient in?

The goal in any adult learning situation is to bring the person to the application level as quickly as possible (synthesis is brought about through experience in application).

The only exception to this is in situations where the learning process itself is the goal... and there's nothing wrong with that. If the pursuit of master is more important than acheiving master, then lingering at the knowledge level is totally cool. Or said another way, if kata itself is important for its own sake, then mastering kata becomes a learning goal in and of itself. There are recognized masters of kata. In this learning model, they have acheived a synthesis level understanding of kata.

Once again, I'm not anti-kata. I simply think that there are more efficient ways to learn technique.

I agree that part of self-defense training is actually using the techniques, by sparring or otherwise exchanging techniques, both attacking and defending. But kata is just working that response system into your body so that it becomes a natural and instinctive move. A middle body block when practiced as kata, for example, can be examined, judged, and corrected, so that you do it correctly each and every time (eventually). In a series of self-defense moves, I wonder if an instructor would pick out that your feet were wrong, or your wrist bent, etc.

An experienced practitioner would, and once again, would be offering correction in context. If you have any doubt about this, sit near the edge of the mat at a BJJ or wrestling tournament. You'll hear very specific instruction being offered that is timely and in context.

Eh, we're getting back to kata and how useful it is again. I'm just a newbie with much to learn, but I do kata, kata, kata, and I will continue to do kata, kata, kata. I believe in it.

And I'm sure you'll benefit from it.

I think this addresses clfsean and Xue Sheng's points, as well. If not, let me know and I'll try to be more specific.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Okay, Okay, Okay..........everything works equally well........or something. Reality may refute that, but if it gives everyone the warm fuzzies all styles are equally suited to everything equally........can I get a hug?

I hate to be the contrarian, but what evidence do we have the effectiveness of this style or that style other than the word of it's practioners that it seems like it should work? Wasn't the point of the first UFC's as a contest between different unarmed styles? And since some styles didn't do so well, we get all kinds of excuses as to why.....and perhaps some of those excuses are valid.......but how do we know?

In short, my question is how do we measure the effectiveness of a style? The question isn't whether High Supreme Master so-and-so can use it effectively.........the standard when it comes to self-defense is whether I can take the art and teach it to the average student in 6 months or less of consistent training and see that person able to apply the techniques to defeat an attacker.

When comparing two forms, if I divided two groups of students of equal skill level and commitment and taught them for 6 months, which group would be more skilled in defending themselves against a physical attack.

If it takes 20 years to become proficient it might be a wonderful 'Art' but it's a lousy means of self-defense.







Here's a hint.......there's a reason why nobody with any credibility seriously questions the effectiveness of BJJ or Muay Thai! If you have to defend your art with words, it's probably not combat effective.

 

[blindsage]

One of which is a TMA and the other solidly based in TMA. Does anyone complain about 'flashy' techniques when a Muay Thai fighter throws a head kick, or a spin kick, or a leaping technique? All impractical and 'flashy' by the standards of most critics of TMAs, but not included as equal criticisms of Muay Thai. Having experience in Kyokushin full contact training and fighting and having seen some of the approaches (not all, but some) put forward as inherently superior to TMA, but having seen the evident weakness in them, should I relegate all RBSD or Muay Thai or BJJ people to the irrelevency pile? Or would that just be ignorant?

Despite how I think I come across on here a lot of the time, I'm equally critical of weak traditional training practices, but I also find more overwhelming the critique by those who want to broadly label any and everything that could be considered TMA as weak, useless, irrelevant, or at the very least out of date. And IMHO this notion is often based on either a lack of experience, or a lack of patience.

 

[Omar B]

The flashy and stylized argument seems to always come from the peanut gallery of sport martial artists or those who's knowledge extends to Jackie Chan movies (like this one person who watch a class at our dojo then seriously asked me after "How come you didnt do any flips or high jumps?"). As I've said before, there are no new limbs on the human body, nor are there new joins that allow movment in new axis.

What has worked will continue to work, it's a question of how the curriculum is arranged and how efficiently it is taught. You may not think kata is an effective teaching tool, but I think it totally is, but then I'm the guy who's fighting looks like kata. It may look like a dance or silly or whatever else you might think but it engrains things in and I can walk into any Seido school and it be the same, not similar.

The reason I love kata is because I'm totally engraining things into muscle memory (it's the guitarist in me), you learn how to do things and how to react to stimulous in a certain way and after the block you can continue as you would in the kata or go for another closer target if it's presented.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Yup, this got old fast.

All the new stuff is great and all the old stuff sucks

now wait I will sum ever siingle post form this point onward
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
No it doesn't yes it does
But I got proof you know a small group of people fought a couple of guys so that proves ever single person simply sucks

 

[Deaf Smith]

Some people are gifted. They can do gymnastics karate and I have no doubt they can use that stuff if need be. And for them I say, "more power to them!"

But us mere mortals find it real hard to do back flips, jump double side kicks, run up walls and somersault, and carry on in the most shameful manner. But I assure you, if we could… we would!

The flashy stuff brings in students. That’s showmanship. That’s cool. And the more people in the martial arts the better. No telling how many troubled boys and girls got into the martial arts cause they saw some of that cool stuff and decided to try it. And they stuck with it and learned enough self-confidence to get themselves out of the rut that got them in trouble (and yes, I bet a few got injured to trying a stunt or two.)

No, this flashy stuff is ok with me. Do I expect them to do flips when fighting? No. I have enough common sense to know better than expect them to do that. But I have no doubt some of them can do some pretty weird stuff in a fight and get it to work.
Deaf

 

[MJS]

On occasion here in the discussion forums, I see people make reference to traditional systems teaching moves that are flashy, stylized, and useless. It seems some of the traditional arts are accused of carrying a lot of "cultural baggage" in their physical technique that has no real use or application in combat or self defense.

I'm not sure what these people are talking about. In over a decade of learning traditional Chinese martial arts, I've never learned anything that is flashy, stylized and useless, nor anything that I'd classify as being some kind of cultural carryover. I've really only learned a lot of useful, hard-hitting stuff. Some of this stuff is a bit unusual, but once you understand its purpose it's pretty clear how useful it really is.

I've never seen anyone making this accusation define what they are talking about, nor give any concrete examples.

I wonder if the people who make this claim are thinking of Modern Wushu, which is a performance and competition art that nobody pretends is a viable combat art. Or maybe people mistake what they see in kung-fu cinema for reality? And I don't think this is limited to the Chinese martial arts either.

anyway, any thoughts on this? Anyone want to give some specific examples?

I was reading a thread on another forum, about Ed Parker, and how some were wondering if he taught things, on purpose, that had no meaning, leaving it to the students to figure it out for themselves. I've been training for quite a while now. During my time, I've seen some great stuff, some ok stuff and some stuff that made me wanna run for the hills. LOL. On one hand I find myself saying that everything has some value, just because I dont see it, doesnt mean that the next guy wont. I also find myself wondering why someone would be concerned with flashy stuff, when time could be better spent on learning something more effective.

To each their own I suppose. If its something that I dont like, I just wont do it. There is stuff in Kenpo that I'm not crazy about and yes people say that its probably because I dont have a good understanding of it, and that may be true. I still teach it because others may have luck with it. I find what works for me, and train the hell out of it. Personally, I'd rather take a few things, really get good at them, and know that I have a set of things to pick from, that will have a good percentage of success for me.

 

[Steve]

The reason I love kata is because I'm totally engraining things into muscle memory (it's the guitarist in me), you learn how to do things and how to react to stimulous in a certain way and after the block you can continue as you would in the kata or go for another closer target if it's presented.

This is such a foreign idea to me. How is kata like learning to play the guitar? It would seem to me that it would be like learning to play the trumpet without a mouthpiece, or guitar by just fingering the notes without strumming the strings.

Xue Sheng, I'm really disappointed in you. Two people post any kind of disagreement and since the lovefest is over, you'll simply dismiss the points with a childish temper tantrum, take your keyboard and go home. Seriously. I'm genuinely sorry I wasted my time typing up my earlier response.

 

[Omar B]

This is such a foreign idea to me. How is kata like learning to play the guitar? It would seem to me that it would be like learning to play the trumpet without a mouthpiece, or guitar by just fingering the notes without strumming the strings.

I do that all the time practicing my legato and arpeggios. It programs fingerings into the hand, it improves muscle memory, it builds finger strength. Just like practicing kata does, ingrains the moves improving muscle memory and making them second nature. If we were to make a concious decision on every foot placement, body position, muscle movment in a fight, or every chord shape, inversion, fingering, picking patern then nothing would get done.

But then, I do understand different strokes for different flokes and practising hours of kata or hours of scales and modes may work for some but not for all.

 

[JadecloudAlchemist]

This is such a foreign idea to me. How is kata like learning to play the guitar? It would seem to me that it would be like learning to play the trumpet without a mouthpiece, or guitar by just fingering the notes without strumming the strings.

Hey Steve I will attempt the analogy. Lets use learning guitar chords as Kata. You have to put the fingers in certain positions on the frets to learn the chords(kata,spar) Once the chords are memorized by muscle memory then you can use the chords freely to create music(as in muscle memory of the principle and concept of Kata you are able to move freely in fighting)

Omar was typing same time as me lol.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Xue Sheng, I'm really disappointed in you. Two people post any kind of disagreement and since the lovefest is over, you'll simply dismiss the points with a childish temper tantrum, take your keyboard and go home. Seriously. I'm genuinely sorry I wasted my time typing up my earlier response.

Do you have any idea how many of these have been posted on MT over the years. Call it what you will be disappointed all you want. It is an old worn out discussion that has been hashed and rehashed on MT for years and this is not even the only post on the topic at the moment and they always end the same way.

And just what are you disappointed in this post that was in response to you that you ignored,

No it does not cede a thing it goes again to a lack of understanding as to what forms are.

Forms are useless in combat but the postures that make up those forms are not and it is a training tool and those tools are expanded upon which to me means they are not stylized and useless but a tool, albeit a tool that is usually misunderstood. No one is ever going to go through a form from beginning to end in an attack or defense but parts of that are and no one is going to use that from beginning to end any more than someone can use what is learned in a drill as it is trained in the order that it is trained in all confrontations. A fight is rather fluid and can’t be put in a box any better by either side of this discussion/argument

But whether or not you agree, disagree or argue for or against doesn’t really matter as I said in my first post I know what I train and I will add to that I know it works and I do not feel the need to prove that point or argue it at all.

And, sadly, since this is likely to turn into a my style is better than your style post (not necessarily from you) I do not think I will be in it much longer since what this appears to be degenerating in a bad direction and once again into what has been done to death on MT.

Or my last post that was about the way this post was going which this type of thing has gone so many times before
.

 

[Flying Crane]

This is such a foreign idea to me. How is kata like learning to play the guitar? It would seem to me that it would be like learning to play the trumpet without a mouthpiece, or guitar by just fingering the notes without strumming the strings.

In my opinion, since you brought up the music reference, it's like practicing scales. Kata catalog the major (and often the minor) techniques that make up your system. Kata, along with the basic techniques, make up the foundation of your art. Of course the foundation is built upon, with other things. So of course kata ALONE is not the answer.

Another thing kata do is to make it easier to practice the broader spectrum of the techniques that make up the system. For me personally, I can wrap my brain around a larger amount of material in this way. If I have a kata made of up 40 movements, it's easier for me to remember the complete kata, and likewise all 40 movements of that kata, than it would be to remember the 40 movements in a disjoined list of discrete techniques. I'd need to carry a list with me so that I wouldn't forget something. But when it's in the context of the kata, I can remember it all.

I'm really surprised this discussion ended up here on the topic of kata.

In my original post, I didn't think kata would become the focus, tho of course I'm well aware of the debate between those who see value in kata, and those that do not, or at least feel there are better ways and choose to train without kata.

I made reference to "cultural baggage", and I wonder if people see kata as such? Is kata a carryover from Asian culture, that perhaps doesn't mesh well with Western cultures and Western mindsets? (I don't want to say "American" culture, because of the many members here from Europe, South America, Australia, New Zealand, and other non-USA, but non-Asian cultures).

What I was thinking about when I opened the thread, was really more on the lines of perhaps the animal mimickry, or something. I wasn't thinking about kata at all as being cultural baggage. I anticipated that maybe people would feel that trying to fight like a mantis or something might be silly. The stylized techniques that mimick the animal namesake seemed to me a likely target for accusations of cultural baggage.

Being that I practice an animal-based art, I'm definitely in a position to observe and work with the methods contained in my chosen system. Maybe some people might think that fighting like a Crane doesn't make sense. I will grant that there is a certain amount of stylized movement in the art, that is something of animal mimickry. But I can also state that I am constantly surprised by the amount of power that can be generated with our methods. Whan I first began training in Tibetan White Crane, I knew nothing about it. I did find the techniques to be somewhat odd, and even contrary to what a Westerner might assume would be inherent in a fighting method. But I held my doubts aside and continued with the training. And it really was not long, before I began to see the tremendous potential that the art contains. I could feel it in the techniques that I was practicing, I can feel it when I work hands-on with my training partners, I can feel it on the heavy bag when I cut loose and give it hell with our methods, and I can feel it in the forms that we practice, that make the foundation of the art.

As I stated, the art does have some amount of Crane mimickry. It isn't named White Crane for nothing. But all I can say is, it works, and it works in such a way as to be really surprising. I think it surpassed my expectations quite a bit, because I simply had no idea that this kind of potential existed.

I can't convince any nay-sayers of the truth in what I am writing. It takes a hands-on experience to understand what I am saying, and see what's in there. And for a Westerner, it takes a willingness to hold back judgement for a while, until you get a chance to really taste what it is all about. Unfortunately, most Westerners don't give it that chance. We've had people come in wanting to learn. I think people get enamored with the romance of it. White Crane sounds sort of mysterious. So Sifu would give them to me and I'd start running them thru the basics, and they wouldn't come back. Oh well.

All I can say is, I'm glad of the traditional art that I've been priviledged to train.

Flashy? I wouldn't say so, but others might.

Stylized? Sure, it's not called White Crane for nothing.

Useless? Most certainly not.

If my system is laden with Cultural Baggage, all I can say is that is probably what makes it work so well. I'll take the cultural baggage that it has, because that has probably given it its strength.

 

[Omar B]

In my opinion, since you brought up the music reference, it's like practicing scales. Kata catalog the major (and often the minor) techniques that make up your system. Kata, along with the basic techniques, make up the foundation of your art. Of course the foundation is built upon, with other things. So of course kata ALONE is not the answer.

Another thing kata do is to make it easier to practice the broader spectrum of the techniques that make up the system. For me personally, I can wrap my brain around a larger amount of material in this way. If I have a kata made of up 40 movements, it's easier for me to remember the complete kata, and likewise all 40 movements of that kata, than it would be to remember the 40 movements in a disjoined list of discrete techniques. I'd need to carry a list with me so that I wouldn't forget something. But when it's in the context of the kata, I can remember it all.

If my system is laden with Cultural Baggage, all I can say is that is probably what makes it work so well. I'll take the cultural baggage that it has, because that has probably given it its strength.

Exactly, kata is the grammar of karate through which the fights flow, just like scales are there to digest huge amounts of information and relationships between one tone another ... or in the case of kata how one attack may lead to an automatic responsee that may be a simple block or an entire series.

As for cultural baggage. I'm sure the knife fighting in The Phillipines helped a lot in the shaping of Kali, I don't think that baggage that's the result is at all bad.

 

[Steve]

I do that all the time practicing my legato and arpeggios. It programs fingerings into the hand, it improves muscle memory, it builds finger strength. Just like practicing kata does, ingrains the moves improving muscle memory and making them second nature. If we were to make a concious decision on every foot placement, body position, muscle movment in a fight, or every chord shape, inversion, fingering, picking patern then nothing would get done.

But then, I do understand different strokes for different flokes and practising hours of kata or hours of scales and modes may work for some but not for all.

Very fair points, Omar. I understand what you're saying. I have never said that kata is useless. I only believe that there are more efficient ways to do the same thing. As you say, different strokes and all of that. If kata works for you, then it works.

Hey Steve I will attempt the analogy. Lets use learning guitar chords as Kata. You have to put the fingers in certain positions on the frets to learn the chords(kata,spar) Once the chords are memorized by muscle memory then you can use the chords freely to create music(as in muscle memory of the principle and concept of Kata you are able to move freely in fighting)

Omar was typing same time as me lol.

Thanks. See my response to Omar above.

Do you have any idea how many of these have been posted on MT over the years.

Yes. Yes, I do.

Call it what you will be disappointed all you want.

I'm not disappointed at the thread. Only your childish response to it. Seriously.

It is an old worn out discussion that has been hashed and rehashed on MT for years and this is not even the only post on the topic at the moment and they always end the same way.

You sound like you need a moist towelette and a hug. These threads all end the same way because someone like you always drags them down the familiar path. If you can't have a grown up conversation about a topic, then perhaps you should avoid the topic. Know thyself. I don't post often in the Study because it gets on my nerves.

And just what are you disappointed in this post that was in response to you that you ignored,

You big baby. I didn't ignore your response. I thought that my response to Bill M. addressed your points and asked you specifically to let me know if you didn't agree (that I had answered you). For Pete's sake.

In my opinion, since you brought up the music reference, it's like practicing scales. Kata catalog the major (and often the minor) techniques that make up your system. Kata, along with the basic techniques, make up the foundation of your art. Of course the foundation is built upon, with other things. So of course kata ALONE is not the answer.

And for this basic level of understanding, it would work fine. As I said above, I think kata is great for teaching the most basic level of underestanding. I believe that there are more efficient ways to do the same thing.

Another thing kata do is to make it easier to practice the broader spectrum of the techniques that make up the system. For me personally, I can wrap my brain around a larger amount of material in this way. If I have a kata made of up 40 movements, it's easier for me to remember the complete kata, and likewise all 40 movements of that kata, than it would be to remember the 40 movements in a disjoined list of discrete techniques. I'd need to carry a list with me so that I wouldn't forget something. But when it's in the context of the kata, I can remember it all.

Maybe. But this is another interesting topic altogether. I'm for simplicity, myself. I'd rather know 10 techniques extremely well than to know 1000 techniques to a lesser degree.

I'm really surprised this discussion ended up here on the topic of kata.

I didn't really mean to take it here. I was actually following up on the circular logic being applied in this thread... where anything that is flashy is modern and therefore not TMA.

Someone said that forms/kata aren't useful. A CMA/TMA person said (essentially), "True, but no one really trains them to be useful, so that doesn't count."

It wasn't kata, per se, but the faulty logic I was talking about.

 

[padre]

Today in class I was being taught white belt 품새in my school's tradition, and as a white belt, none of it is particularly flashy. But I can already say I don't find it useless.

I'd be going through a form and say to the instructor, "Something feels wrong," and sure enough it would turn out that (for example) my arms weren't in the right position to lead into the movement that was to follow.

Seems to me that at least this aspect of training is an ideal way to correct many details of how I'm doing things before I train myself to do them "wrong" and have to struggle with that as more advanced material in the system builds on these details.

I've seen the instructors do some really flashy stuff in demonstration and just having fun. I can't comment on some of their feats would be handy in specific situations, but I wouldn't pick a fight with any of 'em. heh

 

[Xue Sheng]

In my opinion, since you brought up the music reference, it's like practicing scales. Kata catalog the major (and often the minor) techniques that make up your system. Kata, along with the basic techniques, make up the foundation of your art. Of course the foundation is built upon, with other things. So of course kata ALONE is not the answer.

Another thing kata do is to make it easier to practice the broader spectrum of the techniques that make up the system. For me personally, I can wrap my brain around a larger amount of material in this way. If I have a kata made of up 40 movements, it's easier for me to remember the complete kata, and likewise all 40 movements of that kata, than it would be to remember the 40 movements in a disjoined list of discrete techniques. I'd need to carry a list with me so that I wouldn't forget something. But when it's in the context of the kata, I can remember it all.

I'm really surprised this discussion ended up here on the topic of kata.

In my original post, I didn't think kata would become the focus, tho of course I'm well aware of the debate between those who see value in kata, and those that do not, or at least feel there are better ways and choose to train without kata.

I made reference to "cultural baggage", and I wonder if people see kata as such? Is kata a carryover from Asian culture, that perhaps doesn't mesh well with Western cultures and Western mindsets? (I don't want to say "American" culture, because of the many members here from Europe, South America, Australia, New Zealand, and other non-USA, but non-Asian cultures).

What I was thinking about when I opened the thread, was really more on the lines of perhaps the animal mimickry, or something. I wasn't thinking about kata at all as being cultural baggage. I anticipated that maybe people would feel that trying to fight like a mantis or something might be silly. The stylized techniques that mimick the animal namesake seemed to me a likely target for accusations of cultural baggage.

Being that I practice an animal-based art, I'm definitely in a position to observe and work with the methods contained in my chosen system. Maybe some people might think that fighting like a Crane doesn't make sense. I will grant that there is a certain amount of stylized movement in the art, that is something of animal mimickry. But I can also state that I am constantly surprised by the amount of power that can be generated with our methods. Whan I first began training in Tibetan White Crane, I knew nothing about it. I did find the techniques to be somewhat odd, and even contrary to what a Westerner might assume would be inherent in a fighting method. But I held my doubts aside and continued with the training. And it really was not long, before I began to see the tremendous potential that the art contains. I could feel it in the techniques that I was practicing, I can feel it when I work hands-on with my training partners, I can feel it on the heavy bag when I cut loose and give it hell with our methods, and I can feel it in the forms that we practice, that make the foundation of the art.

As I stated, the art does have some amount of Crane mimickry. It isn't named White Crane for nothing. But all I can say is, it works, and it works in such a way as to be really surprising. I think it surpassed my expectations quite a bit, because I simply had no idea that this kind of potential existed.

I can't convince any nay-sayers of the truth in what I am writing. It takes a hands-on experience to understand what I am saying, and see what's in there. And for a Westerner, it takes a willingness to hold back judgement for a while, until you get a chance to really taste what it is all about. Unfortunately, most Westerners don't give it that chance. We've had people come in wanting to learn. I think people get enamored with the romance of it. White Crane sounds sort of mysterious. So Sifu would give them to me and I'd start running them thru the basics, and they wouldn't come back. Oh well.

All I can say is, I'm glad of the traditional art that I've been priviledged to train.

Flashy? I wouldn't say so, but others might.

Stylized? Sure, it's not called White Crane for nothing.

Useless? Most certainly not.

If my system is laden with Cultural Baggage, all I can say is that is probably what makes it work so well. I'll take the cultural baggage that it has, because that has probably given it its strength.

What I find interesting coming from the view of culture is that my Sanda sifu who was born raised and trained in China in Sanda (the police Military version not the sport) is rather impressed with all types of martial arts out of China and he is very impressed by good Bagua, Xingyiquan and Taijiquan in their entirely and my Taiji sifu is of the feeling that all martial arts, trained well, are good for fighting but he is a bit more prejudice towards Taiji and the Neijia arts but he is also very interested in all things Aikido if it is a film of Morihei Ueshiba and one that surprised me was a film of a student of Jigoro Kano he was impressed by. He to was born raised and trained in China (he is older than my Sanda sifu however and has trained longer) but only in Taijiquan. And yet the only type of martial artist either seems to have a problem with is a fake one or one that makes it a business over it being a martial art.

Now this is only the attitude of 2 Chinese martial artists and I am sure there are those that are more opinionated but it seems to be less of a problem in China where some of this comes form than here in the US where it came to.

 

[Flying Crane]

And for this basic level of understanding, it would work fine. As I said above, I think kata is great for teaching the most basic level of underestanding. I believe that there are more efficient ways to do the same thing.

Serious question: when you don't have a training partner handy, do you still train? If so, how? What do you work on?

 

[Xue Sheng]

Yes. Yes, I do. I'm not disappointed at the thread. Only your childish response to it. Seriously. You sound like you need a moist towelette and a hug. These threads all end the same way because someone like you always drags them down the familiar path. If you can't have a grown up conversation about a topic, then perhaps you should avoid the topic. Know thyself. I don't post often in the Study because it gets on my nerves.
You big baby. I didn't ignore your response. I thought that my response to Bill M. addressed your points and asked you specifically to let me know if you didn't agree (that I had answered you). For Pete's sake.

Speaking of disappointing; childishness insults and name calling are so unbecoming but they seem to be becoming the norm around MT these days.

As to your response to Bill, sorry I missed that last bit because it did not feel it address what I posted so I did not finish it. But you have had enough of me and I sure have had enough of you so have a good one. Later.