Forms: A total fighting system?

[Tez3]

Such erudite posts! Bit worried about adding my tuppence worth now lol!
When I did Wado Ryu I was told that katas are aide memoires, they were practised along with the Bunkai so you knew and understood the moves. In Wado we had kihons to learn as well.
The MMA fighters I train with in our adults class scoff at katas, they see me teaching the children in the lesson before the adults one. They think that you are supposed to fight someone using the whole kata and quite rightly think that's stupid. When I explain it's a training aide and that I could reasonably easily make one up for MMA ( I did try, it's not too bad actually!) they begin to see a point in it. When the boxing coach is teaching beginners he'll have them in a row, in a fighting stance repeating many times jab, cross, uppercut,hook, well, what's that if not a very, very basic kata? it contains the movements a boxer needs, the coach will break each punch down and explain it's uses.Each punch will be used separately and in different combinations. You could chuck a bob and weave in there too! A bit simplistic I know but it explains it to the guys!

I used MMA moves the guys could see easily but I know in Ian Abernethy's stuff there is a large amount of stuff they would recognise and could use.
I was also told that when the katas were first used the Bunkai were well known.

 

[kidswarrior]

I certainly believe that the forms of a style ipso facto define the whole of the style.

It can't be any other way if you think about it. What I feel tends to missed by those that dismiss 'kata' derisively is that part and parcel of the form is the bunkai and sparring applications that go with it. If you don't know the bunkai then many movements will seem senseless or utterly unnecessary because you've only got half of the picture. If you don't do the sparring then you don't see how certain things sharpen and adapt when used against a moving and resisting opponent.

The forms educate you as to how a 'perfect' technique is performed. I always term them as the 'toolbox'. The bunkai tells you how that technique fits into a combative situation - the 'manual' for the tools if you will. Applications in the context of sparring teach you how the tools and manual go together in a fluid situation - like a tradesmans apprenticeship after college.

You learn how to recognise the tools and how to use them. You then begin to appreciate what the tools can be used for and finally you start to put it all together to create the style.

If you refuse to see that fluidity you end up with a false impression like the OP of the recent "Blocking" thread because you see a handful of pieces rather than the puzzle picture they actually go towards building up.

I trully believe that that is the major cause of the myriad "What if?" monkeys that invade dojo's on a regular basis.

This is an excellent post, Sukerkin, and while I wanted to respond to it earlier, had classes to teach (hate it when the actual practice of the arts gets in the way of MT time :lol.

Not to keep promoting Abernethy, but as Exile has said so much better than I, he (along with others) does have a way with forms and bunkai. And in the case of your post and the metaphor of using your entire toolbox to put together the whole puzzle, IA says much the same thing, I think, in his Introduction to Applied Karate. He points out four stages of kata practice: 1) Practice without a partner (and I believe, this is as far as many practitioners go; it's certainly all I was taught in more than one art!). 2) Practice applying the techniques with a partner (he specifies the attacks should be simple, close-range, and not dependent on the attacker's movements being prearranged)--still, I take it he means very slow motion/little resistance. 3) Inclusion of variations. He quotes Hironori Otsuka (Wado-Ryu Karate) thus: 'It is important to alter the form of the trained kata without hesitation to produce countless forms of training.' IA interprets this as HO telling us to vary the applications or risk becoming stuck. 4) Practice applying the techniques, variations and principles of the kata in live practice (he clarifies this as live 'any-range' sparring. He concludes by tying it all together: Live sparring and solo performance (his stages 1 and 4) may look very different but are identical at their core.

Anyway, a long-winded way of saying, I believe that you, Mark, and Abernethy are on the same page. :asian:

And Flying Crane, it seems to me you are providing your wife with numbers 2-4 simultaneously. Also worthy of :asian:

 

[bluemtn]

I think forms have a lot of what is essential in an art/ fighting system, if you look closely and practice the applications. I've been told (and shown) where there are sweeps, takedowns, etc. in just the one's I do. However, I don't think just doing forms is enough. You have to look at what the applications of the moves are, and practice them.

 

[kidswarrior]

Such erudite posts! Bit worried about adding my tuppence worth now lol!

Bite your tongue! (Oh, never mind, forgot about your sparring accident ). Really, tho, you apologize and then come up with a great post. :ultracool

The MMA fighters I train with in our adults class scoff at katas,

I can relate, being an old boxer myself. When I first saw katas I thought they were pretty stupid (actually, with the explanations I was given, they were!).

When I explain it's a training aide and that I could reasonably easily make one up for MMA ( I did try, it's not too bad actually!) they begin to see a point in it. When the boxing coach is teaching beginners he'll have them in a row, in a fighting stance repeating many times jab, cross, uppercut,hook, well, what's that if not a very, very basic kata? it contains the movements a boxer needs, the coach will break each punch down and explain it's uses.Each punch will be used separately and in different combinations. You could chuck a bob and weave in there too! A bit simplistic I know but it explains it to the guys!

Seems very sound to me. I'm picturing a really nice form of your design.

 

[Steel Tiger]

I think forms have a lot of what is essential in an art/ fighting system, if you look closely and practice the applications. I've been told (and shown) where there are sweeps, takedowns, etc. in just the one's I do. However, I don't think just doing forms is enough. You have to look at what the applications of the moves are, and practice them.

Those low techniques like sweeps, takedowns, and low kicks are often hidden or disguised. In all the forms I know there are places where a foot is raised off the ground. It could easily be interpreted as a defence against a sweep or low kick, but they are actually indicators of low kicks, often performed simultaneously with hand techniques.

I can relate, being an old boxer myself. When I first saw katas I thought they were pretty stupid (actually, with the explanations I was given, they were!).

I know whereof you speak. So often the explanations for elements of forms are incrediblely strange, and usually based on a complete lack of understanding of the form. I think this contributes greatly to the perception that forms, and by extension any art with them, are of no value.

 

[CuongNhuka]

I have a feeling that Exile has already said everything I was going to say (he seems to have that habit). So, I'll post this instead (it's a Cuong Nhu concept). This is called dimension theory, it is not really a formalized concept, more of a mental attitude. For the sake of discussion I have written it more... well... more 2D (pun intended)
0.5 Dimension - What is on the surface is all there is, and unless it's practiced in context, it is completely useless.
1st Dimension - What is on the surface is all there is
2nd Dimension - A strike can be a differnit strike, a take down/throw can be a lock
3rd Dimension - A strike with one part of the body can be a strike with anouther
4th Dimension - A strike can be a lock, a lock can be a strike
5th Dimension - A weapon strike can be a weapon lock
6th Dimension - A weapon strike can be a disarmed strike
7th Dimension - One technique can a be new technique, atleast to the style

Keep in mind this is MY formalization of the concept. The Cuong Nhu manuel does not mention dimension theory. It is an unwritten, unformalized, concept which is all that the style is made of. Ultimately this is what makes Cuong Nhu differnet from the ancestor styles, yet they include it, in their own ways.
Getting back to dimension theory. It is only really mentioned when a student is coming up with applications to forms/drills. And is really just, "don't think in 1 dimension, think in three. Look for what is there, but not on the surface". This makes one think of the line "still waters run deep". It is meant as an informal way of makeing the Cuong Nhu student look for what is deeper then just the surface.
Stop me if i'm not makeing any sense. And I can't stress enough, this is an INFORMAL concept which I made more structured for the sake of discussion. If you find a problem with the concept, take it out on ME not the style.

 

[Carol]

I can't say I'm particularly fond of forms training.

Here's an example...my instructor was walking me through a long form in a private lesson. and he wanted to focus on areas in the middle where I was stumbling. So he said, "OK, lets start at the strike to the solar plexus."

So I did, making the motion of a punch to the solar plexus in the air.

He chuckled and said "No, not MY solar plexus."

Meaning, my strike was too high. He was 5' 11". I'm 5' 2". I made a strike as if the person was roughly 6 feet tall. He wanted me to practice my form in the air as if the other person I was fighting was exactly my size.

I understand why that is done, and I agree with why this is done...but emphasizing doing forms in the air against targets that are my height just isn't my cup of tea.

There may very well be something I'm missing and not getting. So...if I'm not seeing the big picture, feel free to say so.

 

[Steel Tiger]

I can't say I'm particularly fond of forms training.

Here's an example...my instructor was walking me through a long form in a private lesson. and he wanted to focus on areas in the middle where I was stumbling. So he said, "OK, lets start at the strike to the solar plexus."

So I did, making the motion of a punch to the solar plexus in the air.

He chuckled and said "No, not MY solar plexus."

Meaning, my strike was too high. He was 5' 11". I'm 5' 2". I made a strike as if the person was roughly 6 feet tall. He wanted me to practice my form in the air as if the other person I was fighting was exactly my size.

I understand why that is done, and I agree with why this is done...but emphasizing doing forms in the air against targets that are my height just isn't my cup of tea.

There may very well be something I'm missing and not getting. So...if I'm not seeing the big picture, feel free to say so.

I can definitely see how things like this might make you a bit leery on forms, but I can also see where your instructor was coming from.

A form requires the movements to be performed precisely. So, from your example, a punch to the solar plexus is a straight punch to a mid range target. By striking at a target some 9" higher you are changing the motion of the strike. It may feel the same but muscles and balance will be operating in a different way. Forms are about precision in technique.

Now take the punch to solar plexus of a 5' 2" person and apply it to a 6' 0" person. By doing the straight punch you maintain the power, balance, and precision of the attack. The height of your opponent changes the target area, in this case 9" - 10" lower, somewhere around the navel. You have maintained the integrity of the attack and the result is a powerful abdomen strike which could wind (as a solar plexus strike) and double over an opponent (which a solar plexus strike would not necessarily do).

I think my point is that forms teach precision which then needs to be interpreted for varying situations.

 

[CuongNhuka]

Such erudite posts! Bit worried about adding my tuppence worth now lol!
When I did Wado Ryu I was told that katas are aide memoires, they were practised along with the Bunkai so you knew and understood the moves. In Wado we had kihons to learn as well.
The MMA fighters I train with in our adults class scoff at katas, they see me teaching the children in the lesson before the adults one. They think that you are supposed to fight someone using the whole kata and quite rightly think that's stupid. When I explain it's a training aide and that I could reasonably easily make one up for MMA ( I did try, it's not too bad actually!) they begin to see a point in it. When the boxing coach is teaching beginners he'll have them in a row, in a fighting stance repeating many times jab, cross, uppercut,hook, well, what's that if not a very, very basic kata? it contains the movements a boxer needs, the coach will break each punch down and explain it's uses.Each punch will be used separately and in different combinations. You could chuck a bob and weave in there too! A bit simplistic I know but it explains it to the guys!

I used MMA moves the guys could see easily but I know in Ian Abernethy's stuff there is a large amount of stuff they would recognise and could use.
I was also told that when the katas were first used the Bunkai were well known.

Tez I wouldn't mind learning this kata. If fact, I would LOVE to learn this kata. How about PMing me how it's done? And why not post a video of you performing it in the "members in motion" section? You post a video, I'll see about posting one (I'm not actualy allowed yah know).
Course this makes me wounder, did you name it? Do you teach it to your MMA students, or is it just a self practice thing? I'm sure I could come up with more questions, but I cann't think of any at moment.

 

[jks9199]

In response to Carol's concern about where to punch in a form...

The inherent beauty of forms training is that your opponent is never too big, never too strong, never too strong, and never does anything you don't want him to. Your punches never miss (except on purpose), and you never stumble over what to do next or if you should move now. (OK... as you're learning a form, you'll stumble over what comes next a lot... but you get my drift!)

That's also the inherent pitfall of solo forms practice, or forms practice without also doing applications WITH a partner.

The idea is that, in forms practice, you have the chance to internalize the principles and body structures/alignments/shifts/movements that make a given technique work. Then -- when you apply them "for real" with a partner, you find out how you need to adjust while still keeping the essence of the move. Finally, as your partner begins to throw less perfect attacks are counter your actions and just generally makes it harder on you -- you find the way to take those principles and really apply them.

(Yes -- one step sparring and similar exercises are indeed a type of forms training.)

Or at least that's my opinion. It and $4 will get you a seriously overpriced and overhyped cup of coffee at Starbucks.

 

[Carol]

In response to Carol's concern about where to punch in a form...

The inherent beauty of forms training is that your opponent is never too big, never too strong, never too strong, and never does anything you don't want him to. Your punches never miss (except on purpose), and you never stumble over what to do next or if you should move now. (OK... as you're learning a form, you'll stumble over what comes next a lot... but you get my drift!)

That's also the inherent pitfall of solo forms practice, or forms practice without also doing applications WITH a partner.

The idea is that, in forms practice, you have the chance to internalize the principles and body structures/alignments/shifts/movements that make a given technique work. Then -- when you apply them "for real" with a partner, you find out how you need to adjust while still keeping the essence of the move. Finally, as your partner begins to throw less perfect attacks are counter your actions and just generally makes it harder on you -- you find the way to take those principles and really apply them.

(Yes -- one step sparring and similar exercises are indeed a type of forms training.)

Or at least that's my opinion. It and $4 will get you a seriously overpriced and overhyped cup of coffee at Starbucks.

Woot! :caffeine:


Thanks very much JKS, that makes a lot of sense.

I guess the way I saw it is, I was naturally gravitating towards making my moves against a larger opponent. It wasn't just because my instructor was in front of me (I actually was facing a blank wall when I threw the Solar Plexus strike), it was because I had mostly practiced with bigger people (most adults are bigger than me...LOL)

I guess to my (still very uneducated) eyes, it made more sense to emphasize practicing against the most likely scenario. I can see where that could lead to improper body mechanics but it just seemed like developing the instincts for fighting a bigger opponent was a good thing.

 

[Hand Sword]

It also applies to the training purpose of maximizing one's power. Striking to your own proportions keeps you in balance structurally, maximizing the power. Plus, in training, one can't guess what their attacker's size will be, or where the targets will be. So, using yourself as a guide gives a reference point. I don't think many mirrors were around back then either.

 

[RBaddorf]

The MMA fighters I train with in our adults class scoff at katas, they see me teaching the children in the lesson before the adults one. They think that you are supposed to fight someone using the whole kata and quite rightly think that's stupid.

Exactly. I understood it best when it was explained to me; that the kata is like an alphabet. A B C does not make a word, but C A B does. The old masters' best self defense moves were put together into a kata so they could remember the moves (ever come up with a great application and then the next day can't remember what you did?), were able to practice anytime anywhere, and could practice full speed and power with out damaging a training partner.

 

[CuongNhuka]

In response to Carol, a way to get used to striking to specific targets when refernced to your own body is posture training. Stand in front of a full sized mirror and throw a punch to a high target (I'm not sure if your school teaches striking to more then height, but I'll assume you do). Hold for one minute. Throw the same punch with the opposite hand. Repeat with a mid-level target, then low. Over time the height will come instintivly. And the punch will get much faster and harder, and your shoulders will get stronger. Over time one minute wont be enough, so feel free to increase the time. But do it slowly, it'll hurt regardless.

 

[Carol]

In response to Carol, a way to get used to striking to specific targets when refernced to your own body is posture training. Stand in front of a full sized mirror and throw a punch to a high target (I'm not sure if your school teaches striking to more then height, but I'll assume you do). Hold for one minute. Throw the same punch with the opposite hand. Repeat with a mid-level target, then low. Over time the height will come instintivly. And the punch will get much faster and harder, and your shoulders will get stronger. Over time one minute wont be enough, so feel free to increase the time. But do it slowly, it'll hurt regardless.

Thats a great idea, CN. The instructor that was working with me on my form had us do a very similar thing. I'm not training under him any more (job change made me change schools) so I really appreciate you bringing this up. It has slipped my mind that we used to do this.

Thanks very much for the memory jog! :asian:

 

[jks9199]

I guess to my (still very uneducated) eyes, it made more sense to emphasize practicing against the most likely scenario. I can see where that could lead to improper body mechanics but it just seemed like developing the instincts for fighting a bigger opponent was a good thing.

And it is a good thing to practice for different heights or sized opponents -- both bigger and smaller. You just learn to do it in a perfect situation first. Let me try to make a techie analogy... (It'll probably blow up in my face, but I'll try anyway!)

You work in the telecom industry. You get a kid straight out of college with a degree in EE... On day one, do you hand him a problem involving a bunch of switches that don't work, or do let him monitor a system that's working more or less correctly and maybe needs a tweak or two to run right? You don't hand the newbie a system that's been twisted so far out of shape that it's almost unrecognizable to the folks who twisted it... You let him work on stuff that's close to the way it's should be, and let him learn how to do the big jobs from the little ones.

We do the same thing in law enforcement. My very first night on the street, my Field Training Instructor and I were called in for a rape complaint. Guess what? I watched, learned and took notes; he did the interview. But the DIP a couple of hours earlier? That was mine to handle...

 

[kidswarrior]

I know whereof you speak. So often the explanations for elements of forms are incrediblely strange, and usually based on a complete lack of understanding of the form. I think this contributes greatly to the perception that forms, and by extension any art with them, are of no value.

Yep.

By striking at a target some 9" higher you are changing the motion of the strike. It may feel the same but muscles and balance will be operating in a different way. Forms are about precision in technique.

Now take the punch to solar plexus of a 5' 2" person and apply it to a 6' 0" person. By doing the straight punch you maintain the power, balance, and precision of the attack. The height of your opponent changes the target area, in this case 9" - 10" lower, somewhere around the navel. You have maintained the integrity of the attack and the result is a powerful abdomen strike which could wind (as a solar plexus strike) and double over an opponent (which a solar plexus strike would not necessarily do).

Excellent points, ST.

 

[still learning]

Hello, IS FORMS ENOUGH? Off course NOT.

To learn to fight for real is to train for real. Forms is NOT real fighting. (you do not have to worry about getting hit back) ,& is set movements, all fights do not react the same all the time.

Take a school who practice forms and more forms. Then take a school who practice to spar alot. NEXT have them challenge each other? Who do you think will have more success's?

Forms has a place for some of our martial art training. BUT is not the answer for REAL fighting, timing, distance training,actully hitting and getting hit. Facing a real person set's up a different situtions from forms.

Who fights like forms movements. Look at the World Combat league, look at Mix martial arts, look at JUDO, look at boxers, look at wrestlers, look at Muay thai? Do they have forms like Karate forms? WHY NOT?

IF forms work? ....more sports will have forms training as an important part of there training......(like karate style of set movements).

Reactive training -spontaneous - is what happens in a real fight.

Forms work great for Martial art movies.

We do have forms in our style which was pass on down. We must learn them because it is a part of our system.

IS forms effective for real fighting? NOPE ...but just my thoughts on this. .............Aloha

 

[Sukerkin]

Hi SL

I think it may be that you missed the part earlier in the dicussion where it was posited that 'forms' is not simply the rote practise of "Punch Number One". Also, I don't know if Britain has taken to MA differently than the rest of the West but I've never known a school that practised forms only.

It has become the mistaken norm to think that forms = kata and that's it. Whereas the forms actually equal the style and should have the bunkai and applications bonded within them rather than split apart from them.

In part I think this has come from the Western mindsets' need to deconstruct and compartmentalise everything (it tends to be the way we learn).

All I can say at the end of the day is that I learned in an environment where the three elements were kept combined (other than at the very start where things were kept simple by being kata only with a seasoning of bunkai). When I needed to use what I had learned it came out, unbidden and true to form D) ... and it worked.

 

[Carol]

And it is a good thing to practice for different heights or sized opponents -- both bigger and smaller. You just learn to do it in a perfect situation first. Let me try to make a techie analogy... (It'll probably blow up in my face, but I'll try anyway!)

You work in the telecom industry. You get a kid straight out of college with a degree in EE... On day one, do you hand him a problem involving a bunch of switches that don't work, or do let him monitor a system that's working more or less correctly and maybe needs a tweak or two to run right? You don't hand the newbie a system that's been twisted so far out of shape that it's almost unrecognizable to the folks who twisted it... You let him work on stuff that's close to the way it's should be, and let him learn how to do the big jobs from the little ones.

We do the same thing in law enforcement. My very first night on the street, my Field Training Instructor and I were called in for a rape complaint. Guess what? I watched, learned and took notes; he did the interview. But the DIP a couple of hours earlier? That was mine to handle...

Thats a darn good analogy...I can read a lot in to it. Something that you and I also deal with are concerns because some issues are more political/sensitive than others. We don't start the new folks off working with on very visible or sensitive issues until they have proven themselves on the the less-visible switches.

It's starting to make more sense!