Forms: A total fighting system?

[Tez3]

Sukerkin is right, I think we had all agreed that kata/patterns/forms aren't a fighting system and you have to learn to fight for real with real people!
I think one of the problems is that the Bunkai seems in many cases have been lost in the translation somewhere. I'm pretty sure when the katas were originally devised all the practioners knew what is was for.

Still Learning, I have to tell you Judo has katas, I know some of them the Kime-No katas, there's even a very good thread on them on MT.Muay Thai has forms too.

Another useful use of katas I've found is for teaching people balance, their left from their right ( don't scoff! often in a sparring situation beginners get confused easily and lose co-ordination), if you do kata as a group you learn instinctively where everyone is without looking which is useful in a self defence situation where you have more than one attacker. I'm sure there's a posh word if not a Japanese word for this sense! Kata helps give confidence without which it's harder to spar.

I love kata! I also think Ian Abernethy is the best thing since sliced bread!

 

[Yari]

Well, it really doesn't depend 100% on the style/form, but more on the individual and if they have the perception to get what they need from a form.

/yari

 

[LawDog]

Forms are multiple preset patterns connected by transitional moves.
*A form will teach a student the floor clock principle. This principle is how to properly flow from one direction to another direction.
* A form will teach the internal awareness clock. This is the ability to keep the location of all your oppents in your head at all times. In this way you will be able to turn and locate your many different opponets more accurately.
A form, like many preset patterns, is a tool that is used to help the martial artist within the many areas of his training.
:knight:

 

[Em MacIntosh]

Any isometric exercise is good for building strength but developing proper muscle memory is the greatest benefit. I prefer to keep my kata in class and shadow box on my own time.

 

[MJS]

Do you believe a form or group of forms can contain a complete fighting system?

WOW, I guess I'm late to this thread! Great topic!

The problem with forms, and the #1 reason, IMHO, why they take such a beating, is because you need to be able to extract the info that is contained in them. People look at them at face value and thats all they see...a bunch of moves put together in a different pattern. However, what they're not seeing, is the hidden moves contained in them. Nobody ever said the Martial Arts were going to be easy. I had this problem for the longest time. I went thru the moves, but never understood the deeper meaning of them. Fortunately, that has changed!

I like to view every aspect of the arts as a piece of the puzzle. Kata is a piece of that puzzle. I think that if someone were able to break apart the moves, yes, you can find fighting applications. However, I still feel that the other parts of the puzzle, ie: sparring, partner drills, etc. need to be included as well. The hands-on part is key in developing your skill IMO. Without that, that would be like saying that all you had to be do be good at sparring is shadow box. Well, shadow boxing is good to do, but you also need that person who is throwing punches and kicks at you, so you can work your defense. Same thing with kata.

Just my .02

Mike

 

[kidswarrior]

Thanks to all who have responded or voted in the poll. :asian:
I'm still hanging on a couple of things, though, so wanted to probe the subject just a little further.

Many people have responded that forms are important, but that they lack two-person training, which is also needed (examples: in performing techniques and sparring). But I'm wondering if forms can't be--and shouldn't be--done as two-person exercises after a point. In fact, looking back at Abernethy's sequencing which I first outlined in an earlier post, it seems he believes exactly that: forms practice includes techniques practice, just as forms practice includes sparring. Looking again at his progressive levels of forms practice brings up some questions for me I still don't believe I have answers for.

1) Practice without a partner. I believe this is the extent of many MA's understanding of what a form is.
2) Practice applying the techniques with a partner. That is, have someone 'step in' as an attacker (as we do when practicing techniques).
3) Inclusion of variations--using the same element of the form, but to get a different result (as our 'opponent' steps in, instead of a strike, turn it into a lock, or a throw or a strike to another target--as Steel Tiger mentioned could happen with a strike intended for the solar plexus could become a strike to the lower abdomen)
4) Practice applying the techniques, variations and principles of the kata in live practice. I don't know of anyone who does this, other than perhaps some internal arts practitioners, and Iain Abernethy's own group. And I've certainly never learned it or even seen it done this way. I'm wondering if anyone has heard of or seen forms practiced to the extent of live practice (#4)? Or for that matter, with a partner, as IA's #2 and 3? I was never taught forms as anything beyond #1, but believe this is a potentially rich area. Thoughts?

 

[CuongNhuka]

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:

VERY WELCOME!

I love being of help.

 

[jks9199]

Thanks to all who have responded or voted in the poll. :asian:
I'm still hanging on a couple of things, though, so wanted to probe the subject just a little further.

Many people have responded that forms are important, but that they lack two-person training, which is also needed (examples: in performing techniques and sparring). But I'm wondering if forms can't be--and shouldn't be--done as two-person exercises after a point. In fact, looking back at Abernethy's sequencing which I first outlined in an earlier post, it seems he believes exactly that: forms practice includes techniques practice, just as forms practice includes sparring. Looking again at his progressive levels of forms practice brings up some questions for me I still don't believe I have answers for.

1) Practice without a partner. I believe this is the extent of many MA's understanding of what a form is.
2) Practice applying the techniques with a partner. That is, have someone 'step in' as an attacker (as we do when practicing techniques).
3) Inclusion of variations--using the same element of the form, but to get a different result (as our 'opponent' steps in, instead of a strike, turn it into a lock, or a throw or a strike to another target--as Steel Tiger mentioned could happen with a strike intended for the solar plexus could become a strike to the lower abdomen)
4) Practice applying the techniques, variations and principles of the kata in live practice. I don't know of anyone who does this, other than perhaps some internal arts practitioners, and Iain Abernethy's own group. And I've certainly never learned it or even seen it done this way. I'm wondering if anyone has heard of or seen forms practiced to the extent of live practice (#4)? Or for that matter, with a partner, as IA's #2 and 3? I was never taught forms as anything beyond #1, but believe this is a potentially rich area. Thoughts?

In my opinion, the answer is absolutely yes. Forms should be practiced solo, with a partner, in variants, and eventually through sparring-type unscripted exercises.

I've practiced my various forms with various modifications (add a kick, block down instead of up, etc). I've also practiced most of them with a partner, both following the "perfect" script, and with adaptations , like using an extended step because I don't need a full step due to the difference in position, and I've even managed to use techniques or principles from the forms in sparring, and in the real deal a few times.

This is what I mean when I talk about developing Style... Developing the skills and principles to a point that when someone watches you -- they know that you're a X-style fighter... not just another kickboxer/wrestler.

 

[MJS]

Thanks to all who have responded or voted in the poll. :asian:
I'm still hanging on a couple of things, though, so wanted to probe the subject just a little further.

Many people have responded that forms are important, but that they lack two-person training, which is also needed (examples: in performing techniques and sparring). But I'm wondering if forms can't be--and shouldn't be--done as two-person exercises after a point. In fact, looking back at Abernethy's sequencing which I first outlined in an earlier post, it seems he believes exactly that: forms practice includes techniques practice, just as forms practice includes sparring. Looking again at his progressive levels of forms practice brings up some questions for me I still don't believe I have answers for.

1) Practice without a partner. I believe this is the extent of many MA's understanding of what a form is.
2) Practice applying the techniques with a partner. That is, have someone 'step in' as an attacker (as we do when practicing techniques).
3) Inclusion of variations--using the same element of the form, but to get a different result (as our 'opponent' steps in, instead of a strike, turn it into a lock, or a throw or a strike to another target--as Steel Tiger mentioned could happen with a strike intended for the solar plexus could become a strike to the lower abdomen)
4) Practice applying the techniques, variations and principles of the kata in live practice. I don't know of anyone who does this, other than perhaps some internal arts practitioners, and Iain Abernethy's own group. And I've certainly never learned it or even seen it done this way. I'm wondering if anyone has heard of or seen forms practiced to the extent of live practice (#4)? Or for that matter, with a partner, as IA's #2 and 3? I was never taught forms as anything beyond #1, but believe this is a potentially rich area. Thoughts?

I've done this in the past during group classes. We'd pick a form and have one person perform the kata, while the others attack. Doing this, certainly gave a different feel for things. I'd have to say that #3 would have to be done, so as to give the variation, otherwise, we're confined just to the attacks in the kata.

I dont know, but for me, I still feel that without the other aspects of the arts, I'd still be missing out on something.

 

[CuongNhuka]

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

While I agree with you about 60%, here is my disagreement with you. My Cuong Nhu school (like all Cuong Nhu schools) puts a HUGE amount of empasis on kata and proper form. It is the only thing we do EVERY single class. On the rare occasion a Cuong Nhu student goes to a tournament, we almost always do well.
Master Bao has even made jokes about the number of tournaments he's won. For a while it was fashionable to own a differnit pare of Gi pants to tournaments, with the patch of the tournament/hoster on the leg (if you took first place). Master Bao has joked that if he did that, he wouldn't have been able to ever move. See what I'm saying?
Also, my Sensei has been in countless sparring matches with a Tae Kwon Do guy in our area. My sensei is a Shodan (keep in mind that in Cuong Nhu you become a shodan AFTER black belt, not at it), this guy is a Godan. The Godan spent all his time practicing combos and sparring. He never won once.
Forms in of themselves are not enough. One must also understand application. See my first post in this thread for a breif explantion of Cuong Nhu Dimension theory for our further thoughts on the subject.

 

[CuongNhuka]

1) Practice without a partner. I believe this is the extent of many MA's understanding of what a form is.
2) Practice applying the techniques with a partner. That is, have someone 'step in' as an attacker (as we do when practicing techniques).
3) Inclusion of variations--using the same element of the form, but to get a different result (as our 'opponent' steps in, instead of a strike, turn it into a lock, or a throw or a strike to another target--as Steel Tiger mentioned could happen with a strike intended for the solar plexus could become a strike to the lower abdomen)
4) Practice applying the techniques, variations and principles of the kata in live practice. I don't know of anyone who does this, other than perhaps some internal arts practitioners, and Iain Abernethy's own group. And I've certainly never learned it or even seen it done this way. I'm wondering if anyone has heard of or seen forms practiced to the extent of live practice (#4)? Or for that matter, with a partner, as IA's #2 and 3? I was never taught forms as anything beyond #1, but believe this is a potentially rich area. Thoughts?

Cuong Nhu used to require a two person form some were in the post black belt ranks (not sure were, it was removed simply because it was difficult to train a two person form with one person who may or may not be testing with you). And many other schools include two person forms. One could also make the argument that two person systemized drills could be a form of two person kata. Drills like those of Wing Chun and Filiphino styles. May not be what you mean, but I think you can understand what I'm saying.

In Cuong Nhu, if you cann't do it with a partner, we don't really care how well you can do it. Perfect form with no understanding is completly useless. So, we make sure everyone can do applications. It's pretty cool some of the things that have been come up with for differnit forms. And we dont use standerized Bunkai either. You have to come up with them ALL on your own.

At tests, and upper level practice in general, it is not uncommon to include all kinds of fun variations to doing your kata. And random, "hay whats X move from Y kata all about?" Spontanious applications and variation are what make Cuong Nhu more mental then physical.

Simple answer to four is yes. I cann't count the number of times I have let muscle memory kick in and did a spontanious application. Sadly, it's normaly a technique that is meant to break someones arm, or really hurt them.

 

[exile]

Thanks to all who have responded or voted in the poll. :asian:
I'm still hanging on a couple of things, though, so wanted to probe the subject just a little further.

Many people have responded that forms are important, but that they lack two-person training, which is also needed (examples: in performing techniques and sparring). But I'm wondering if forms can't be--and shouldn't be--done as two-person exercises after a point. In fact, looking back at Abernethy's sequencing which I first outlined in an earlier post, it seems he believes exactly that: forms practice includes techniques practice, just as forms practice includes sparring. Looking again at his progressive levels of forms practice brings up some questions for me I still don't believe I have answers for.

1) Practice without a partner. I believe this is the extent of many MA's understanding of what a form is.
2) Practice applying the techniques with a partner. That is, have someone 'step in' as an attacker (as we do when practicing techniques).
3) Inclusion of variations--using the same element of the form, but to get a different result (as our 'opponent' steps in, instead of a strike, turn it into a lock, or a throw or a strike to another target--as Steel Tiger mentioned could happen with a strike intended for the solar plexus could become a strike to the lower abdomen)
4) Practice applying the techniques, variations and principles of the kata in live practice. I don't know of anyone who does this, other than perhaps some internal arts practitioners, and Iain Abernethy's own group. And I've certainly never learned it or even seen it done this way. I'm wondering if anyone has heard of or seen forms practiced to the extent of live practice (#4)? Or for that matter, with a partner, as IA's #2 and 3? I was never taught forms as anything beyond #1, but believe this is a potentially rich area. Thoughts?

Hi all, I had to get to bed earlyish last night to get going very early this morning on a daytrip around various parts of central Ohio that we'd had in the works for a while, so I couldn't participate further in this thread till now (we got back just a little while ago). I'd like to take up Kidswarrior's summary of the Abernethy kata training progression (clearly, it holds for hyungs, tsings and any other MA's pattern set) and speculate a bit on what's behind it and how it has to work.

So (1) involves solo practice. But it's not just rote performance you're working on, with the goal of executing a choreography routine with martial movements prettily enough to wow some judges; what you're doing is fixing in your mind just what the instructions were for the various combat scenarios that the kata creators were trying to give you. The fact that in a certain subpart of a kata you use a reverse punch rather than a forward lunge punch is probably important, so listen up!—the kata may well be telling you that in the situation that part of the kata depicts, you're keeping your assailant controlled or anchored by your forward-projected weight, and the simplest thing to do at that point is to keep him under control and strike him with the rear fist, rather than changing your weight distribution and maybe letting him have a chance to escape. So in the combat scenario in question, it's really important that you understand not to change your weight at that point, but to dig in and use the reverse punch the the optimal target. Training the form so you have a clear understanding of the logic of the scenario the kata is presenting to you is therefore the crucial necessary first step. But it's understood that at the same time you're learning the form, you're working out the bunkai—the meaning of those movement sequences—analyzing them as you learn the form. This is part and parcel of learning the form: learning how the movement sequence could be applied. And that involves, very importantly, determining what kind of attack the various subsequences of the kata are supposed to apply to. Something that looks absurd as a response to a roundhouse or a double grab may make perfect sense if you think about it as a way to respond to a bearhug, just as a sequence that looks loony if you assume you're going to be going to the outside may suddently look totally natural in a scenario where you're going to the outside. This is why kata are actually rather demanding: you have to combine your knowledge of how the body moves and where the weak points are with a certain analytic skill in figuring how to get maximum firepower from actually converting a sequence of movements into linked moves; something that looks like a punch, and may very well be interpreted as a punch in one context, might be much more effectively (and dangerously) applied as a head twist if it comes at the end of a different sequence. You have to do stuff like think, what the hell good is this middle-level spearhand strike going to be?—the masters of old are telling me to slam my unconditioned fingers into this guy's abdomen or solar plexus?—and then go on to think, hmmm, maybe the previous moves were designed to force this guy's head way down, and the striking surface of the `spearhand' isn't the fingers at all, but the palm heel—it's really a palm-heel strike rotated 90º! And when you look at the preceding moves, they fall into place from this new point of view... because most definitely the masters of old are not going to tell you to do anything that wasn't practical, effective and straightforward. That's how they themselves fought, and the kata are in the end the record of their own fighting methods, their `notes' on effective combat.

Now on to (2): yes, you've nailed down the moves, and you begin to understand them. That `uppercut' wasn't actually an uppercut; it was you cranking your assailant's trapped punching arm around your forearm under his armpit so that you can lock that limb, hyperextend his shoulder and by a quick hard hip twist, completely unbalance him so he falls to the ground. Well... does it work in practice? Let's see... so you and your training partner now have to do some preliminary experimentation to see if this scenario, this drill, works in practice. I think that Still_Learning's earlier post is based on an erroneous picture of how the great karate pioneers of the past expected you to train: they gave us a kata as, basically, a sets of drills... and then expected us to actually drill them. The fact that something is itself a `drill' doesn't mean that just by learning it, you're drilling it; once you learn the drill, you then have to go out and drill the drill. People like Itosu, Motobu, and Funakoshi would have laughed in your face if you told them that all you did was solo practice and `back-of-envelope' bunkai. From what we know of training practice in the Okinawan context, before the mass export to Japan, you worked with your instructor one-on-one repetitively. Kata was the textbook, but to solve the end-of-chapter exercises, you had to start by seeing if they actually work with a partner. If your training partner is totally unimpressed by your ingenious bunkai for the form and can escape your `control' easily, or can counter with an uncontrolled limb before you can apply a terminating strike, then it's back to the drawing board. This is the stage of roughing out the picture, as the draughtsmen would say: deep-sixing the impractical apps, the ones that look good on paper but fail to take into account a resource that your attacker can still bring to bear.

Let's assume that you've leared the movement sequence the kata creator wanted you to learn and have mentally decomposed it into four to six combat scenarios corresponding to different attack initiations, or to different approaches to a single attack initiation in some cases (go outside or go inside? Attack high or attack low? Try to bring the assailant to the ground in the first couple of moves, or try to apply a severely damaging strike to a vulnerable weak point?). And further, that you've tested it out with a training partner who's worked with you on the various analyses you've come up with, so that the flawed analyses have been spotted and flushed. That leaves a core of techs that could be very effective, if trained to be automatic responses. But you know full well that in the heat of a real, violent attack, your assailant may react unpredictably; more to the point, for one reason or another—differences in height or build or other differences between you and your attacker—you may find it convenient, or necessary, to improvise a different continuation from some point in the bunkai action, the oyo, on the spot. That means that full destructive testing of your analysis requires you to see just how versatile your techs are: if the guy somehow is able to get away, can you use your preprogrammed response somewhat differently to still put through a sufficiently damaging
move? So that leads you to (3): making your analysis what the engineers call robust—giving you a set of alternative options requiring minimal deviation from your original plan if your preferred scenario goes sideways. As Kane and Wilder say about the (2)/(3) phase of training,

Dojo practice affords practitioners a safe and sane way to learn new kata, decipher applications, and increase their skills through trial and error. It is an opportunity to understand strategy, tactics, principles and rules to see what works and does not work for you.

(The Way of Kata, p. 187.)

So now we come to (4). Inevitably—because (2) and (3) are what you have to do to see whether a certain kata interpretation can work; but once you've established that that's the case, you still having reprogrammed your own fighting reactions so that the application you've worked out becomes your automatic, reflexive reaction to an attack initiation of the kind the kata subparts are designed to counter. As Abernethy notes, Gichin Funakoshi insisted in his Karate-do Kyohan that

Once a form has been learned, it must be practiced repeatedly until it can be applied in an emergency, for knowledge of just the sequence of a form in karate is useless

(my emphasis). And just in case anyone misinterprets this statement as a recommendation for endless kata performance `in the air', IA reminds us of Funakoshi's further dictum in the same source that

Sparring does not exist apart from the kata, but [rather] for the practice of kata.

(my emphasis). Similarly, he cites Chojin Miyagi, Goju-ryu's founder, to the effect that

Through sparring practice one may identify the practical meaning of kata

(The Outline of Karate-Do). The understanding that these masters had of `sparring' is illuminated by the comment of H. D. Plee, one of the first great European karateka, quoted by Abernethy from Plee's 1967 book as follows:

One must not lose sight of the fact that Karate is "all-in" fighting. Everything is allowed … This is why Karate is based on blows delivered with the hand, the foot, the head or the knee. Equally permissible are stragulations, throwing techniques and locks.

The message is that `kumite'—sparring practice—exists not for tournament competitive practice but for training the techiques encoded in the kata, and that, as per Plee's observations, these techniques involve not only the familiar strikes of karate but a range of controlling, grappling and throwing moves. It's clear that classical karate kumite was designed to train, refine and make automatic the combat techs implicit in the kata, which the practitioner was expected to be able to extract for practical use. Why did Chotoku Kyan and Choki Motobu deliberately seek out out street fights? It's pretty clear from their personal histories that both of them were obsessed with effectiveness, and sought out the most realistic of `live' training—actual violent conflicts. Their attitude was that only by subjecting their techniques—which, for both of these great martial artists, were founded in the kata of their system—to the test of real combat could they know what worked and what didn't. Nowadays, we're a bit more rational (most of us) about our MA training, but in the end, we still need to acknowledge that the `final exam' of our MA training is Abernethy's stage (4) training: maximally realistic, minimally compliant and, crucially, minimally predictable partner training with no techs ruled out (though some of them, like groin and eye strikes, have to be replaced by detuned versions, or you're going to be replacing training partners with liability lawyers on your list of acquaintances...) The keys to (4) are (i) there is no prearrangement as to what uke is going to throw at tori, (ii) uke can do anything s/he likes by way of attack, and (iii) it's not assumed that tori's tech is going to put even a tiny dent in uke's attack; tori has to make the tech work.

I've trained a little bit this way (most people don't want to do it, and it takes two to tango, so it's a bit difficult to keep going), and it's extremely unpleasant. But so are interval sprints and high-intensity weight training, both of which I've done, hating them, for the past ten years. As a friend of mine likes to say, it doesn't matter whether you want to do it, or enjoy doing it, as long as you do it anyway. Smug preachy bastard!

 

[CuongNhuka]

See Exile, this is why I didn't bother to really post. I know you're going to say everything I have to say, only better then I could/would

 

[exile]

See Exile, this is why I didn't bother to really post. I know you're going to say everything I have to say, only better then I could/would

No, CN, not true!!

This whole issue—the `analytic' approach to forms, and how people train in order to bring that approach to living reality in their own training—is so new and personal, within the recent history of the MAs, that everyone's story and perspective is valuable and crucial. What I wanted to emphasize in my last post was just that the approach that Kidswarrior was citing from Abernethy seems to be exactly the same one that many martial arts pioneers took, way back in the early days—IA has really done the legwork here—and that that approach makes sense to me in terms of my own training. But the success of this approach depends on the experience of individuals who've tried out and experimented with the methods involved, or worked out new ones. So really, everything I've said (apart from the parts which I've lifted outright from the great MA innovators) is just my own angle, based on my own limited experience—I've only been doing this stuff for a few years. I'm a 2nd gup, you're a 3rd kyu, so our experience in the arts is probably roughly comparable. This whole line of inquiry is a group expedition without an actual leader (I take advice from a gang of mostly UK MAists whom I'm always referring to, but other people have their own oracles). Your own experience is essential input, eh?

 

[CuongNhuka]

Yah but still, we tend to end up with the same oppion. And you express it better, because you have done more reading. Sadly I'm limited by my current unemployment, and lack of a car. Otherwise I would have lots more books, and a better way of expressing our oppion.
You have to admit (if nothing else) we do tend to end up with ruffly compareable oppions. I get the feeling you have have somthing like the dimension theory I explained earlier?

 

[Kosho Gakkusei]

Great thread. I've agreed with most of the pro-kata posts. Those who post from a 'Kata is useless' mindset are putting their ignorance on display.

The 1 to 4 sequence drawn from Ian Abernathy is absolutely the progression needed if you are going to get anything out of Kata besides a tool to compete in forms for a tournament. I'd like to add my 2 cents regarding step one building off what exile had to say here:

So (1) involves solo practice. But it's not just rote performance you're working on, with the goal of executing a choreography routine with martial movements prettily enough to wow some judges; what you're doing is fixing in your mind just what the instructions were for the various combat scenarios that the kata creators were trying to give you.

Don't miss out on the benefit of solo practice!! You can get so much more out of it than merely learning a sequence or building muscle memory.

There are many ways to practice Kata as a solo excercise.

1. Deep Wide Stances with Isometric movements. - great excercise - go ahead and try taking a mile long run then see how many Kata you get thru this way.

2. Shallow Stances with focus on speed, fluidity, &/or targeting - this is closer to how you may actualy apply the movements. Yagyu Minanori (a Samurai who makes Musashi look like an idiot) spoke of attacking with the natural mind. I envision an attack and respond. Attacks will vary, distances will vary, angles will vary. I will also practice breaking from the pattern as in still performing the form but adding rotations. Say the attacker is to my left - I'll turn to the left even though the original version may go straight. Sometimes I will use rotation to change the application. For example: In Pinan or Heian Shodan the opening sequence is turn left with a down block step forward into a right forward stance with the Oi Zuki. Let's say I envision the attack on my left as a left handed jab to right cross combination. I turn to my left and my downblock becomes an inward chest level block followed by directing the jab downward & to my left, putting my opponent to the outside. As he throws the jab, rather then stepping with the right into an Oi Zuki I step back with the left and rotate 180 degrees utilizing my right hand to grab his right hand and execute a hand throw. Now this Okinawan Kata has produced a technique that looks more like Aikido.

3. Real slow with an emphasis on the rotation to perform the prescribed movements. The idea is to be real anylitical of your movements even emphasizing them to discover weight shifts and angles required. For example steping foreward from a natural stance into a right forward stance requires you to shift your weight onto your left leg as you bring your right foot out you're actually moving at 45 degrees to your right. The C step or Z step required to now move into left forward requires you continue with your left leg at 45 degrees to the right then 45 degrees to the left. Adding hand movements creates additional rotations and angles. This is can really be aided by a mirror so you can see it or by having a partner perform the Kata this way so you can observe it. You can also experiment with changing the Kata by continuing on angles that are opened up or discovering similar movements - rather than step forward into left front stance - left roundhouse kick into left front stance.

4. This is the opposite of #3, now you will try to cloak your movements you've become aware of. This would involve shifting the hips or feet or other muscle groups that are not visible to the opponent. A mirror helps but a partner is better so you can experiment with different ranges.

5. Open hands or closed hands. Take the above options and see how changing hands on the Kata changes it. If it's a closed hand Kata perform it with all open or vice versa.


Thanks.

_Don Flatt

 

[CuongNhuka]

A variation on the last one is to do it as a soft style kata, if it's hard. If it's a soft style, do it hard. If fact that is the way O'Sensei used to teach Nhu 1 (first soft style kata in Cuong Nhu) to people who had a hard time figuring out how to do a kata "soft". It's also a good way to mess with your mind.
And I got about a 30 other ways to alter a kata... maybe I should post a thread...

 

[qi-tah]

Thanks to all who have responded or voted in the poll. :asian:
I'm still hanging on a couple of things, though, so wanted to probe the subject just a little further.

Many people have responded that forms are important, but that they lack two-person training, which is also needed (examples: in performing techniques and sparring). But I'm wondering if forms can't be--and shouldn't be--done as two-person exercises after a point. In fact, looking back at Abernethy's sequencing which I first outlined in an earlier post, it seems he believes exactly that: forms practice includes techniques practice, just as forms practice includes sparring. Looking again at his progressive levels of forms practice brings up some questions for me I still don't believe I have answers for.

1) Practice without a partner. I believe this is the extent of many MA's understanding of what a form is.
2) Practice applying the techniques with a partner. That is, have someone 'step in' as an attacker (as we do when practicing techniques).
3) Inclusion of variations--using the same element of the form, but to get a different result (as our 'opponent' steps in, instead of a strike, turn it into a lock, or a throw or a strike to another target--as Steel Tiger mentioned could happen with a strike intended for the solar plexus could become a strike to the lower abdomen)
4) Practice applying the techniques, variations and principles of the kata in live practice. I don't know of anyone who does this, other than perhaps some internal arts practitioners, and Iain Abernethy's own group. And I've certainly never learned it or even seen it done this way. I'm wondering if anyone has heard of or seen forms practiced to the extent of live practice (#4)? Or for that matter, with a partner, as IA's #2 and 3? I was never taught forms as anything beyond #1, but believe this is a potentially rich area. Thoughts?

Well, we sometimes pratice a two-man set in my ba gua class of something i call "shoving legs" (don't know what it's called, sorry) that resembles yr step 3. It's not an app or couple of apps in isolation, but it's the entire form with variations. Each person takes turns initating attacks and then defending/counterattacking. If you both call/respond well, you can repeat the form ad nauseam. (or until one of you gets dumped on yr ****!

) The thing i find it great for is playing with the rythem of the form (there is an solo version of the form too), modulating force and timing to gain maximum effect. It's also useful as a tool to sense when yr opponent is preparing to change weight... b'cause the order of the attacks constantly change, you have to main yr receptivness to yr opponent. I guess it's a bit like push hands in Taiji (which i love too!), except you are very fluid on yr feet and are constantly trying to take yr opponent's legs.

Actually, timing and rythem is one thing i'm really trying to work on with my forms at the moment... trying not to break them up in disjointed movements or applications, but see the whole form as a flowing entity. Sometimes that's the only way an app (contained within the form) will work too... the Ba gua swimming dragon form i am learning at the moment is a case in point. There is a sequence of movements that progressively twists the lumbar spine in opposite directions (L5 to right, L4 to left, L3 to right, L2 to left, L1 to right) and then releases them all explosively... you just can't get it unless you get the flow right. I was thinking the other day that i knew i'd seen a movement like it demonstrated outside of training, finally it came to me: when i played state rubgy, a Qld. player shrugged off a solid ball and all tackle i laid on her with a very similar "shimmey" like motion... I went flying!

I was amazed at the time, considering that she didn't step off line or lift her knees or anything like that!

My take on the whole forms containing whole fighting system thing? In my opinion, nothing can contain everything, and forms don't begin and end as discretely as is often thought.

Cool thread btw! :asian:

 

[Shotgun Buddha]

Hmmm. Best way I can think of describing it is that forms themselves are not a fighting system, they just contain the techniques you use within that system.
A system would I think be composed like this, from the bottom up:

1. Single Techniques- >- Solo/Static Practice
2. Combination Techniques/Applications- >- Solo/Static Practice
-----------------------------------
3. Combination Techniques/Applications- >- Partner/Static Practice
-----------------------------------
4. Combination Techniques/Applications- >- Partner/Drills/Dynamic Practice
-----------------------------------
5. Combination Techniques/Applications- >- Sparring/Dynamic Practice
-----------------------------------
6. Combination Techniques/Applications- >- Freefight/Fighting


Forms and Kata are just another way of doing the first two, a reference guide for single techniques and applications. They're still just step one though, after that it still has to go through all the other stages.

 

[kidswarrior]

Great thread. I've agreed with most of the pro-kata posts. Those who post from a 'Kata is useless' mindset are putting their ignorance on display.

The 1 to 4 sequence drawn from Ian Abernathy is absolutely the progression needed if you are going to get anything out of Kata besides a tool to compete in forms for a tournament. I'd like to add my 2 cents regarding step one building off what exile had to say here:



Don't miss out on the benefit of solo practice!! You can get so much more out of it than merely learning a sequence or building muscle memory.

There are many ways to practice Kata as a solo excercise.

1. Deep Wide Stances with Isometric movements. - great excercise - go ahead and try taking a mile long run then see how many Kata you get thru this way.

Good stuff.

2. Shallow Stances with focus on speed, fluidity, &/or targeting - this is closer to how you may actualy apply the movements. Yagyu Minanori (a Samurai who makes Musashi look like an idiot) spoke of attacking with the natural mind. I envision an attack and respond. Attacks will vary, distances will vary, angles will vary. I will also practice breaking from the pattern as in still performing the form but adding rotations. Say the attacker is to my left - I'll turn to the left even though the original version may go straight. Sometimes I will use rotation to change the application. For example: In Pinan or Heian Shodan the opening sequence is turn left with a down block step forward into a right forward stance with the Oi Zuki. Let's say I envision the attack on my left as a left handed jab to right cross combination. I turn to my left and my downblock becomes an inward chest level block followed by directing the jab downward & to my left, putting my opponent to the outside. As he throws the jab, rather then stepping with the right into an Oi Zuki I step back with the left and rotate 180 degrees utilizing my right hand to grab his right hand and execute a hand throw. Now this Okinawan Kata has produced a technique that looks more like Aikido.

I've seen photos that look very close to this. I think you've really hit on something here. And couldn't this be true not just of IA's first step (solo), but really all four? I'm thinking maybe it could. And in fact, seems in your next point you make the bridge to partner work:

3. Real slow with an emphasis on the rotation to perform the prescribed movements. The idea is to be real anylitical of your movements even emphasizing them to discover weight shifts and angles required. For example steping foreward from a natural stance into a right forward stance requires you to shift your weight onto your left leg as you bring your right foot out you're actually moving at 45 degrees to your right. The C step or Z step required to now move into left forward requires you continue with your left leg at 45 degrees to the right then 45 degrees to the left. Adding hand movements creates additional rotations and angles. This is can really be aided by a mirror so you can see it or by having a partner perform the Kata this way so you can observe it. You can also experiment with changing the Kata by continuing on angles that are opened up or discovering similar movements - rather than step forward into left front stance - left roundhouse kick into left front stance.

It occurs to me your fourth point and IA's No. 4 could be related, i.e., 'sparring':

4. This is the opposite of #3, now you will try to cloak your movements you've become aware of. This would involve shifting the hips or feet or other muscle groups that are not visible to the opponent. A mirror helps but a partner is better so you can experiment with different ranges.

And the final, 'simple' point can be very profound:

5. Open hands or closed hands. Take the above options and see how changing hands on the Kata changes it. If it's a closed hand Kata perform it with all open or vice versa.

IA does this quite a lot with partner applications, sometimes calling them the 'hidden' moves, or just further applications. And I agree with you, this is very helpful for opening up whole new avenues of applications (blows become throws, throws become blows, or locks)