How do your forms/katas progress?

[oftheherd1]

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[skribs]

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

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

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

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

 

[Hyoho]

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



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

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



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

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

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

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

 

[Flying Crane]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Gerry Seymour]

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

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

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

 

[Flying Crane]

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

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

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

 

[Gerry Seymour]

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

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

 

[Flying Crane]

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

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

 

[_Simon_]

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

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

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

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

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

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

Well said, and makes sense

 

[jobo]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[jobo]

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


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

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

 

[Gerry Seymour]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Gerry Seymour]

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

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

 

[Hyoho]

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

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

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

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

 

[jobo]

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

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

 

[hoshin1600]

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

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

 

[jobo]

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

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

 

[oftheherd1]

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

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

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

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

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

Have you considered studying another art?

 

[_Simon_]

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

XD

 

[Gerry Seymour]

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

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

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