MMA bashing on Kung Fu

[skribs]

In my SC (Chinese wrestling) system, form is for

- teaching,
- learning,
- recording.

Form is not for training. When I get older, form can be used for health purpose.

Like I said, in your style it isn't. To make such a blatant statement that it isn't at all, is incorrect.

For TKD, improving your form is part of the training. You are not just learning a performance, or learning concepts. You are learning to exactly copy the form as it is meant to be passed down. I don't know if it was this thread or another (I think it was another), but @Dirty Dog was talking about how the forms have stayed the same since they were created in the late 60s or early 70s, and any deviation from them is incorrect (by Kukkiwon standards). Any differences in stance, such as a shorter or wider stance than prescribed, or doing a punch at a different height than prescribed, is incorrect. Copying your Master to exactness is part of your training. Just like scribes writing books back in the day, before the printing press.

 

[drop bear]

And you can be improving in all areas, and show much bigger gains in 1 area. Say someone starts out, and their forms are at a 2/10, and sparring at 4/10. If, after a year, their forms are 3/10, and their sparring is 8/10, they've improved in all areas, but their biggest gains have been sparring.

The more diverse your curriculum, the more this hits.

Mabye that just happens in your school.

In mine if say your striking is good but your wrestling isn't. Then we make your wrestling better.

If you are not physically and mentally tough enough to engage in full contact competition. Then we give you those skills.

It is not just left up to chance.

And this is only if people are training results based. I mean if they are just training for self defense then it is not the same issue as if someone might actually have to rely on those skills.

Then people can afford to progress in whatever directions they want.

But it isn't left up to chance how people develop. Because for us that isn't good enough.

And I believed that there were fighters and non fighters that sprung up through some sort of natural magic as well.

But because we have programs that drag people kicking and screaming through the process of becoming fighters. I have seen it has a lot less to do with random chance.

Very much like the process the Aikido guy Rokus went through.

 

[dvcochran]

Mabye that just happens in your school.

In mine if say your striking is good but your wrestling isn't. Then we make your wrestling better.

If you are not physically and mentally tough enough to engage in full contact competition. Then we give you those skills.

It is not just left up to chance.

And this is only if people are training results based. I mean if they are just training for self defense then it is not the same issue as if someone might actually have to rely on those skills.

Then people can afford to progress in whatever directions they want.

But it isn't left up to chance how people develop. Because for us that isn't good enough.

And I believed that there were fighters and non fighters that sprung up through some sort of natural magic as well.

But because we have programs that drag people kicking and screaming through the process of becoming fighters. I have seen it has a lot less to do with random chance.

Very much like the process the Aikido guy Rokus went through.

That is the best descriptions of a purely Martial program I have heard in a while. It is a hard mentality to promote and probably harder to keep going. But it is infectious and, if done correctly, will have a very good following. Too often it is promoted and seen as the formidable/manic/seedy side of training instead of just hard/gritty/effective training. People need to understand going in that it will not be easy. But it will be fun and effective with amazing gains.

A comment I often make jokingly (sort of) while working out is "this isn't ballet class"! My point being that there is going to be contact. You will be hit or pushed or pulled.
I am certain high level ballet training is akin to gymnast training and is very effective in its own rights.

 

[dvcochran]

I didn’t say “that is how we have always done it”.

What, exactly, are you saying? I feel like the target is moving.

 

[dvcochran]

I certainly enjoy it. However, I put it in the place of competitive dance or ballet since I don't believe you can develop actual fighting ability from its practice.

I do see some of that.

 

[Flying Crane]

What, exactly, are you saying? I feel like the target is moving.

I said this: “Sure, sparring can fill that purpose. Other drills can also fill that purpose. ”. That is the post I made, that you replied to.

What am I saying? I am saying that sparring can be an effective training tool. But other methods also can be effective training tools. Sparring isn’t as important as many people make it out to be, as long as you are doing other things that build those application skills.

 

[Flying Crane]

It doesn't have to be for the performance itself, in order for you to train to get better at the form. It might not be a training you understand, but it is a form of training.

How do you define “to get better at the form”?

 

[Flying Crane]

If I understand it correctly, Okinawan martial arts were originally meant to be killing marauding samurai with agricultural implements.

Thing is, I haven't seen marauding samurai in MONTHS. Maybe my gas-powered hedge-trimmer kata drove them off?

In all seriousness, it's great if you enjoy martial arts training as recreating one particular training approach from the late 19th century...but there's no reason that's the only right way to do martial arts in 2019.

My training dates back to 14th century Tibet (if the oral history has any accuracy, which it may, or may not), via southern China, not Okinawa. So what the Okinawans were doing in the 19th century has little to do with it. And the training has nothing to do with a desire to recreate something from the past. It simply is a continuation of a training method that does give results. The method works, and it is a method that seems to be a good match for my personality, so I follow it. It is not historical re-creation.

 

[Flying Crane]

Actually I don't know how to take that answer because I don't know what gradual escalation of working techniques against partners is or what it would consist of.

I am sure you do this too.

You take your techniques, either from you basics or taken from the context of your forms, and you drill them against a partner. You experiment with how you might apply them, under various circumstances. You gradually increase the level of intensity with these interactions. You gradually increase the number of techniques used in the interactions, you gradually add to the randomness in the encounters. But it is a more controlled encounter, used to focus on developing specific techniques or specific groups of techniques.

 

[skribs]

How do you define “to get better at the form”?

Better defined stances. Less wobble or extra movement in your technique. Proper chamber and execution of each technique. Good posture and breathing.

Better understanding of each component in the form.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I am sure you do this too.

You take your techniques, either from you basics or taken from the context of your forms, and you drill them against a partner. You experiment with how you might apply them, under various circumstances. You gradually increase the level of intensity with these interactions. You gradually increase the number of techniques used in the interactions, you gradually add to the randomness in the encounters. But it is a more controlled encounter, used to focus on developing specific techniques or specific groups of techniques.

Sounds familiar in my head, but I'm not sure if it's the same thing. Here's what I'm thinking:

When I train students, we always spar at a level where mistakes aren't costly. I usually encourage them to use the big punch because it's our basic punch. I don't tell him how to use or apply it during sparring, instead I let them figure it out (sounds similar to the "Experiment with how you might apply them."). I usually give them openings but it's up to them to step forward to try the technique.

I've only increased the intensity level once within a 5 years period and that was with the other instructor and after 2 sessions I had to bring the intensity back down because he was making critical and foolish mistakes, like leaning his face into my power hand multiple times.

As for the number of techniques used, I allowed them to use the one that want to try. The can use other techniques if it helps them to set up the one they are actually trying to learn. If they didn't use one then I pick one for them. I always made them try to use the big punch because it's the basic punch for Jow Ga. The sparring in general is random it's a lesson in trying to see opportunities and risk of applying a technique against a partner who trying to defend and attack.

Is this similar to what you are doing?

 

[Flying Crane]

Better defined stances. Less wobble or extra movement in your technique. Proper chamber and execution of each technique. Good posture and breathing.

Better understanding of each component in the form.

Is it for an audience, or is it to develop your technique and your skills?

 

[Flying Crane]

Sounds familiar in my head, but I'm not sure if it's the same thing. Here's what I'm thinking:

When I train students, we always spar at a level where mistakes aren't costly. I usually encourage them to use the big punch because it's our basic punch. I don't tell him how to use or apply it during sparring, instead I let them figure it out (sounds similar to the "Experiment with how you might apply them."). I usually give them openings but it's up to them to step forward to try the technique.

I've only increased the intensity level once within a 5 years period and that was with the other instructor and after 2 sessions I had to bring the intensity back down because he was making critical and foolish mistakes, like leaning his face into my power hand multiple times.

As for the number of techniques used, I allowed them to use the one that want to try. The can use other techniques if it helps them to set up the one they are actually trying to learn. If they didn't use one then I pick one for them. I always made them try to use the big punch because it's the basic punch for Jow Ga. The sparring in general is random it's a lesson in trying to see opportunities and risk of applying a technique against a partner who trying to defend and attack.

Is this similar to what you are doing?

This would be similar. It would start with fewer components and less freedom, but would grow into something similar to what you describe. The main point is that it is controlled in order to work on specific skills, and not just a face-off and go at it with total freeform.

And obviously you work things like the heavybag in order to develop your power.

 

[skribs]

Is it for an audience, or is it to develop your technique and your skills?

To develop technique and skills.

 

[JowGaWolf]

This would be similar. It would start with fewer components and less freedom, but would grow into something similar to what you describe. The main point is that it is controlled in order to work on specific skills, and not just a face-off and go at it with total freeform.

And obviously you work things like the heavybag in order to develop your power.

Ok I think I understand what you are describing now. I've never trained like that before. The school did drills but they weren't like that. They were always repetition drills which to me were a double edge sword. It helped trained the movement but it also programmed the movement. If my partner changed it up with a different strike then I would follow the programmed movement and get hit. After the first school closed down I changed how we did drills to help minimize the programming while having the benefits of repetition.

A drill like what you described sounds like it would have been a good fit.

 

[Flying Crane]

Ok I think I understand what you are describing now. I've never trained like that before. The school did drills but they weren't like that. They were always repetition drills which to me were a double edge sword. It helped trained the movement but it also programmed the movement. If my partner changed it up with a different strike then I would follow the programmed movement and get hit. After the first school closed down I changed how we did drills to help minimize the programming while having the benefits of repetition.

A drill like what you described sounds like it would have been a good fit.

Understandable, and you do point out some potential weaknesses. Every drill or method has weaknesses. But yeah, you do work towards more freedom, and there is a lot of middle ground in that progression. At the beginning, and as a way to return to the fundamentals, doing simple one-steps are a good place to start. But I agree, it does need to go beyond that.

 

[Flying Crane]

To develop technique and skills.

Sounds good to me.

Admittedly, I can sometimes get a bit hung up on the terminology. When someone says “get good at forms”, that tells me they see the forms as an end product and as more of a performance piece, and may not see it as a functional and useful drill for skills. I do believe there are schools that treat them as such.

But it may be just me, inaccurately interpreting what they mean.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Sounds good to me.

Admittedly, I can sometimes get a bit hung up on the terminology. When someone says “get good at forms”, that tells me they see the forms as an end product and as more of a performance piece, and may not see it as a functional and useful drill for skills. I do believe there are schools that treat them as such.

But it may be just me, inaccurately interpreting what they mean.

When I say getting good at forms, or practicing forms, the idea is to improve your form, and by improving your form, you are therefore improving your technique as well.

 

[skribs]

Sounds good to me.

Admittedly, I can sometimes get a bit hung up on the terminology. When someone says “get good at forms”, that tells me they see the forms as an end product and as more of a performance piece, and may not see it as a functional and useful drill for skills. I do believe there are schools that treat them as such.

But it may be just me, inaccurately interpreting what they mean.

In this case, the form is the end product. Perfecting the skills of the form, is to perfect that end product.

My Master takes this approach in a lot of things. His philosophy is that when people are required to memorize something, they will practice it more. This is why we have so many rote memorized drills and combinations on our tests.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Sounds good to me.

Admittedly, I can sometimes get a bit hung up on the terminology. When someone says “get good at forms”, that tells me they see the forms as an end product and as more of a performance piece, and may not see it as a functional and useful drill for skills. I do believe there are schools that treat them as such.

But it may be just me, inaccurately interpreting what they mean.

I'm 'with you on this one. When forms are performed without focus of function then the form loses it's meaning and students lose the understanding of it. Sort of like what has happened with Tai Chi. Many people can do the form but not tell you the application and because of the lack of that knowledge stances and body positioning are often incorrect.

This is what Tai Chi is for some (video on page). It totally misses the mark with the first sentence in the video.
Video: Tai chi

A different video that misses the point too on so many levels. First time I've heard Tai Chi as being like ice cream and cake.

I didn't watch the whole video.