The issue with MMA community

[Alan0354]

You know how kung fu people train? You've trained kung fu? ALL of it? I mean, I realize you had a few whole months of Wing Chun, and then you followed some bad advice on iron palm and hurt yourself. So you now know all about how kung fu people train, and what place forms take in training, and what other drills and applications are part of the whole of the training? really? ...interesting...

I wish I was so knowledgeable. I only know what I do. I don't entertain fantasies of knowing what everyone else does.

Now I know from reading here, you guys are trained against only people on the street that don't know anything and claim your stuffs work beautifully.

You should really go on youtube and watch Xu Ziaodong. Those people he challenged and whooped their butts, are famous masters in China. Guess what the government did, they make him paint his face before every fight to humiliate him, some people put a $20K bounty on him to whoever can beat him.

This is really an eye opener, I did NOT realize until this thread and till today. WOW. This, I agree, all kung fu works beautifully.......on untrained people.

 

[Alan0354]

Okay, since the UFC seems to be the end all be all of martial arts to you folks...

I currently train systems that utilize knives, swords, and sticks. I am only a beginner in this system, granted, but I think there's a good chance I'd win a fight against even the best unarmed UFC fighters. There are totally unskilled people who, given a weapon, or just a different opportunity, could do the same. I think there's also a very good possibility that people who have trained my system would have a much higher survival rate against me in such an unfair, unarmed vs armed fight.

I'm not even sure that the best UFC fighter in the world would necessarily win against an average practitioner of a given weapons based system if you give him a weapon. Sure, he may have a physical advantage and good reflexes, but he has absolutely zero experience, knowledge, and muscle memory.

Does being the best UFC fighter in the world also prepare you to do any of the following?
1. Hit someone without gloves, and not break your hand
2. Take someone down, and not have your head kicked in by their buddy
3. Deal with multiple opponents
4. Handle both trained and untrained opponents who are much larger than you, and who behave very differently than they do in the ring.
5. Handle a variety of weapons, including sticks, knives, swords, or even firearms?
6. Deal with an attacker who may be wielding any of the above variety of weapons.
7. Make most efficient use of bodymechanics and techniques given the very big changes that subtle differences make when wearing clothes, shoes, lack of training gear, and the potential for weapons, multiple opponents, and all other factors mentioned here? People really under estimate how much of a difference small things make. *Really*

I'd also argue that the way people behave in a non sportive combat environment is very different. Committed, unskilled attacks are not always as easy to defend from as people think, and always practicing against uncommitted, skilled opponents sort of robs you of learning what you can do in response to them. Ending a fight is all about efficiency, and taking advantage openings that your opponent gives you while not getting hit, stabbed, or cut yourself. If you don't train versus a wide range of attacks at various distances and with all sorts of implements, your performance will be suboptimal for the situation.

My argument is a case for being unspecialized. Competitive fighters must specialize highly. On the other hand, people with a more general approach to preparedness and combat must specifically avoid specializing and adopt a general approach that can deal with a much broader spectrum of threats.

Let me just give you a very tiny example of how specialization hurts: In Filipino Martial Arts, most people train with a light weight rattan stick of exactly 28 inches. However, the moment you pick up a fighting weight stick twice the weight, or a stick that is a little longer or shorter, or indeed a blade or machete, things become extremely awkward if you haven't handled that specific length, weight, and shape or nature (blade versus impact) weapon before, and the nature of what you can and can't do with each one changes a lot more than you would think. If you always train with that one implement of a certain size and weight, I'm sure you can compete well in a stick fighting match. But you will be far less effective when wielding anything other than that 28 inch light weight rattan stick that you spend all your time training with.

Then, there's the nature of the sportive context in which you test your skills. Some people treat the stick as a stick. Some treat it as a blade. Others seem to totally ignore what would be, without protective equipment, lethal shots to the head and rush in for to grapple or take down, which I can't really understand. Decided norms around competition hugely affect how you test your art, and who would come out on top if you were competing.

That's just an example of minor differences, and applies across the board to things like wearing or not wearing gloves, etc.

Then there are things you simply don't train for at all if your focus is purely on competition, such as multiple attackers, hitting with your bare hands, dealing with weapons, multiple attackers, concrete, and all sorts of uncertainties which do not just change what you do a little bit, but completely.

I just watched a video of two trained, very competent sports fighters get into a street fight with a larger group of random people. They did really good, until one of the random guys picked up part a large piece of construction lumber laying around, and swung at one of them. Not knowing what to do, his natural, trained reaction was to back off and try to get out of range, and he wound up getting hit squarely in the head, knocked to the ground unconscious, and stomped on. You can say all you want that "oh, I know better than to do that" and "I can deal with X or Y" but until you've trained to do so and have ingrained and make it second nature, you had better think twice about whether or not you can, indeed, do what you say you can.

I agree with a lot of what you said. I have so many guns they're coming out of of my ears!!! We went shooting twice a week for years, I punched a big hole in the middle of my target at 25yds pistol shooting every time. I won 2nd in one competition. I have guns from Glock to tiny Freedom Arms 22Magnum that fit in the palm of the hand. When I go to some questionable place, you bet I carry. Not only that, I do gun smithing to improve performance and reliability on pistols. I talked about this in Firingline Forum on and off, not here.

I train hard on stick fighting using a cane also and carry a cane wherever I go these days. I have pepper spray in my pocket at all time. I train a lot harder on stick fight than kick boxing. Kick boxing at this point is more aerobic exercise in my weekly exercise program.

BUT, this is a thread on MMA....................

 

[Argus]

I agree with a lot of what you said. I have so many guns they're coming out of of my ears!!! We went shooting twice a week for years, I punched a big hole in the middle of my target at 25yds pistol shooting every time. I won 2nd in one competition. I have guns from Glock to tiny Freedom Arms 22Magnum that fit in the palm of the hand. When I go to some questionable place, you bet I carry. Not only that, I do gun smithing to improve performance and reliability on pistols. I talked about this in Firingline Forum on and off, not here.

I train hard on stick fighting using a cane also and carry a cane wherever I go these days. I have pepper spray in my pocket at all time.

BUT, this is a thread on MMA....................

Awesome! I'm glad you have broad training. That will serve you well.

My point is that you can't really use MMA as the yardstick by which to measure every martial art, though. Consider this: Would you assert that an Olympic shooter would have superior skill in self defense with a firearm than someone who trains self defense / tactical shooting? The sport version is highly specialized, and no doubt, the practitioners are extremely good marksmen. But that training misses out on many real world aspects of accessing and using a weapon in self defense. The same can be said of many sportive arts. Now, MMA/UFC is pretty close, granted, to real combat, but it ignores far, far too much to be used as some kind of universal yardstick by which to judge the effectiveness of all things. Not all TMAs are good, but many are, and some of them are very ideal for self defense, or other combative contexts, whilst simultaneously not being great for competitive fighting in the ring, and that simply comes down to differences in the context for which the respective arts evolved.

 

[Flying Crane]

Now I know from reading here, you guys are trained against only people on the street that don't know anything and claim your stuffs work beautifully.

You should really go on youtube and watch Xu Ziaodong. Those people he challenged and whooped their butts, are famous masters in China. Guess what the government did, they make him paint his face before every fight to humiliate him, some people put a $20K bounty on him to whoever can beat him.

This is really an eye opener, I did NOT realize until this thread and till today. WOW. This, I agree, all kung fu works beautifully.......on untrained people.

Oh you KNOW this eh? Funny fellow. You seem to know everything.

 

[drop bear]

I currently train systems that utilize knives, swords, and sticks. I am only a beginner in this system, granted, but I think there's a good chance I'd win a fight against even the best unarmed UFC fighters. There are totally unskilled people who, given a weapon, or just a different opportunity, could do the same. I think there's also a very good possibility that people who have trained my system would have a much higher survival rate against me in such an unfair, unarmed vs armed fight.

Ok. How do you fare weapon against weapon though?

Are you able to dominate a ufc fighter in say a full contact stick fight.

Or even with some head gear and nerf bats?

Have you tested that your weapon skills make any difference at all?

Or is this another ego bolstering logic game?

The dog brothers for example test weapon systems with a modified MMA platform. Could you beat a dog brother?

 

[drop bear]

Does being the best UFC fighter in the world also prepare you to do any of the following?
1. Hit someone without gloves, and not break your hand
2. Take someone down, and not have your head kicked in by their buddy
3. Deal with multiple opponents
4. Handle both trained and untrained opponents who are much larger than you, and who behave very differently than they do in the ring.
5. Handle a variety of weapons, including sticks, knives, swords, or even firearms?
6. Deal with an attacker who may be wielding any of the above variety of weapons.
7. Make most efficient use of bodymechanics and techniques given the very big changes that subtle differences make when wearing clothes, shoes, lack of training gear, and the potential for weapons, multiple opponents, and all other factors mentioned here? People really under estimate how much of a difference small things make. *Really*

Yeah. Pretty much.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=3517380384972485

By the way. I have been in a lot of fights. Do you think those issues you raised are super important specialist skills?

Because with those questions. It is kind of like you don't understand the subject.

The thing I think people miss is that they think their system has some sort of monopoly on real world experience. And that is not the case.

Quite often the sports fighter can have more real world experience than the RSBD guy.

So Integrated above train bouncers. The coach works doors with half his students.

Near to me in Townsville MMA train a bunch of soldiers. There just happens to be a massive military base there. I did a seminar with the guy who sets up the systems for the Armies close combat. You can't throw a rock in that club and not hit a war veteran.

We have at least 3 cops train with us. I bounced for twenty years and my coach recently did volunteer/protection work in PNG a country where they still burn witches.

So is the information about what is and isn't necessary in a street attack coming from credible guys?

Because your outfit for example isn't exactly a game changer.

 

[Argus]

Ok. How do you fare weapon against weapon though?

Are you able to dominate a ufc fighter in say a full contact stick fight.

Or even with some head gear and nerf bats?

Have you tested that your weapon skills make any difference at all?

Or is this another ego bolstering logic game?

The dog brothers for example test weapon systems with a modified MMA platform. Could you beat a dog brother?

Ego bolstering logic game? Not sure where you got that.

I could not come close to beating a dog brother at my current skill level. But I've trained with, and was taught by one for a short time (about a year). He taught a traditional system, but with an extremely pragmatic and real-world approach. I experienced first hand his skill and ability, and was thoroughly convinced that what he had to teach was very effective indeed. I experienced a truly eye opening level of power, speed, and functional technical skill. He is a world class martial artist, and has had a huge impact on my understanding of Martial Arts, even if I did not train long enough to cover more than the basics of the system he taught me. This is just to say what has influenced my understanding and perspective on what makes a system practical and effective, and how things change between a sportive and real world context.

As for if I could dominate a UFC fighter with no experience in a stick on stick fight... Who knows. Maybe. Maybe not -- simply because I do not know if my limited skill level is sufficient to beat his huge advantage in athleticism. But it's certainly possible that I could, given that weapons are very much a force equalizer, and that skill becomes increasingly more of the determining factor. I'd actually love to finding out, if and when I work up to the level of full contact stick fighting myself. I'm personally more interested in sword/blade over stick systems, however -- and have and probably will continue to focus on that. Put us both in HEMA gear and give us each training blades and I'd happily run that experiment today! And I'll report back with the results. Then we can both learn a thing or to, perhaps

I have huge respect for anyone who competes, and the amount of training and physical conditioning that they put in. I do not have nearly the same amount of time and resources to dedicate to training, though I wish I did. But, I have met and experienced the skill and prowess of such people, both in the world of combat sports, and traditional martial arts, including individuals who do both. Like I said, I find I learn the most from those who are open minded and who have a broad base of experience in both simultaneously.

 

[Argus]

Yeah. Pretty much.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=3517380384972485

By the way. I have been in a lot of fights. Do you think those issues you raised are super important specialist skills?

Because with those questions. It is kind of like you don't understand the subject.

The thing I think people miss is that they think their system has some sort of monopoly on real world experience. And that is not the case.

Quite often the sports fighter can have more real world experience than the RSBD guy.

So Integrated above train bouncers. The coach works doors with half his students.

Near to me in Townsville MMA train a bunch of soldiers. There just happens to be a massive military base there. I did a seminar with the guy who sets up the systems for the Armies close combat. You can't throw a rock in that club and not hit a war veteran.

We have at least 3 cops train with us. I bounced for twenty years and my coach recently did volunteer/protection work in PNG a country where they still burn witches.

So is the information about what is and isn't necessary in a street attack coming from credible guys?

Because your outfit for example isn't exactly a game changer.

I'm having a hard time following your argument.

You're saying some MMA guys train outside of the ring, and have real world experience outside of the ring, therefore, people who train MMA are prepared for contexts outside of the ring?

The crux of your argument seems to be that training only for the context of the ring is sufficient, and that anything that doesn't produce a high percentage of competitive fighters in the ring is worthless.

Is your argument now that, because some MMA guys have experience outside of MMA, that this prepares them for artifacts of conflict outside of the ring, or are you saying that because people who are interested in real world combat seek out training at MMA schools, that this proves that MMA is the best thing on the block? Or are you saying that some MMA schools also train for contexts outside of the ring, and therefore are prepared?

What is your argument exactly? I can't even tell if we disagree or not.

I'm all for pressure testing your art, and cross training. I'm only advocating to take a broader perspective than just what happens in a competitive setting. And for the record, I've considered training at an MMA gym myself, and believe I would both enjoy it and learn and benefit a lot. I just don't see how you can say that the ring is the end all be all and that nothing matters outside of that -- if that is indeed what you're saying.

 

[drop bear]

I'm having a hard time following your argument.

You're saying some MMA guys train outside of the ring, and have real world experience outside of the ring, therefore, people who train MMA are prepared for contexts outside of the ring?

The crux of your argument seems to be that training only for the context of the ring is sufficient, and that anything that doesn't produce a high percentage of competitive fighters in the ring is worthless.

Is your argument now that, because some MMA guys have experience outside of MMA, that this prepares them for artifacts of conflict outside of the ring, or are you saying that because people who are interested in real world combat seek out training at MMA schools, that this proves that MMA is the best thing on the block? Or are you saying that some MMA schools also train for contexts outside of the ring, and therefore are prepared?

What is your argument exactly? I can't even tell if we disagree or not.

I'm all for pressure testing your art, and cross training. I'm only advocating to take a broader perspective than just what happens in a competitive setting. And for the record, I've considered training at an MMA gym myself, and believe I would both enjoy it and learn and benefit a lot. I just don't see how you can say that the ring is the end all be all and that nothing matters outside of that.

Ultimately i am saying a lot of those issues listed are fabricated issues made by people who either don't understand the subject or who are actively making it up for personal gain.

And I am saying this because I have as much access to real life defence experts through MMA as anyone else does from any other avenue in life.

And my experts are better because they can actually prove their theories in a MMA context.

Tim larkin for example has no evidence he can perform the techniques he advocates. Or even perform an approximation of the techniques he advocates. Or that any of his studentscan perform any of the techniques he advocates. And there is no vehicle to test if he is correct in his assumptions or not. And so his training is purely faith based.

And so you will never know if he is right or wrong. And you have no way to find out other than put your life at risk.

And this is done intentionally to sell you a product.

And so if you are suggesting UFC isn't the be all and end all. When compared to this specific alternative it actually is the be all and end all.

 

[Argus]

Ultimately i am saying a lot of those issues listed are fabricated issues made by people who either don't understand the subject or who are actively making it up for personal gain.

And I am saying this because I have as much access to real life defence experts through MMA as anyone else does from any other avenue in life.

And my experts are better because they can actually prove their theories in a MMA context.

Tim larkin for example has no evidence he can perform the techniques he advocates. Or even perform an approximation of the techniques he advocates. Or that any of his studentscan perform any of the techniques he advocates. And there is no vehicle to test if he is correct in his assumptions or not. And so his training is purely faith based.

And so you will never know if he is right or wrong. And you have no way to find out other than put your life at risk.

And this is done intentionally to sell you a product.

And so if you are suggesting UFC isn't the be all and end all. When compared to this specific alternative it actually is the be all and end all.

Overall, I think we agree much more than we disagree.

For one thing, I share your general skepticism, and I'm not actually a fan of Tim Larkin. I just liked the specific video that he analyzed.

I do agree also that the more contexts something can be proven in, the better. If you have a self defense technique that also works in an MMA context under pressure, all the better.

But I also practice a sort of reverse skepticism, which is to say, I try not to throw the baby out with the bath water. And I try to decide for myself if a technique does actually work under pressure, by actually trying to apply it under pressure myself. Not necessarily in a competitive environment, but with friends and training partners.

I believe in, and regularly test what I learn. I don't just believe in accepting everything on good faith, and I always maintain a certain amount of skepticism and openmindedness simultaneously. I may not be a self defense expert, or a competitive fighter, but I've routinely gotten together with friends in the martial arts world to test out things under pressure, including really really difficult stuff like knife defense. We've practiced a lot of this stuff full speed, and I've learned a lot from it. Some of the traditional stuff, a lot of it -- including stuff that many people will claim is "not practical," I've had great and reliable success with after playing around with it long enough to understand when it does and doesn't work, and how to apply it pragmatically. Other stuff, I'm not sure of because I haven't been able to apply it under pressure with a high success rate, but that's often times due to my own lack of training it, or lack of understanding when and how to apply it effectively, so I reserve judgement on it. Some stuff, I couldn't make work at all, but this is actually the exception more than the rule, and I remain skeptical but keep open the possibility that it has value that I just don't understand.

Like wise, I've tested, though not competed, my empty hand skill on a variety of martial artists, and to a limited degree, in a sportive context as well. I learned a lot from that. And I have a lot to learn if I want to compete. But I think there is something to be said for its effectiveness that I was able to apply what I did know to good effect, even if at nowhere near the level of a true competitive fighter.

Here's the thing, though: I don't see how you can practice things, like, say, knife versus empty hand in a competitive environment. It's totally unfair, whilst sportive arts are obsessed with fairness. But it's something that I consider really important to practice.

Likewise, you can't really practice disengaging and escaping from a fight, etc. in a competitive environment. You may want to just simply create an opportunity to escape, or to access a weapon as opposed to engaging in a mutually agreed upon fight.

These are just a few examples. There are tons more nuanced differences that I feel are quite large (and I feel this way speaking from direct experience and comparison!), but if we can't even agree on these examples, I don't think we'll agree on more nuanced differences.

I'm not so sure if I agree with your take that many of the "little things" I mentioned aren't big issues in actual real world combat or self defense. I have my own knowledge and actual experience in this area that leads me to value and place emphasis on these differences -- I'm not just parroting what I've heard others claim. And I do often ask myself "how important is this" and "is a much simpler approach just better." My answers are not nearly as clear cut as yours, even after applying a lot of skepticism.

Again, I do highly value testing one's skill in a sparring context, and against a wide range of trained individuals. I'm just saying that there's more to martial arts and self defense than just that. People who are too narrowly focused on *just* competition often throw the baby out with the bath water, and I get the sense that you might be doing that just a little.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yeah people get confused about forms. Forms done correctly is good mobility training. It is bunkai where stuff gets pretty useless.

Except that that's not the message I hear a lot from the anti-TMA crowd. I hear a lot of "forms don't teach fighting" and such, claiming those things are a waste of time.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I can see why you laugh at my post. You only worry about facing people that don't know anything. I am sure a competent boxer can handle most untrained people, just like I said even if I do weight training, the fact that I am stronger than someone that doesn't know how to fight, I can throw him around without knowing any MA.


I guess this is funny. We should only talk about facing people that doesn't know anything.

And here, once again, you present your inability to see anything other than extremes. Congratulations. There are a lot of people with some ability (anywhere from "meh" to quite good) who aren't elite fighters.

But then you knew that, and just found it easier to argue a point I never made. That's called a strawman, and you've presented a really eggregious example of one here. Well done.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Does being the best UFC fighter in the world also prepare you to do any of the following?
1. Hit someone without gloves, and not break your hand
2. Take someone down, and not have your head kicked in by their buddy
3. Deal with multiple opponents
4. Handle both trained and untrained opponents who are much larger than you, and who behave very differently than they do in the ring.
5. Handle a variety of weapons, including sticks, knives, swords, or even firearms?
6. Deal with an attacker who may be wielding any of the above variety of weapons.
7. Make most efficient use of bodymechanics and techniques given the very big changes that subtle differences make when wearing clothes, shoes, lack of training gear, and the potential for weapons, multiple opponents, and all other factors mentioned here? People really under estimate how much of a difference small things make. *Really*

Being an elite MMA fighter would put someone well ahead in any of those categories, compared to someone untrained or not elite in that category. The skills translate. As for #7, I don't think it's as big a factor in that direction. MMA fighters train to deal with no useful clothing to hang onto, so if you add in some handles in the form of jackets, etc, that likely goes in their favor. Clothing (other than something overly constrictive) doesn't become a significant liability unless you're dealing with a grappler who's trained to make use of it (which is why so little clothing in most MMA matches).

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Here's the thing, though: I don't see how you can practice things, like, say, knife versus empty hand in a competitive environment. It's totally unfair, whilst sportive arts are obsessed with fairness. But it's something that I consider really important to practice.

Likewise, you can't really practice disengaging and escaping from a fight, etc. in a competitive environment. You may want to just simply create an opportunity to escape, or to access a weapon as opposed to engaging in a mutually agreed upon fight.

I don't think you can really do either of those in a dojo or gym very fully, either. You can create a simulation for the knife vs. empty hand, but it will always be limited (there's not enough risk for either side, for starters, so decisions change). And disengage/escape in a dojo setting doesn't have the factor of the other person's decisions. You can only drill the movements and strategies, but you can't really try them out with much reality.

 

[Trondyne]

They then know they don't have to tools to deal with grapplers

What boxer is training to fight grapplers?

How come almost 30 years later, they still don't manage to get up there and still talk trash?

Not sure what this means... Everyone has moved on some people will always be lost.....

That's what I point out about kung fu, they refuse to change, keep doing things that don't work and making excuse.

This is simply anti style bias... I don't think there is anything wrong with "kung fu", sorry. What's wrong is that not enough people spar or fight with it. There are teachers who never fought or fought very little teaching people who don't want to fight and what do you get? People who can't fight...shocking... Too many of these people aren't fighting at all, let alone grapplers...

If kung-fu people started fighting (more) we might have a chance to see some very interesting additions to MMA, moves and methods never before seen or rarely seen. We might have a chance to grow more, and save some dying arts. I know many people don't agree but that's fine, we'll never know until those people start fighting with their art...

 

[Trondyne]

Being an elite MMA fighter would put someone well ahead in any of those categories, compared to someone untrained or not elite in that category. The skills translate. As for #7, I don't think it's as big a factor in that direction. MMA fighters train to deal with no useful clothing to hang onto, so if you add in some handles in the form of jackets, etc, that likely goes in their favor. Clothing (other than something overly constrictive) doesn't become a significant liability unless you're dealing with a grappler who's trained to make use of it (which is why so little clothing in most MMA matches).

There are many elements in actual Self Defense not addressed by traditional fighting arts in any way shape or form....

Tony Blauer has been covering this stuff for decades and very well... Of course fight training helps but can lead you away from what is self defense and not fighting consensual 1 on 1...

This video is Gold...

 

[Trondyne]

Except that that's not the message I hear a lot from the anti-TMA crowd. I hear a lot of "forms don't teach fighting" and such, claiming those things are a waste of time.

Forms bore the $hit out of me but they are an ingenious way of preserving not only a catalogue of moves and ideas of the art but sneaky ways to challenge the body and train balance in motion, specialized mechanics, how to loosen up and stretch out muscles and tendons, generate specialized kinds of loose power and more....

The down side is that they also allow information to be lost because if you don't tell people what some of the moves are they very likely won't figure it out...

 

[Trondyne]

Now I know from reading here, you guys are trained against only people on the street that don't know anything and claim your stuffs work beautifully.

Lumping millions of people all together in one bucket is ignorant AF.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

There are many elements in actual Self Defense not addressed by traditional fighting arts in any way shape or form....

Tony Blauer has been covering this stuff for decades and very well... Of course fight training helps but can lead you away from what is self defense and not fighting consensual 1 on 1...

This video is Gold...

I'm not someplace where I can watch a video. Can you give me a bullet-point synopsis of which elements you're referring to?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Forms bore the $hit out of me but they are an ingenious way of preserving not only a catalogue of moves and ideas of the art but sneaky ways to challenge the body and train balance in motion, specialized mechanics, how to loosen up and stretch out muscles and tendons, generate specialized kinds of loose power and more....

The down side is that they also allow information to be lost because if you don't tell people what some of the moves are they very likely won't figure it out...

I'm not a fan of them as a catalogue (using them that way leads some folks to determine what is and isn't in an art by the forms, so there's no evolution). I use them almost entirely for the other purposes. I'm not so sure they're sneaky about that - or rather that they necessarily are. I teach my students what the purpose of the forms is, how they were designed, and what they do and don't include.

If someone misinterprets a movement in my forms, it's inconsequential unless they are doing something that's bad for their body.