What Good are Forms?
- Thread starter dvcochran
- Start date
Can you give an example or two?
If the individual components are in the forms (or in the training) then why the requirement for that specific combination to be as well?
If you know the moves, and you know transitions, you should be able to combine them in any way to suit the situation.
For example, I have done - lead hand straight punch flowing into backfist (same hand, no return, one move) followed by lead leg twisting kick followed by rear leg jumping turning kick (roundhouse).
Not in any form verbatim to my knowledge, and the initial hand move isn't in any form at afaik (straight punch is, as is backfist, but not as single combined), yet I put those components together from knowing the components and transitions.
Notwithstanding a flying side kick is in 'my' patterns - someone figured it out all by themselves at some point...
I don't think it's necessary that every combo (or even every technique) be cataloged in a form. You'd definitely want a drill for it.If you like to use side kick, spin back fist combo, but this combo is not in any form that you have learned, what will you do?
Will you add this combo into one of your forms?
This is a great way of saying that. And I agree entirely. And if that server was being used to run web hosting, you could still use it to run web hosting. There would be some changes consequent of the change of platform, but it would still be a web server.
I believe this happened with NGA, as well. While Richard Bowe was clearly a gifted martial artist at the time (he's getting quite old now and no longer teaches), he had only trained NGA for a few years when the founder of the art died, and Bowe returned to the US. Everyone now practicing NGA is descended from his teaching (the school in Japan closed many years ago), and I believe the lack of that long-term exposure to the source (founder or source arts) caused some loss of knowledge. I've been reaching back to some of the source arts to better understand principles, and adding material to improve understanding.
(Side note - I'm not sure this was meant as a response to my post you quoted. While interesting, it seems non sequitur to my comment.)
Is a form necessary to learning a technique? (Obviously, that's a facetious question; many styles don't use forms and teach many techniques without them.)
I don't have forms for most of the techniques I train outside the 50 Classical techniques in NGA. If I ever grow any instructors (seems doubtful, but I keep hoping), it's up to them to communicate the full curriculum - as they see it - to their students. I won't codify the entire syllabus, because I don't want them blindly copying what I do. They should prune what they don't see useful and add what they think fits.
I think it's also easier to pass along incomplete information, which might be less useful than simply losing a technique. If a technique gets lost, it probably wasn't being used much. If it gets communicated incompletely (because it's not used much, but is codified in a form) then time may be spent learning something that's not really understood, so isn't useful.
This isn't a planned combo. This is a recovery after a successful parry of a side kick. What we are looking is what many instructors may warn about "don't push your opponent into the next technique".If you like to use side kick, spin back fist combo, but this combo is not in any form that you have learned, what will you do?
Will you add this combo into one of your forms?
I know in Jow Ga there are blocks and parries that will help your opponent flow into another technique if done incorrectly. This is where the form becomes important and why certain parrying and blocking techniques stop at a specific point or are done in a specific direction. Get the technique incorrectly and you'll help your opponent.
For example in this clip, the parry is a downward parry. All of the parry's to a side kick used in Jow Ga send the kicking leg side ways, and not downward. Moving that kicking leg side ways throws the opponent off balance. Moving that kicking leg down helps the opponent set his root. In practicing the parry in a form, an instructor would have gotten on him for not sending the parry side ways.
Hanzou
Grandmaster
Eh.... Bjj threw out Judo kata, and it came out just fine, if not better.
TSDTexan
Master of Arts
(1) would be expected. I was hoping someone might point it out. I actually started my Te journey in a Shotokan dojo. It doesn't matter what Funakoshin renames it as, because he is wrong. (chuckle)
(2) bears may or may not have been round kicked by Chuck. The video specifically pointed out that it didn't cover everything at the seminar.
TSDTexan
Master of Arts
Gracie JJ uses two man drills that are "one steps", that are a judo legacy that were derived from kata.
I liked due to the first bit
To me it actually looks like about a 45° parry there, not fully down nor fully to the side.
In either case though (sideways or downward) there are things that can be used as a follow up move.
A sideways parry would help more to initiate the motion for an opportunistic spinning backfist, if the attacking party has decent balance and recovery skills.
Hanzou
Grandmaster
But it isn't the Kata. The nine kata of Judo is not in Bjj.
TSDTexan
Master of Arts
missing my point.
There is a ton of bjj kata.
while it isn't fighting kata (just like Sanchin isnt a fighting kata)
Hanzou
Grandmaster
Your point was that removing kata is like removing the mainframe of a system. Bjj clearly removed Judo kata and its just fine. You're now moving the goal posts to say that any drill or practice method is "kata", which is simply nonsense. Kata are historical pre-arranged movements, not practice drills that you do to sharpen an individual skill. Shrimping drills in Bjj isn't kata. Tackling drills in football isn't kata. Shooting drills in Basketball isn't kata.
I never saw kata in Judo, either. I don't know that it made much difference in Judo.
Hanzou
Grandmaster
Yeah, some modern Judo schools don't even practice the kata because its largely pointless.
TSDTexan
Master of Arts
well, my earlier point i was referring to karate.
now i am talking bout bjj. hardly moving goalposts. its apples and oranges.
shrimping into a sweep leg sweep.
shrimping into a technical standup.
Both of those are a pair of seperate techniques that are being arranged. they are now a form. a 2 step solo drill.
And a drill is a pattern. or form. when you do a series of drills in sequence that is kata. see the second video where the guy is flowing from drill to drill.
and while historical "orthodox", fully formed, pre arranged forms exist, that is not exclusively kata.
Last edited:
They don't have to be historical, TKD tul aren't that much older than me.
They are simply prearranged moves.
So solo drills (that are scripted and always performed with the same goal in technique) are by definition patterns/kata/whatever.
Partner drills, if choreographed, are the same.
In BJJ, when learning a technique (with or without a partner) do you practice the same thing over and over or is it roughly described and you're expected to just get on with it? If the former, it's kata. Maybe a short one, but still.
Now, solo practice in grappling brings another variable. If I understand grappling even marginally then everything you do is dependent upon the action and reaction of another person - you can't choke thin air for example.
So in that case, longer multi move solo kata I can fully agree would be pretty pointless, there's just about nothing to gain there imo. Partner drills (two person kata) on the other hand, definitely useful.
There's a punch/turn/block combo in one of the very first TKD patterns that I maintain can be used as a throw - but until you add another person there's no way to develop that usage. You need to practice into resistance, the weight and the reaction to make it happen.
