What Good are Forms?

[skribs]

Because I did agree with what that reporter had said.

What's the difference between the following 3 training options?

Option 1: 100% solo form training.
Option 2: 50% solo form training and 50% partner drill training.
Option 3: 100% partner drill training.

To train a good fighter, IMO, 3 > 2 > 1

Example of solo form training:

Example of partner drill training.

I'd say it depends on your art. Striking I'd say it's going to be about 60-40 for solo forms, grappling maybe 30-70. I don't think anything is 100% either.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'd say it depends on your art. Striking I'd say it's going to be about 60-40 for solo forms, grappling maybe 30-70. I don't think anything is 100% either.

Grappling could be 100% partner work, though I think some of the drills fulfill the same functions as forms do for striking. I can't think of much in the way of solo drill work (other than fitness stuff, and falls training) that was part of my grappling training. Nearly all the solo work was in striking.

And I do think there's questionable value for solo forms in grappling, as it's difficult to mimic the mechanics without the partner. I try to minimize the time spent in class on the one I have - it's really meant mostly for warm-up, remedial movement work, and to have something for solo practice outside class.

 

[skribs]

Grappling could be 100% partner work, though I think some of the drills fulfill the same functions as forms do for striking. I can't think of much in the way of solo drill work (other than fitness stuff, and falls training) that was part of my grappling training. Nearly all the solo work was in striking.

And I do think there's questionable value for solo forms in grappling, as it's difficult to mimic the mechanics without the partner. I try to minimize the time spent in class on the one I have - it's really meant mostly for warm-up, remedial movement work, and to have something for solo practice outside class.

Sometimes you have to go over the footwork or the gross hand motion without a partner, so you can drill it a bunch in rapid succession.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Sometimes you have to go over the footwork or the gross hand motion without a partner, so you can drill it a bunch in rapid succession.

Okay, I can buy that. We always used a partner even for that, but I can see the value in working some motions without the partner, too.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Option 1: 100% solo form training.
Option 2: 50% solo form training and 50% partner drill training.
Option 3: 100% partner drill training.

To train a good fighter, IMO, 3 > 2 > 1

Option 3 is only true when you have a sparring partner around.

Option 1: 100% Solo form training - Not real option if you are trying to be a fighter. That's like saying "Option 1: for being a good swimmer is 100% Swimming movement training, outside of the pool" This leaves us with #2 and #3.

Option3 2: 50% solo form training and 50% partner drill training. This is actually what boxers do.
Take a look at videos of people's 1st day at the boxing gym. You'll see things similar to forms training. Like locks of correction of stance, structures, and lots of practicing the same thing.

There are tons of solo boxing drills. The only difference is that with forms you are practicing way more techniques than what boxers train.

Option3: 100% partner drill training. No one does this. Why? Because what are you going to do if you don't have a partner to drill with? Not train? Of course not. You are going to work on your solo drills, which is like doing the forms with the exception you pick 1 thing and really drill it to get it right. Martial art is going to be different because there's a lot "doing 2 things at once" in martial arts.


For most people the most difficult thing about martial arts is learning how to move in different and uncommon ways. Most adults who take kung fu for the first time look exactly like this. How many techniques do you learn in Martial arts in comparison to boxing?

Most common statements that I've heard from adults is that it's mentally challenging just to get the body to do what you want it to do. Because of the complex movement people are going to spend a lot of time just learning how to get their brain to better communicate with their body.

You won't be good at partner drills if you can't do the movement or if you have bad structure.

 

[skribs]

Okay, I can buy that. We always used a partner even for that, but I can see the value in working some motions without the partner, too.

You can do more reps without waiting for your partner to stand back up every time. It also lets you isolate a movement (i.e. footwork) wothout worrying about everything else working right.

 

[skribs]

Option 3 is only true when you have a sparring partner around.

Option 1: 100% Solo form training - Not real option if you are trying to be a fighter. That's like saying "Option 1: for being a good swimmer is 100% Swimming movement training, outside of the pool" This leaves us with #2 and #3.

Option3 2: 50% solo form training and 50% partner drill training. This is actually what boxers do.
Take a look at videos of people's 1st day at the boxing gym. You'll see things similar to forms training. Like locks of correction of stance, structures, and lots of practicing the same thing.

There are tons of solo boxing drills. The only difference is that with forms you are practicing way more techniques than what boxers train.

Option3: 100% partner drill training. No one does this. Why? Because what are you going to do if you don't have a partner to drill with? Not train? Of course not. You are going to work on your solo drills, which is like doing the forms with the exception you pick 1 thing and really drill it to get it right. Martial art is going to be different because there's a lot "doing 2 things at once" in martial arts.


For most people the most difficult thing about martial arts is learning how to move in different and uncommon ways. Most adults who take kung fu for the first time look exactly like this. How many techniques do you learn in Martial arts in comparison to boxing?

Most common statements that I've heard from adults is that it's mentally challenging just to get the body to do what you want it to do. Because of the complex movement people are going to spend a lot of time just learning how to get their brain to better communicate with their body.

You won't be good at partner drills if you can't do the movement or if you have bad structure.

Option 1 can work if your primary goals are fitness and mental wellness.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

You won't be good at partner drills if you can't do the movement or if you have bad structure.

1. If you teach the following technique, will you teach the application first, or will you teach the solo form first?
2. If you teach the solo form first, do you think your student can understand what they are doing?
3. What kind of body structure does a student need for this technique?
4. Do you think students can develop a good body structure just from the partner drill?
5. After a student has learned the partner drill, does he still need to learn the solo drill (since solo drill is just partner drill without partner)?

Application training:

Solo form training:

 

[JowGaWolf]

1. If you teach the following technique, will you teach the application first, or will you teach the solo form first?

When I teach anything in general, start with the basics. I don't go straight to applications if they lack the ability to get the movement of that application correct. Trainers don't even do that in boxing.

2. If you teach the solo form first, do you think your student can understand what they are doing?

Yes. They will understand what they are doing according to their skill level and the skill level of the form.

What kind of body structure does a student need for this technique?

I don't know the structure of that as I don't run into my opponent like that to trip them. In my book I wouldn't recommend doing the technique that way. If your opponent is quick they can use your forward momentum to counter you.. I'm not guessing on this. I've actually have done this before.

Do you think students can develop a good body structure just from the partner drill?

Yes. because that's the foundation for which other skills are built upon. A weak foundation means that everything else will be weak.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You can do more reps without waiting for your partner to stand back up every time. It also lets you isolate a movement (i.e. footwork) wothout worrying about everything else working right.

It also means everyone is practicing that movement, not half the room. There are some benefits.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

1. If you teach the following technique, will you teach the application first, or will you teach the solo form first?
2. If you teach the solo form first, do you think your student can understand what they are doing?
3. What kind of body structure does a student need for this technique?
4. Do you think students can develop a good body structure just from the partner drill?
5. After a student has learned the partner drill, does he still need to learn the solo drill (since solo drill is just partner drill without partner)?

Application training:

Solo form training:

I believe it's best to learn the actual technique (what you call the application) first, then the form related to it. (The exception would be where a form contains movement to support multiple techniques - then it's not necessary to learn all of those techniques before the form, though it is probably helpful to know some of them.) My reasoning is that students - especially adults - learn much more quickly with context. Learning a movement out of context at best begets an approximation of what's needed. Learning to use the movement, then using solo form to reinforce it is a more effective sequence, IMO. That's not to say the form necessarily comes after the technique is learned well, just that they should be introduced to the technique first, so they know what the movements mean.

In some cases, students struggle to do the movement correctly in actual application. Some time spent practicing the movement to engrain some "feel" for it can be helpful. I usually do this by having them repeat the movement at that point in the technique with their partner, but as @skribs points out, there are some advantages to doing this sometimes without a partner.

And the answer to #4, IMO, is no. But just because they don't need to do the solo form, it doesn't necessarily follow that the solo form has no benefit. There are many ways to help develop movement, and I find solo forms work reasonably well, especially for filling those times when the student doesn't have a partner (or maybe just doesn't have a safe place for the partner to fall).

 

[skribs]

1. If you teach the following technique, will you teach the application first, or will you teach the solo form first?
2. If you teach the solo form first, do you think your student can understand what they are doing?
3. What kind of body structure does a student need for this technique?
4. Do you think students can develop a good body structure just from the partner drill?
5. After a student has learned the partner drill, does he still need to learn the solo drill (since solo drill is just partner drill without partner)?

1. In TKD, it's random. Sometimes it's form first, sometimes application first. There are movements in our blue belt forms I'm just now finding the application for. In a lot of cases, we're building muscle memory for techniques that come later, so it's easier to learn the technique when the time comes.
2. Irrelevant. You copy the Master.
3. Stance and posture is very important for TKD solo forms.
4. It depends on the student. Some students only work well with others and their forms are sloppy, because they don't really understand what they're supposed to do, and they lack imagination. Others have a hard time applying on another person, but a very easy time doing the forms. When they're having trouble with a throw and I tell them "use front stance instead of back stance" they understand and can shift their weight to make the throw happen.
5. Unless you carry around a partner with you, yes, solo forms are needed to practice.

 

[Mitlov]

When I competed in Olympic-style epee fencing, there were three parts to training.

1. Solo drills (footwork drills, blade drills on a training dummy). This is where you improve your form and efficiency and precision.

2. Scripted two-person drills. This is where you learn a particular sequence against a partner to get the feel, the rhythm, and to commit it to muscle memory.

3. Free sparring. This is where you learn to apply what you've learned against a resisting opponent who is trying to apply what they've learned against you.

I know of no competitive fencers who skip the first category, because of its benefit for fast efficient movement. This curriculum had nothing to do with tradition; the first category was part of training simply because it works.

 

[Hanzou]

That is what happens when you base grappling on kata instead of randori/rolling.

We call it "crappling".

 

[skribs]

That is what happens when you base grappling on kata instead of randori/rolling.

We call it "crappling".

What is this "instead of" you speak of?

 

[Hanzou]

What is this "instead of" you speak of?

There are JJJ and classical schools that don't do any sparring at all. What you see in that vid is a possible result of that practice.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Okay, but if someone doesn't understand what you mean, why not help them understand the statement?

Frankly, I don't think any art is inseparable from its forms. There are those who disagree with my view (you'd be among them, of course). I just don't think there's anything that is taught via forms that can't be taught via something else. I rather like forms, but don't consider them irreplaceable. I think Shorin-ryu (to grab a style more or less at random) can remain Shorin-ryu without the kata, so long as the same approach to the techniques exists.

OK, fair enough. I am going to start a new thread. I may not participate that much in it because very honestly, I'm past arguing over it. I get that people want and need something else from their martial arts training than I do, so I'll leave them to it.

 

[skribs]

OK, fair enough. I am going to start a new thread. I may not participate that much in it because very honestly, I'm past arguing over it. I get that people want and need something else from their martial arts training than I do, so I'll leave them to it.

I'm not trying to argue. I just want to know what you mean so I can understand what you said.

Otherwise, you might as well say "hopscotch buttermilk cowabanga dingdong".

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I'm not trying to argue. I just want to know what you mean so I can understand what you said.

Otherwise, you might as well say "hopscotch buttermilk cowabanga dingdong".

So I started a new thread about it. I hope it enlightens. I suspect it won't. I also suspect that there will be statements explaining how wrong I am, because that's what we do here.

 

[skribs]

So I started a new thread about it. I hope it enlightens. I suspect it won't. I also suspect that there will be statements explaining how wrong I am, because that's what we do here.

This has got to be the most glum post I've ever seen on this forum.