What i learned from 4 months of mostly only forms training.

[Tigerwarrior]

For the last 4 months of my training my teacher and myself have focused on forms training. And I'm amazed at what i have learned from it and also the results. I haven't hit a heavybag or lifted a weight this whole time but I'm hitting harder than I ever have and my speed has improved too(although I'm not as fast as I was 10 years ago when I was younger) I think there is alot to be learned from forms, and not all of it is the technique aspect, stuff like the movements and transitions and studying how power is generated in each movement down to the smallest level. The biomechanics and how your body moves. This is stuff I've learned doing forms slowly. I think it's getting overlooked now a days but it's still a good method of training .

 

[HighKick]

I agree forms definitely have great value in most MA's systems. However, training with zero feedback is a bad idea. Very unrealistic to the intended purpose.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

MA include:

1. timing,
2. opportunity,
3. angle,
4. power,
5. balance.

Without partner, 1, 2, 3 have no meaning.

Form training can only "polish" your MA. But first, you have to develop MA skill (need partner) before you can "polish" it.

You can learn MA in 2 different ways (binary choice?).

1. Learn form first. You understand the application of your form. You then train your application.
2. Learn partner drills first. When you train partner drills without partner, you will have solo drills. If you link your solo drills into sequence, you will get your solo form.

Which learning method is better?

I have 2 MA teachers. My 1st MA teacher taught me with method 1. My 2nd MA teacher taught me with method 2. IMO, 1 < 2.

 

[isshinryuronin]

You can learn MA in 2 different ways (binary choice?).

1. Learn form first. You understand the application of your form. You then train your application.
2. Learn partner drills first. When you train partner drills without partner, you will have solo drills. If you link your solo drills into sequence, you will get your solo form.

Both methods get you to the same place. I'm not sure which is best.

#1, You first learn and spend time on the technique motion properly, without which application will not work.
#2, You first train partner application, but its effectiveness will take time as technique motion has not been well learned yet.

The same steps must eventually be covered with either method and the total time invested to get an effective working technique may be similar. It may be a case of how the student best learns as to which method is best.

#1 is generally the way modern TMA is taught, at least in most karate schools.
#2 is how we believe karate forms were originally taught, but back then the art, teachers and students were much different.

As Master Shimabuku once said, "All shapes of bottles are good" as they serve the intended purpose.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Both methods get you to the same place. I'm not sure which is best.

My concern about method 1 is some MA teachers only teach form without teaching application.

A: Why do you teach form without teaching application?
B: I don't want my student to learn how to fight.
A: If you don't want your student to learn how to fight, why do you even teach them?
B: MA is more than just for fighting. I want to teach them to be better persons.
A: ...

What are you going to do with those kind of MA teachers? Are those MA teachers trying to promote MA, or trying to destroy MA?

 

[HighKick]

MA include:

1. timing,
2. opportunity,
3. angle,
4. power,
5. balance.

Without partner, 1, 2, 3 have no meaning.

Form training can only "polish" your MA. But first, you have to develop MA skill (need partner) before you can "polish" it.

You can learn MA in 2 different ways (binary choice?).

1. Learn form first. You understand the application of your form. You then train your application.
2. Learn partner drills first. When you train partner drills without partner, you will have solo drills. If you link your solo drills into sequence, you will get your solo form.

Which learning method is better?

I have 2 MA teachers. My 1st MA teacher taught me with method 1. My 2nd MA teacher taught me with method 2. IMO, 1 < 2.

I would argue 1-4 have no merit without a partner.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I would argue 1-4 have no merit without a partner.

You are right! Punching into the thin air is different from punching into an object. Also dealing with balance in solo form training is different from dealing with opponent body weight during throw.

MA is like playing chess game. It takes 2 persons to play. Of course, for those who only care about self-cultivation, inner peace, be a better person, ... their views will be different.

 

[Badhabits]

Some timing is easier to work on solo initially. Timing your strikes in even a simple combo for example. Slide up jab-reverse punch-rear leg front snap kick-backfist-reverse punch. It takes some solo practice to get the timing down to where each strike takes advantage of the preceding movement's momentum and each strike is landing just a hairs breadth after the one before it.....getting the back fist to land at the same time you set your foot down after the front kick...Awfully hard to get that timing down without solo practice.

 

[Tigerwarrior]

I agree forms definitely have great value in most MA's systems. However, training with zero feedback is a bad idea. Very unrealistic to the intended purpose.

I'm getting feedback.

 

[Tigerwarrior]

MA include:

1. timing,
2. opportunity,
3. angle,
4. power,
5. balance.

Without partner, 1, 2, 3 have no meaning.

Form training can only "polish" your MA. But first, you have to develop MA skill (need partner) before you can "polish" it.

You can learn MA in 2 different ways (binary choice?).

1. Learn form first. You understand the application of your form. You then train your application.
2. Learn partner drills first. When you train partner drills without partner, you will have solo drills. If you link your solo drills into sequence, you will get your solo form.

Which learning method is better?

I have 2 MA teachers. My 1st MA teacher taught me with method 1. My 2nd MA teacher taught me with method 2. IMO, 1 < 2.

I think it depends on the person. Some learn easier with 1 and some learn better with method 2

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I think it depends on the person. Some learn easier with 1 and some learn better with method 2

What can you do for those MA teachers who teach forms but don't teach application?

 

[Tigerwarrior]

What can you do for those MA teachers who teach forms but don't teach application?

I think they need to teach both. If they teach forms they should also teach applications of the techniques in the forms. I think it is more difficult to teach applications without the student having a partner to practice the applications on, but it's not impossible in some arts. In grappling arts it seems harder to pull off compared to striking arts.

 

[HighKick]

I'm getting feedback.

Can you describe it?