What is our base?

[Luther]

"WFD." Isn't everybody?

heh maybe...I dunno. I just love Kenpo.

 

[Flying Crane]

TOD is a blackbelt. There is no need to go on about it. While fundamentally we may disagree on points he has a depth of knowledge that deserves respect without threatening him or demeaning him about his bag work or whatever.

He was aiming his derision at me, not TOD. Thanks, tho.

 

[Flying Crane]

I don't think people necessarily need to stand in a horse stance for a half hour or something, altho this does help to build strength and learn to relax and settle into the stance properly.

I wanted to clarify my thought here a little.

I actually think that standing in stance is a good practice, develops a strong stance, and should be a regular part of practice.

However, I understand why people do not do it, given limited time to train and other obligations. I'll admit that it's not as regular a part of my own training as I would like it to be.

Given how most of us are pressed for training time, maybe we might get more benefit if other things were sacrificed instead. Do we need two dozen or more kata, for example? Maybe a dozen good kata are all we need in that department. Maybe some of the time spent on so much kata could be better spent on stances.

 

[punisher73]

Yes, that is what I was referring to.

Flying Crane and punisher -

You are free to disagree, but boxers/kickboxers/MMA folk do not train 'stances', and do just fine. To try to "freeze" their motion belies my point about footwork. Stances are by definition static, and I can't see many times where one would want to be static in any kind of martial arts scenario (sparring or otherwise).

I think you misunderstood what I meant. Stances are NOT static, they might be isolated in training to understand what they are for but you are not meant to just stand in them.

One of the first things you learn in a good boxing gym is how to stand. There are in fact various boxing stances used to employ that particular type of strategy and guard. Some are more side on and some are a bit more squared, but you learn how to stand, how to hold your hands, where the feet should be pointed and how to distribute weight. The footwork drills ALL work on maintaining this optimal position. Why? In boxing, you only have to worry about hands coming at you from the waist up. You don't have an opponent charging you, you don't have a knee coming up into your face when you bend over. Stances in MA's are meant to deal with these other variables.

Look at a martial art like Judo. They teach a specific way to stand and a way to counter throws. No Judoka would confuse that you just stand in that stance the whole time. Go to any MMA gym and they will have you stand a certain way to learn how to employ your tools. They take into consideration that you need a slightly wider base than a stand up game alone to help avoid takedowns, they also understand that you need to be slightly more squared up than a regular boxing stance to employ your leg kicks.

They ALL employ stances, it's just that MA's break it down more to understand what each one is for and when to employ it. I do agree, that many people DON'T learn to be fluid and solid in their footwork and tend to stand in place (much like a newbie to boxing).

The other consideration is MA's are designed for a civilian self-defense scenario. The assault is happening so you don't have to worry about closing the distance and jockeying for position in and out of range as you do in sparring or a match. Both combatants are right on top of each other and you need stability alot more than mobility.

I wish I could find the interview I read from an ex-boxing champ when he talked about getting assaulted by multiple people on the street. His response was along the lines of setting into a deep stance for power and hitting each one with a right cross. Sounds alot like a traditional kata to me.

 

[MattJ]

He was aiming his derision at me, not TOD. Thanks, tho.

That is correct, although I did not threaten anyone. And I was merely responding in kind to the "derision" FC aimed at me here:

But if your description of what kata is, is an accurate statement of what you honestly believe it to be, then you do not understand it.

 

[Flying Crane]

That is correct, although I did not threaten anyone. And I was merely responding in kind to the "derision" FC aimed at me here:

As I said earlier, we were having a discussion.

You made a comment about what kata is, and I went out on a limb and assumed that you meant what you said.

My understanding of kata is that it is much deeper than your description. Given my experiences, it is my observation that you don't understand what kata really is and how it is intended to be used as a training tool.

And I'll say it for the third time: you don't need to like kata. You don't need to train it, and you don't need to teach it. You can certainly develop skills without it. I'm not telling you that you are wrong for not liking kata and for not training it. But given what you said earlier, I am saying that I do not believe you understand it.

 

[MattJ]

I think you misunderstood what I meant. Stances are NOT static, they might be isolated in training to understand what they are for but you are not meant to just stand in them.

I don't think I misunderstood - I disagree, though. You seem to be referring to stances in the course of overall footwork, which is the same thing that I'm talking about.

One of the first things you learn in a good boxing gym is how to stand.

But not to the extent that you see in most MA schools. Stances are shown, then they have you move around with them. At least as much as I've seen.

Why? In boxing, you only have to worry about hands coming at you from the waist up. You don't have an opponent charging you, you don't have a knee coming up into your face when you bend over. Stances in MA's are meant to deal with these other variables.

MMA and Muay Thai do deal with those, and don't spend more than cursory time on stances.

Look at a martial art like Judo. They teach a specific way to stand and a way to counter throws. No Judoka would confuse that you just stand in that stance the whole time. Go to any MMA gym and they will have you stand a certain way to learn how to employ your tools. They take into consideration that you need a slightly wider base than a stand up game alone to help avoid takedowns, they also understand that you need to be slightly more squared up than a regular boxing stance to employ your leg kicks.

Sure, but again, those stances are shown in the context of overall footwork.

They ALL employ stances, it's just that MA's break it down more to understand what each one is for and when to employ it. I do agree, that many people DON'T learn to be fluid and solid in their footwork and tend to stand in place (much like a newbie to boxing).

Fair enough.

The other consideration is MA's are designed for a civilian self-defense scenario. The assault is happening so you don't have to worry about closing the distance and jockeying for position in and out of range as you do in sparring or a match. Both combatants are right on top of each other and you need stability alot more than mobility.

Sure, I agree with that, although I think that clinch training is overall more effective than stance training, since you have to take into account the opponent pulling and pushing the upper body, etc. I certainly think there is a time and place for pure isolation training, like stance work in kenpo, but I believe it should be much less than more active work.

 

[MattJ]

As I said earlier, we were having a discussion.

So, it's a 'discussion' when you make an insulting assumption about me, but it's 'derision' when I do it back to you. Got it.

You made a comment about what kata is, and I went out on a limb and assumed that you meant what you said.

My understanding of kata is that it is much deeper than your description.

My understanding that kata is a waste of time comes from my experiences, which have equal merit with yours.

Given my experiences, it is my observation that you don't understand what kata really is and how it is intended to be used as a training tool.

So, I can make the same observations re: your comments on sparring and bagwork, yes?

But given what you said earlier, I am saying that I do not believe you understand it.

*sound of buzzer*

See, it would be OK for you to say, "I disagree with that", or "I think kata is great because XYZ" (as other here have done). But you are simply trying to character assassinate me because you feel insulted about my opinion.

 

[Flying Crane]

So, it's a 'discussion' when you make an insulting assumption about me, but it's 'derision' when I do it back to you. Got it.

I think you need to get a thicker skin. I wasn't throwing insults at you. Why do you read what I say as an insult?

My understanding that kata is a waste of time comes from my experiences, which have equal merit with yours.

you have experiences from which you draw conclusions. You had not commented on your experience, rather you commented on what kata is. You gave a description. Here it is:

It's required for kata because that's what kata is - a bunch of stances and strikes strung together in a certain order.

If this is the sum total of what you feel kata is, then your description shows an incomplete understanding. I pointed that out. If you want to refine your kata description, then do so.

So, I can make the same observations re: your comments on sparring and bagwork, yes?

I'm here for discussion. Say what you want. I don't believe I've said much about bag work, nor sparring, other than that I don't believe they are good methods for building stances and rooting. To think so puts the cart before the horse. Rather, if your they are not well developed prior, then bag work and sparring can cause them to deteriorate even more. It's a bit like building a house without a foundation, and expecting the foundation to appear somehow once the house is finished.

If you want to comment on that, if you want to disagree and explain where I'm mistaken, go ahead. this is a discussion forum, after all. I won't be insulted if you tell me I'm wrong.

 

[MattJ]

I think you need to get a thicker skin. I wasn't throwing insults at you. Why do you read what I say as an insult?

I was assuming, since you mentioned my "derision" in reply to you. "Derision" is an insult, yes? You must have felt insulted, and replied emotionally. BTW, you seem to be the only here personally insulted by my opinion on kata. Although I am awaiting response from ToD, to be certain.

If this is the sum total of what you feel kata is, then your description shows an incomplete understanding. I pointed that out. If you want to refine your kata description, then do so.

I don't recall saying that was my "sum total understanding" - that was your term. If you can point out where I mentioned that, then do so.

However, my description is mechanically accurate, which was the context in which I used it in my original response when asked about stance training.

I'm here for discussion. Say what you want. I don't believe I've said much about bag work, nor sparring, other than that I don't believe they are good methods for building stances and rooting. To think so puts the cart before the horse. Rather, if your they are not well developed prior, then bag work and sparring can cause them to deteriorate even more. It's a bit like building a house without a foundation, and expecting the foundation to appear somehow once the house is finished.

I don't agree that is putting the cart before the horse - they are two entirely separate things. How does kata prepare one for striking something? One could do umpteen strikes in the air, and still have poor alignment when finally hitting something like a bag or a person in sparring. Neither does kata "develop" the ability to root - that comes from resistance.

If you want to comment on that, if you want to disagree and explain where I'm mistaken, go ahead. this is a discussion forum, after all. I won't be insulted if you tell me I'm wrong.

Again, please grow a thicker skin. I am not here to tell anyone that they are "wrong". I am merely offering my opinion - without insulting anyone first.

 

[Flying Crane]

I was assuming, since you mentioned my "derision" in reply to you. "Derision" is an insult, yes? You must have felt insulted, and replied emotionally. BTW, you seem to be the only here personally insulted by my opinion on kata. Although I am awaiting response from ToD, to be certain.

Well, trying to play the rank and time card looked to me like a deliberate attempt at a slight. Maybe you didn't intend it that way, but it looked that way. I wasn't insulted because I didn't care, but I think the other poster saw it as derision and perhaps inappropriate and unnecessary. He also thought you were aiming it at TOD. I just clarified that point.

I've read your profile. According to that, I've been training for about a decade longer than you. You don't list your rank, but I wouldn't be surprised if you are ranked higher than me. Many people are, including many who have trained for less time than me. Does that mean you are better? Does that mean I am better? I don't know, and really don't care. I don't think the time and rank are relevant to this discussion because it doesn't establish anything that matters to the discussion.

I don't recall saying that was my "sum total understanding" - that was your term. If you can point out where I mentioned that, then do so.

alrighty, finally you say so. Flesh it out, it adds to the discussion.

However, my description is mechanically accurate, which was the context in which I used it in my original response when asked about stance training.

that's where I disagree. Your description is, in my experience, only mechanically accurate on a superficial level. I don't think it hits the real notion of what kata is. That's why I don't feel you understand kata. If you've got something to add about that, then please do so. Add to the discussion. But kata was not my intended topic of discussion here. It just came up into the picture.

I don't agree that is putting the cart before the horse - they are two entirely separate things. How does kata prepare one for striking something? One could do umpteen strikes in the air, and still have poor alignment when finally hitting something like a bag or a person in sparring. Neither does kata "develop" the ability to root - that comes from resistance.

again, kata was not my intended topic of discussion. But I will say that, in my training, kata does all these things. That doesn't discount the other things, like sparring and bagwork. Those are part of the picture, they all can reinforce the other when used properly together. But kata, when understood thoroughly and trained properly, does all that you mention above.

 

[Touch Of Death]

I was assuming, since you mentioned my "derision" in reply to you. "Derision" is an insult, yes? You must have felt insulted, and replied emotionally. BTW, you seem to be the only here personally insulted by my opinion on kata. Although I am awaiting response from ToD, to be certain.



I don't recall saying that was my "sum total understanding" - that was your term. If you can point out where I mentioned that, then do so.

However, my description is mechanically accurate, which was the context in which I used it in my original response when asked about stance training.



I don't agree that is putting the cart before the horse - they are two entirely separate things. How does kata prepare one for striking something? One could do umpteen strikes in the air, and still have poor alignment when finally hitting something like a bag or a person in sparring. Neither does kata "develop" the ability to root - that comes from resistance.



Again, please grow a thicker skin. I am not here to tell anyone that they are "wrong". I am merely offering my opinion - without insulting anyone first.

You see, I have spent a good part of the day, and on unauthorized breaks at work last night, trying to perfect my step throughs, using Kata; so, I guess I'm saying I am always doing some kind of Kata at some point during any given day; so, I just am not seeing your point at all; in fact, I kinda feel sorry for you.
Sean

 

[MattJ]

FC -

Well, trying to play the rank and time card looked to me like a deliberate attempt at a slight. Maybe you didn't intend it that way, but it looked that way. I wasn't insulted because I didn't care, but I think the other poster saw it as derision and perhaps inappropriate and unnecessary. He also thought you were aiming it at TOD. I just clarified that point.

I've read your profile. According to that, I've been training for about a decade longer than you. You don't list your rank, but I wouldn't be surprised if you are ranked higher than me. Many people are, including many who have trained for less time than me. Does that mean you are better? Does that mean I am better? I don't know, and really don't care. I don't think the time and rank are relevant to this discussion because it doesn't establish anything that matters to the discussion.

I doubt that you have been training 10 years longer than I have. The time stated in my profile was for EPAK only. And you're right, perhaps it's no more relevant than you trying to judge my kata knowledge over the internet from one statement you took out of context.

alrighty, finally you say so. Flesh it out, it adds to the discussion.

What kind of strawman is this?

that's where I disagree. Your description is, in my experience, only mechanically accurate on a superficial level. I don't think it hits the real notion of what kata is. That's why I don't feel you understand kata. If you've got something to add about that, then please do so. Add to the discussion. But kata was not my intended topic of discussion here. It just came up into the picture.

I agree it's not the topic of discussion, but remember that I was only responding because YOU brought it up. Remember? -

I don't think people necessarily need to stand in a horse stance for a half hour or something, altho this does help to build strength and learn to relax and settle into the stance properly. But when executing technique and kata, the teacher needs to harp on proper stances within the execution. Students get lazy or sloppy and stances suffer. Doing that kata? fine, get the stances right when you are doing it. Delayed Sword? Your stance was off, do it over. and again. and again...

If you feel it's off topic (which I did mention before, even about stances), feel free to change the subject. I did not mention it first.

But kata, when understood thoroughly and trained properly, does all that you mention above.

Kata alone cannot work timing, or distancing, or resistance, and to suggest otherwise is specious at best. There are things that people can get out of kata, but those are not elements that one can. I never said kata was *useless* (implying that there is nothing one can gain); I said it was a *waste of time*, implying there are other things I think would be more useful to work on.

ToD -

so, I just am not seeing your point at all; in fact, I kinda feel sorry for you.

I guess that makes two of us; I don't understand your point, either. I feel sorry for you that you feel sorry for me. I am doing just fine.

 

[Flying Crane]

FC -



I doubt that you have been training 10 years longer than I have. The time stated in my profile was for EPAK only.

alrighty then, I guess you know best. Again, I really really don't care, as was my point in my earlier comments. People on this forum generally don't put much stock into things like rank, which was the other half of this point that you raised. What matters a lot more is how you can contribute to the discussion. Add something to it, carry the discussion to a deeper level and we all can benefit. I can't believe I've gotten into this pissing match with you.

And you're right, perhaps it's no more relevant than you trying to judge my kata knowledge over the internet from one statement you took out of context.

look, if you told me that a circle is a shape with four straight sides and four 90 degree angles, I know that you do not understand what a circle is. No amount of experience is going to change that fact.

I've invited you to show me where I'm wrong, convince me you understand kata. You have not done so. I don't know why. You can't? You don't want to? You are just angry at me and don't want to look for a way to have a beneficial discussion? I dunno. I don't much care at this point.

I agree it's not the topic of discussion, but remember that I was only responding because YOU brought it up. Remember? -

I brought up kata as an example of where one can work on proper stance development. I still believe that stances are an important part of the foundation of any martial art, including kenpo. Granted, stances are different in different systems, and the approach to training them can be different, but they are still extremely important. That's my position on stances.

Kata alone cannot work timing, or distancing, or resistance, and to suggest otherwise is specious at best. There are things that people can get out of kata, but those are not elements that one can. I never said kata was *useless* (implying that there is nothing one can gain); I said it was a *waste of time*, implying there are other things I think would be more useful to work on.

I never said kata alone was the answer to everything. Look at my last post, I said things like bagwork and sparring have their place in the big picture, along with kata. But your comments here reinforce my feeling that you don't really understand kata.

For the fourth time, it's really OK that you don't like and don't train kata. I don't care. But I don't believe you understand kata. I guess that does make it a *waste of time* for you. But not for someone who understands it.

Seems to me you've decided that you are gonna be offended by everything I say here. I guess you and I just cannot have a discussion, so I won't try any longer, and I don't expect you to either. It's not worth the energy to sit and argue on the internet like this. I was actually prepared to let this go a couple pages back. It's often impossible to adequately describe and discuss things on the internet, when they really require a hands-on experience to get the real message thru. I let myself get sucked back into it because I thought I might be able to clarify some points, but either I've failed to do so, or you don't want to see it. I don't care which it is at this point.

 

[Touch Of Death]

FC -



I doubt that you have been training 10 years longer than I have. The time stated in my profile was for EPAK only. And you're right, perhaps it's no more relevant than you trying to judge my kata knowledge over the internet from one statement you took out of context.



What kind of strawman is this?



I agree it's not the topic of discussion, but remember that I was only responding because YOU brought it up. Remember? -



If you feel it's off topic (which I did mention before, even about stances), feel free to change the subject. I did not mention it first.



Kata alone cannot work timing, or distancing, or resistance, and to suggest otherwise is specious at best. There are things that people can get out of kata, but those are not elements that one can. I never said kata was *useless* (implying that there is nothing one can gain); I said it was a *waste of time*, implying there are other things I think would be more useful to work on.

ToD -



I guess that makes two of us; I don't understand your point, either. I feel sorry for you that you feel sorry for me. I am doing just fine.

That's funny, Short Form One is supposed to teach us the timing of blocking out of a cover, but forms don't help with timing.?
Sean

 

[MattJ]

look, if you told me that a circle is a shape with four straight sides and four 90 degree angles, I know that you do not understand what a circle is. No amount of experience is going to change that fact.

Please tell me how my mechanical description of kata is inaccurate.

I've invited you to show me where I'm wrong, convince me you understand kata. You have not done so. I don't know why. You can't? You don't want to? You are just angry at me and don't want to look for a way to have a beneficial discussion? I dunno. I don't much care at this point.

I am not burdened by having to prove your description of kata - which you have not made, BTW. That I do not like kata does not mean that I don't understand it. For instance, you told me in the last post that kata can teach all the things I said it can't. Please explain how it can show distancing and timing and resistance. Show me that I'm wrong.

I brought up kata as an example of where one can work on proper stance development. I still believe that stances are an important part of the foundation of any martial art, including kenpo. Granted, stances are different in different systems, and the approach to training them can be different, but they are still extremely important. That's my position on stances.

Fair enough.

Seems to me you've decided that you are gonna be offended by everything I say here.

Surprisingly, I do get offended when people make baseless, insulting assumptions about me.

I guess you and I just cannot have a discussion, so I won't try any longer, and I don't expect you to either. It's not worth the energy to sit and argue on the internet like this. I was actually prepared to let this go a couple pages back. It's often impossible to adequately describe and discuss things on the internet, when they really require a hands-on experience to get the real message thru. I let myself get sucked back into it because I thought I might be able to clarify some points, but either I've failed to do so, or you don't want to see it. I don't care which it is at this point.

I was prepared to have a discussion without you insulting me. We still can, as far as I am concerned. I don't hold grudges.

 

[MattJ]

That's funny, Short Form One is supposed to teach us the timing of blocking out of a cover, but forms don't help with timing.?
Sean

What timing is that showing, though? Not timing relative to someone actually hitting you, which is what I was talking about. That is the only important timing, IMHO. Kata cannot simulate that.

 

[Touch Of Death]

What timing is that showing, though? Not timing relative to someone actually hitting you, which is what I was talking about. That is the only important timing, IMHO. Kata cannot simulate that.

Again Kata is about you and how you move. Did you know there are seven different types of speed? Before we start a big discussion about timing, what is your defenition of timing?
Sean

 

[Flying Crane]

Please tell me how my mechanical description of kata is inaccurate.

alright, I'll come back to the table again. Look, honestly I don't intend any insult. Maybe my initial comment about you not understanding kata was more blunt than it needed to be. I might have worded that differently, so point taken.

I don't feel your description is necesarily inaccurate, so much as it doesn't really hit the depth of what kata has to offer. Yes, kata is a series of movements, stepping, stances, defensive, offensive movements, etc. On a superficial level that is what kata is, a collection of techniques strung together.

But it goes deeper than that, and it is more than just a way to catalog techniques. It's also a way to drill the fundamentals of the system within that string of movements. It develops the base and foundation for each technique, and it is challenging because when moving from one technique to another, it is easy to get sloppy with the foundation. People often get too excited about moving quickly, speeding thru the kata, and they let their foundation fall apart. This is why, in my earlier posts from a couple pages back, I say you can look all over Youtube and see examples of poor kata, particularly in kenpo. These guys have these blindingly fast hands, but their stances and footwork (related issues) is sloppy and unrooted.

I don't train exclusively kenpo. I also train in the Chinese arts. In that training, I've got some teachers who really harp on stances and basics, and nit-pick these details in the forms. Before I trained with these folks, I admit, I used to just fly thru my forms, pay lipservice to the importance of stances and basics and getting the forms *right*, but in hindsight I wasn't living up to what I was saying. Since I've been working with these folks, I've given a lot more attention to these basics, both as stand-alone concepts, and within the forms, and my technique has improved tremendously. We have a specific way of generating power in our strikes, it's fairly different from kenpo. It's not worth going into the details because it's tough to describe in words without showing. But I'll say that when my stances improved, my power increased noticeably. And I can see the difference when I hit the bag. My rooting is more solid, and it gives me the base to deliver the goods with more authority. Before this, my rooting would sometimes slip, and I could tell when I hit the bag that my power would bleed off. Root the stance, build the foundation, deliver a frighteningly powerful strike.

Within the forms, we pay attention to every step and make sure our foundation is strong, and the technique is delivered strongly. My sigung says, the form itself doesn't matter. What matters is every single movement within the form. If those movements are done correctly, you have good technique, and the form is good. If those individual moves are not done correctly, you can blaze thru the form but it's all hollow, no foundation, poor technique, only good for exercise. No martial power.

I feel that a lot of people sort of look at kata on a superficial level as just a bunch of techniques, or, worse yet, a required exercise in memorization for the next belt test. Youtube examples often support my feelings on this. But when you approach kata in the right way, with the appropriate attention to every detail along the way, it builds outstanding fundamentals and powerful technique, which can then be further honed on the heavybag and within a resistance/partner training exercise such as sparring. But, in my opinion, that foundation work needs to be done first, before jumping into sparring and the heavy bag. If you don't understand your foundation first, these other exercises will just make it fall apart. Then it just becomes sloppy brawling, and if one is happy with that, there is no need to study a more sophisticated method like kenpo.

I am not burdened by having to prove your description of kata - which you have not made, BTW. That I do not like kata does not mean that I don't understand it. For instance, you told me in the last post that kata can teach all the things I said it can't. Please explain how it can show distancing and timing and resistance. Show me that I'm wrong.

see above.

Fair enough.

thx.

I was prepared to have a discussion without you insulting me. We still can, as far as I am concerned. I don't hold grudges.

I'll keep at it for a while.

 

[MattJ]

Again Kata is about you and how you move. Did you know there are seven different types of speed? Before we start a big discussion about timing, what is your defenition of timing?
Sean

I typically only refer to mental, physical and perceptual speed types.

Well, I am not trying to create a scientific defition of timing here. But as I use it in martial terms, I refer to the ability to act first or react for superior effect to an opponent.