Forms/Applications vs. Sparring/Fighting

[KC Elbows]

I've noticed when the topic of forms and fighting comes up, the argument against doing only forms is based on the fact that things are different against resisting opponents with elements like adrenaline/fear creeping into them.

However, I am of the opinion that, these elements aside, one still uses the same techniques/principles as in the forms, and the only difference between specific techniques from the forms and their use in fighting seems to be the emotional element, and forms should technically be performed under the correct emotional intent, as that should be considered part of the form.

So the questions are:

-Theoretically, could a person become a good fighter studying only the form, including angles of attack, footwork, emotional "centeredness"/"intensity", power generation, counters, etc.?

-If not, what prevents adequate simulation of the emotional content of a fight situation to do so?

I'm not looking for any set answer, just different member's views. Here's mine:

-Theoretically yes. Realistically, much, much more difficult.

-Difficult to test the emotions while doing forms, and how do you set up the proper mind frame? Carry poisonous snakes dangerously close to the forms practitioner, so that they must deal with the adrenaline and fear? Randomly poke a spear close to the practitioner without warning, just to try to freak them?(I like this concept. I suspect I'm gonna be one strange sifu)

Keep in mind, by saying "forms", I'm not just saying practicing the sets in their set order, but the pieces and different combinations of the pieces as the practitioner sees fit.

[Braden]

There are many more difference besides emotional content. Unless you are an absolute prodigy, you won't be able to understand what you're supposed to be doing in solo practice without having spent some time going hands-on.

[Knifefighter]

Let's you and I take up the Olympic sport of ski jumping. You practice all your techniques in "forms" in your living room without actually jumping. I, meanwhile, will practice these exact same techniques jumping with skis from a ski jump. Let's see who is better after 6 months of training.

[yenhoi]

-Theoretically, could a person become a good fighter studying only the form, including angles of attack, footwork, emotional "centeredness"/"intensity", power generation, counters, etc.?

-If not, what prevents adequate simulation of the emotional content of a fight situation to do so?


+Theoretically, no. A person cannot become a good fighter by studying only the form. A person can only become a good fighter by fighting. The closest "simulation" of this is sparring.

+The fact that there is not another human attempting to cause harm to you would be the main factor preventing the simulation of the emotional content of a fight.

I think your snake idea is cool, but frankly: bunk. I dont think it would really scare anyone unless for some odd reason they have some inherent fear of snakes. Randomly thrusting a spear at a person is closer, but still far from fighting. I think a better idea would be to build some sort of machine that has multiple moving parts that can all hit and injure the person at different levels, angles, etc. Like a gauntlet or something - you see them in movies all the time.

[Merryprankster]

Theoretically, NO. A person who does forms will become very good at forms. They will NOT become proficient at techniques other than "what they look like."

There are people who throw picture perfect crosses and knees that have next to no power and balance when hitting something solid.

Sparring is the ONLY way...

[Stacey]

drills that lead slowly into sparring is the only way, hey wait, those are forms and two person forms. They teach all the above mentioned things. Then of course, there is sparring.

[KC Elbows]

Yenhoi,
The only person not afraid of a deadly poisonous snake near their face is a snake handler. However, I agree, the idea is bunk, but would deal with the emotional factor, up until all your students quit and called the men in white coats on you.:eek:

The gantlet idea is nice. The wooden army form.

Braden,
If you practice the applications, plus know the angles of attack, etc., then you will know what you are supposed to be doing, which still falls under forms practice. In otherwords, two man practice should do that. Sparring doesn't automatically tell you what the forms are for: usually you figure that out for yourself, or you are taught it, and then you implement it into your fighting/sparring.

Knifefighter,
You're on. I'm practicing right now. Let me know how you're first jump goes.:D


Believe me, I don't learn from form alone, I spar. I just wonder how impossible it really is to become a decent fighter without fighting. I think, after a much longer practice time that was really focussed on understanding the style, one would be better off against most opponents, though I'm not suggesting better than those who spar, but better than those who would attack them.

BTW, Knifefighter, when we do this jump thing, it'll have to be in Frederick, Friday night, there's this little park...

[KC Elbows]

Merryprankster, is sparring the only way to develop balance and power?

[Water Dragon]

Forms= power mechanics, structure, alignment, footwork in an environment free of other stimuli

Sparring= learning to apply the above in a non-cooperative, combative setting

So why not do both?

[Knifefighter]

The park in Frederick, MA, right? The one with the ski jump platform? I believe they have ski jump competitions there every Friday.

[Black Jack]

Theoretically no-way.

To fight and defend yourself you have to get in there and pressure-test your stuff against the living, beyond that it also helps greatly if you are into conditioning, not only the needed impact conditioning used to generate power, heavy bag, posts, dummies, sheilds, pads, but also the important aspect of sheer physical conditioning, as well as that of mental awareness and harnessing a aggressive mindset, itself a aspect which will come out of intense sparring and situational drills.

How can a person expect to be able to defeat a "trained" attacker if you can not even do 50 jumping jacks?

IMHO forms are considered a excerisce tool that fits into a hybrid format of both physical and mental conditioning, not pressure-testing, but one related to working out the muscles and mind together, that and it is also IMHO a guidebook to the tech's found within the flavor of the eastern systems.

Just my thoughts, I am going to be getting back into some form work if I past my second test for the association I am under review for, but this is a minute part of what they do, most of it being severe pressure-testing and serious physical conditioning.

[CrushingFist]

i agree, without experience your forms are not going to make u GOOD, but they will aid.

if you practice forms and techniques without ever sparring, you still might be able to pull some of the techniques off, but still your not going to be GOOD.

one of my sidi's did nothing but forms for maybe 1 year or so, and he actually managed to block a guys hockey stick with his own using one of the techniques from the forms, and then proceeded to block the guys punch, put him in a joint lock, and take him down.
i was actually pretty impressed hahaha but i don't ENCOURAGE ppl to try and fight without atleast having sparring experience, it's not very smart.

but thats also how a some of ppl used to do it in HK too, back in the 60s and 70s, practice forms for maybe 5 or 6 yrs, and then go challenge ppl: hope your forms practice paid off....

[KC Elbows]

Black Jack,
Didn't think of including the fitness thing. Let's assume equal fitness in both the forms and sparring practitioners. Therefore, the fighter and forms guy both can do the same number of jumping jacks.

Also, internal forms have a very important mental content that should match the mental state of the person when fighting. All the good fighters I know look more intense when doing form.

BTW, good luck on your test, I'm sure you'll do great.

Crushing Fist,
That's a great story. I wouldn't recommend it either. To be honest, I'm more a mix guy, I like both forms and sparring, and I like what my sparring does to my forms.
Is that true about the HK guys?

[Black Jack]

Thanks KC:)

Its not a physical test but more like a symbolic/ritualistic second interview that has been done this way for a number of decades in the American Bando community.

If I pass this second test, I passed my first test which is a biography/resume and criminal background check, I go to my third, which will make me a probation member in the assocaition, if I fail I hit the road and thats it.

Thanks for the confidence boost.

[KC Elbows]

Black Jack,
Then let's hope they don't find out about the busload of flight attendants and that sordid "mooning" incident.:eek:

Seriously, I'm sure you'll do fine. Let us know how it goes, and don't let them know you come here, or someone's liable to claim your actually another Ralek alias or something.

[Braden]

"Braden,
If you practice the applications, plus know the angles of attack, etc., then you will know what you are supposed to be doing, which still falls under forms practice. In otherwords, two man practice should do that. Sparring doesn't automatically tell you what the forms are for: usually you figure that out for yourself, or you are taught it, and then you implement it into your fighting/sparring. "

KC,

If you practice the applications in mid-air, you're still missing alot other than emotional content. Again, unless you're an absolute prodigy, there's just no way you'll understand how to do it right.

[KC Elbows]

Braden,
Applications practice should take care of the "hitting thin air" thing. Then its just the mental remaining.

I hope you guys aren't getting too annoyed with my nit-picking. I'm trying to narrow the list of things that only sparring and fighting can provide for two reasons:

-As I'm always thinking about how I will someday teach, I wanted to approach the forms/sparring thing from as informed an angle as possible, and...

-As I am presently unable to spar due to health reasons, I am trying to define exactly what in sparring I cannot replace, and what I can continue to train in other ways, all the while killing some time on a completely slow work day.

[Braden]

Well, is our theoretical guy only training the form, or is he doing two-man hands-on work too? You specifically said only doing the form, so that's what I replied to. If he's doing two-man hands-on work, then he's doing more than just the form. All sparring is, is a certain kind of hands-on two-man work.

[Braden]

I mean, the next step is I would say, well you've got to do those single movement applications against someone who's really resisting. And you'd go - oh yeah, of course! And then I'd say, we'll you still won't learn about flow. And you'd say - well, you'd do them in a flow drill!

So now we have the situation where our theoretical person is immersed in a seamless flow drill, trying to pull of techniques, against an honestly resisting opponent, which presumably means he's going to get hit... uh... sounds like the picture your painting is someone sparring.

[Mutant]

No it wouldnt work well, forms are just a small part of the equation that, imho, are way over emphasized.

I think you could build a good fighter w/o making him/her learn any forms, but couldnt build a good fighter with just forms. If the goal is fighting or even real defense, long, time consuming forms should not be the main emphasis in training. Maybe in certain situations they might defend themselves better than w/ no MA training, but against a trained fighter they would get creamed.

By forms, I mean in the stereotypical sense of stringed together reutines, not 'correct form' which is important and can be learned by breakdown, repetition and analysis like in a boxing gym.
All forms w/ no real fighting is like a glass albatross, a delicate structure that may appear beautiful and substancial, but when tested under stress, will shatter and come crashing down.

[KC Elbows]

In my view, applications practice IS forms practice, only its a two man form made up of one move(or more if you link moves together). That is what was meant by the title "Forms/applications vs. Sparring/Fighting". By the same token, I don't think application training is sparring, as there is no question what is going to be the attack, defense, etc.

If memory serves me correctly, each move is, technically, form. Anyway, our theoretical practitioner is doing forms, both solo and two-man.

EDIT:

OK, I guess my semantics are getting in the way. When I say forms, I'm talking the individual moves, the whole form(to remember the system/flow), but mostly the moves and chains of moves that that individual is best suited to. And Braden, ultimately, I suppose it would lead naturally to sparring, but I'm just trying to see what everyone isolates as the things that ONLY sparring can provide.

[Braden]

Heh. Allright then. We'll do it the long way: Is his partner resisting?

[KC Elbows]

Once the practitioner understands the tech well enough to do it on a non-resisting opponent, yes.

[Braden]

Ok, then what about flow: Will you encorporate your "two person resisting form practice" into a flow drill?

[KC Elbows]

No, because I don't think it would be possible. All the attacker would have to do is step somewhere other than the preplanned route, and it would be over. That would be sparring, and we're assuming that the practitioner is taking the slow route to proficiency, whether because of personal ethics, injury, what have you.

"two person resisting form practice":D

Sneaky b@st@rd!

[Braden]

Ok, then again, like I said originally, there's so much you'll never figure out. Try doing single movement applications, even linked together, for a while. And then try to incorporate those exact same techniques into something like push hands (nevermind full contact sparring) - you'll find they need alot of changing if you want them to work. In fact, you'll find that you finally understand what you were supposed to be doing solo in the first place.

[Braden]

I mean, fighting someone is NOT a series of application interactions. Knowing four punches, two kicks, and six grappling techniques perfectly is great, but it's not fighting. HOW you use that knowledge is far, far more important than what knowledge you have. And that 'most important' bit is exactly what you're proposing you neglect. In analogy, it would be like teaching a guitarist to play every note on his instrument perfectly, but never teaching them about melody, harmony, or rythm - never teaching them how to put the notes together! How do you think a song written by such a person is going to sound? Pretty bad. And moreover, do you really think that's the hard part about playing a guitar? No way, in fact, it's pretty easy. Put your finger here, pluck the string - tada, a perfect note. It's the same with fighting. It's really easy to hit someone, kick someone, or do some grappling move. The tough part is all the little permutations that come up when two guys get thrown at each other. That's what your training should focus on.

[KC Elbows]

OK, I agree.

However, what if you had a student, someone really promising, absolutely LOVES kung fu, the purity of it, loves keeping it real as far as the applications in the forms, the sparring, all that stuff. Then, he takes a bad hit, retinal damage or some such thing, if he takes another one, he's blind, no apparent chance of fixing the problem. This happens not far into his sparring training, before he gets much of the benefits of it. He wants to continue his training, but can't spar, period. However, he wants it to be real kung fu, wants to be able to know he can defend himself.

Can you, as the teacher, make him an adequate fighter(and how), or do you tell him its over, he'll be a flower fist practitioner and no more?

(I know, pretty cheeky what if, either Braden counters his previous argument, or he tells the half-way-to-blind-guy to take a hike. I'm always willing to take the low road;) )

Here, fairer question: how would you train the injured go so that, IF he were someday in physical condition to spar, he could benefit from the previous training in a substantial way?

[KC Elbows]

Braden, I'm not proposing anyone neglect sparring, I didn't mean to sound like that. If someone can spar, and is ready to, they should, we're in total agreement there. Much quicker path. I'm just saying that without sparring, some gains are still made.

[red_fists]

Braden.

I got some questions after reading through the thread.
1.) Forms training = learning technique and it's possible application.
2.) Sparring = learning to apply the technique to a resisting Opponent.
Now if I got a Guy that does mostly sparring, when is he learning techniques and their application??

How will his punches and kicks be corrected/perfected in a mostly sparring only environment??

If a Guy learns mostly via sparring, why do we need a MA System and a Teacher as the experience from sparring would be valued higher??

Nope, you need both in order to be good.

P.S.: Seen how Ski-jumpers train. they don't spend their full time on the Ramp.
Most of the time they jump of a wee little ramp(maybe a foot or two), to learn the timing when to jump of it.
And they are doing that over and over under supervision of a trainer.

Seen how skiers are trained for high speed runs. They strap them to the roof of a Car and drive them down the road. In Summer without any snow.

[KC Elbows]

I don't think Braden is arguing fighting fighting OVER forms, just the importance of sparring.

[SifuAbel]

Originally posted by KC Elbows

So the questions are:

-Theoretically, could a person become a good fighter studying only the form, including angles of attack, footwork, emotional "centeredness"/"intensity", power generation, counters, etc.?
-If not, what prevents adequate simulation of the emotional content of a fight situation to do so?


No, a form is a tool for training just like sparring is. Along with the physical benefits, form work, applications breakdown and such work helps create muscle memory that will be used later in live practice, . It should be both, not either / or.
Sparring is needed to learn contact, sensitivity, timing; and the all important, learning how to take a shot or two and give back. Those thinking about their technique in sparring will not be able to apply it. Those that have commited such movents to muscle memory, through practice, are not trying apply a technique, more they are reacting to the stimulus at hand and flowing with it in an automatic fashion. The muscle memory is faster at choosing a proper shape to respond to the stimulus.

[red_fists]

Hi KC.

I understand that.

My point being that if the focus is too heavy on either sparring or Form training the practicioners skill and fighting ability will suffer.

Too many Kwoon and styles these days specialise either on one or the other.
And with that comes a mindset that either sparring or form training is a waste of time.

Often I think this is more of a fault of the Instructor who simply gives into his own personal preference.

Anyhuh, not here to argue with him, just want to see his reply to my questions.

[Mutant]

Just going straight into sparring without other training would not work well either. So we do need 'form' and accuracy.
It after you drill and aquire the basic tools, you need to use simulations to learn things like timing, distance and seeing what all this crazy stuff is used for.
So there are different levels of simulation. The better and more realistic the simulation, the better chance you have of making it all work for you in a real fight.
Solo forms is a low level, poor simulation. Using realistic visualization during these can actually be decent training excercise, but only if you know what to realistically visualize, which you can't really do unless you have already rigorously drilled higher forms of simulation and sparring. This is the big dilema; schools which teach only or mostly forms are attempting to simulate or mentally replicate situations that the students have no real knowlege or way of truely visualizing, so it becomes the realm of pure fantasy.
Two man form sets are much better than solo. Two man drills such as push hands or chi sao are much better yet, but are still not sparring. Light contiuous sparring is a step more realistic than the drills....and then the best simulations that are available to us are different types of full-contact fighting. There is a great gap between this type of sparring and forms. I don't know how one could realistically bridge this gap of training and skill with just the low-level simulation offered by forms practice. Maybe in the future, there could be a kind of holodex v.r. simulator, but even that would lack many of the elements of having some someone really putting the hurt on you.

[PhoenixPangaryk]

"The muscle memory is faster at choosing a proper shape to respond to the stimulus."



Agreed
Phoenix

[red_fists]

Mutant.

That is one of the reasons why in Tai Chi (as an example) we got different training methods.

I give here the traditional method:
1.) Posture/technique training2.) Combining posture to build forms training(up to the full set)
Note:
Those 2 steps are now often reversed.
3) Tui Shou (Push Hands)
4.) San Shou (Sparring Hands)
5.) Free sparring

But the just because we started on sparring doesn't mean that we drop the forms & posture training.

But rather are supposed to gain understanding in sparring and than re-apply this in our Forms/posture training to make our techniques better and stronger.

So it is a continious circle of all those training methods interacting.

Atleast that is how I see it.

[Braden]

red_fists:

"Forms training = learning technique and it's possible application."

I don't believe that's the purpose of forms training. What are you doing when doing a form? Uh... kind of moving your body. So what should you be training? Moving your body! That's what forms are for. In some cases, styles are 'over-engineered' to the point where the movements in the forms are related to the movements of applications. But that is icing on the cake, and shouldn't confuse you into thinking you learn applications from forms. Or that's how I look at it anyway.

KC - You're right, I'm not advocating a hardcore sparring approach. In some ways I was playing devil's advocate for you. :) I've got my own ideas on 'how things should work', even though I'm a beginner - it's the academic in me. But I'm too busy with dinner now to give it an adequate reply (re: the scenario with the retina injuried fellow).

[KC Elbows]

Great discussion, everyone.

I've got to get going, but I'd just like to say that I agree with a huge amount of what you all have been saying. And Braden, I totally agree with what you've said, you said it better than I could have. It all leads to sparring, at some level, and without sparring, one has a really long road ahead of them, and most who take that road fall into the trap of thinking that doing form is enough. I still think that one who was unable to spar but practiced with intent and really thought deeply about their style could make gains, but it would be very slow going, and I wouldn't recommend they go to UFC or anything.

Mostly, this topic was motivated by my present inability to spar, and me thinking about how I will practice until I can spar again, and what I would do if I had a student in my present predicament(nothing dire, just not the time to spar). Also, some of the other threads(Ryu's Fight thread and the thread titled "Why won't anyone fight me?") got me thinking about alternate methods of training and being flexible in teaching.

So goodnight, have a good dinner(Braden), and Mr. Retinal Damage will have to wait another day(although we can assume Mr. Retinal Damage is cross-training, and any other members who want to take on this special needs student can give him a crack...well, not literally, I mean, he's practically blind as it is:D )

[red_fists]

Originally posted by Braden
red_fists:

"Forms training = learning technique and it's possible application."

I don't believe that's the purpose of forms training. What are you doing when doing a form? Uh... kind of moving your body. So what should you be training?

Yes, that is one aspect of Form training.

I normally do each Form a few times, while concentrating on different aspects of the Form (Balance, Stepping, Breathing, etc.)

The last one I concentrate on is "Intent", this is where I visualise the opponent/s and perform the moves and attacks against an imaginary Opponent.

By visualising Opponents of different size, build I can now readjust to fit this imaginary Opponent.
Yes, not as good as Push Hands or Sparring, but better than nothing when I got no partner to work with.

My Sifu shows us plenty of application when we learn the Postures, as this will be building block for the fighting techniques.
Just giving you my viewpoint, I have met a few people that shared your view .

[KC Elbows]

D@mnit, Braden, I thought I was devil's advocate!!

[Black Jack]

Red Fist,

The thought that a person needs to have both forms and sparring to be a good fighter is IMHO very off track, to be honest you don't need either, there are a lot of tough crackers out in the world that don't do squat, they are just made for it.

Beyond that tidbit, there are many, many fighting systems/methodologies that do not use what you would call solo forms, arts like Boxing, Sub Wrestling, Muay Thai, Lathewae, Sambo, BJJ, Savate, hundreds of Kali systems, Panatuken, RMCAT, Naban, JKD, Catch as Catch Can, Shooto, Krav Maga, Jujitsu, and so forth.

They can all produce very effective people who are capable of defending themselves, without you guessed it, no forms, just hard training.

As SifuAbel stated, forms are just a tool, same as sparring, but the difference IMHO is that you can not do away with the sparring but you can do away with the forms.

Here is the deal though, since forms is a tool, it will benefit you, to the degree of the benefit, well that is up to each player and how they input that into there training when compared to everything else they do.

My advice, just do both, but make the contact work and physical conditioning your biggest piece of the pie, forms do have there place though, just not for everybody.

[red_fists]

Black Jack.

The argument off "Kata vs Waza" based Forms is as old as the moon itself.

Even if you train individual Skills, you still at some time need to combine them so that you can learn the transitions & flow between them.
Now if I do "Part Horse Mane(R)" & "Part Horse Mane(L)" alternating or if I do a sequence of 50+ movements/stances linked together it becomes "Form training".

A Form can be as little or as many moves as you want.

It is simply a way to train the techniques in a flowing continous method.

In japanese Kata translates to something like: "Linked movement training"
And thus even 2 moves done together are a Form.

Apart from that I agree with most of your Post.
P.S.: Some of the Arts you mentioned have Form/Kuen/kata training.

[Black Jack]

I don't really get your point but the difference between a form and something that is two techs or more put together as in shadow boxing is done via freeform, everchanging, not stuck in a routine.

Believe in what you wish, each to his own training, but I will never agree that a person can not become a good fighter without a forms, the facts show this is not so.

P.S. what arts above use solo form training????????

[red_fists]

P.S. what arts above use solo form training????????

Did I say SOLO form training only.

Not that I remember, many styles got 2 man Form training.

Let see Boxing comes to mind, or what do you call training a combination(Form) on a punch bag or similar.

Personally, I think you are too fixed on terms and phrases.

[Black Jack]

Thats ok, I personally don't think you know what your talking about.:D

Boxing does not have forms, it seems to me that the term called forms is always changeable depending on what CMA guy you are talking to, to showcase his certain agenda, boxing has different drills to increase ones attributes, speed drills-speed bag, impact drills-heavy bag, rythem drills-shadowboxing, endurance drills-round work, footwork drills-jumping rope and of course sparring.

Where do you see a boxer doing a form as seen in CMA's, a pre-set form from start to finish, a form which has been handed down from one lineage holder to another????

You don't, they do drills, they do bag work, they do endurance work, they condition, they spar.

You are making up logic to fit your own arguement.

Plus what other styles up above, since boxing has no forms, and sense we are using the CMA terminology of forms, what else above has forms????

[red_fists]

Black Jack.

Here is the deal.

You create your own MA and than beat all the other MA as you seem to know better than the rest.

No Forms, no Chi, no Kata, no kuen, no Qi-gong.

Some other people already told me that you are very closed minded, and they have met you in Personn.

P.S.: Can you say "ignore list", that is where your name is going on.

[Black Jack]

He Fi Fo Fum...who smells a troll.

Number 1: You are a bonafid *******.

Number 2: Ask anybody here who has been around for awhile, I have never, ever, made up my own martial art style, you are a complete wackjob, a crybaby who gets mad when he does not get his own way, that my small minded friend is the real deal.

Number 3: I have met no one here, zero, nobody, zlich, I have had very friendly e-mail converstations with Monkey-Slap, Royal Dragon and I believe maybe Water Dragon, as well as educated phone converstations with Royal on two occasions.

Number 4: I could care less what anybody on the internet says about me, its the internet, everything here should be taken with a grain of salt.

Number 5: You are a bonafid lair.

G

[Braden]

red_fists: I don't see how Black Jack is being closed minded. All he's saying is that there's plenty of people who are good fighters who have never done forms. That's pretty obvious to anyone. And he's saying boxers don't do forms. They don't. The distinction he's drawing between shadowing and form work is that the former is a set of very short hand techniques combined freeform in real time to free variations in footwork, while the later is completely standardized.

[red_fists]

Braden.

"standardized" is not true.

How many Tai chi Forms are there??
How many Kara-Te Kata are there??

Some of those don't even look alike, neither are the same length, same emphasis.

Anybody can make up a form, as it was used as a catalogue of available techniques to let an illiterate teacher transmit to an illiterate Student.

The Form is not the set of "moves" taught to the student, but a way of training to show how multiple movements can interact and follow each other.

Now, how does that differ from a boxing combination or a takedown/submission hold combination in Judo.

Form training is not just solo, there are also 2-man and 2 man Weapon forms.
Form training extends directly into Tui shou, san shou and sparring.
Most good schools at one stage require the student to make up their own forms and than explain why and how they have choosen that Form. This goes into application, follow-ups, etc.
Forms go way beyond Solo practice and just learning the moves.

But I guess no convincing People, that made up their minds that Form training has no longer a use in Ma.

Agreed, Forms are less fun than hitting people, but don't ditch them because of that. They are usefull and do teach people how to fight, but the refinement comes in sparring.

Funnily enough I see the same discussion and arguments on ALL the Boards dealing with any kind of MA.

[red_fists]

Final Words on this Thread.

Form training ALONE will not make a good Fighter, neither will too much sparring as you tend to pick up bad habits.

But Forms trained CORRECTLY will go a long way towards giving you a set of skills you can use in a fight.

[Braden]

"'standardized' is not true."

Oh come on. You know what I meant. I didn't see the need to spend an entire paragraph explaining it, since it's plainly obvious. You've got to be trolling if you claim there's no difference between forms and shadowboxing.

"But I guess no convincing People, that made up their minds that Form training has no longer a use in Ma."

There's no need to be such a reactionary. No one ever said that.

[Black Jack]

Braden,

Boy he has me pegged;)

If you go back through this thread you will see where I state that formwork has a place, that is if the person wants it to have a place, it has benefits, I stated that it does.

The other side of the coin as you well know is that forms are not needed, does that mean that forms are not good training tools for different elements that can be benefical in fighting, of course not, but they are not required to become a good fighter by any means.

How the heck does that come across to some people as I hate forms????

[Braden]

Heh. Don't worry about it man. When the kungfu guys tell you you're a modernized cretin, and the modern guys tell you you're a traditional dreamer - you gotta believe you're doing something right.

[rogue]

Well Black Jack forms can also be used to break you out of self imposed pre-planned ummm? forms! Many times people will work on their favorite moves or techniques that are easy for them and ignore the tough stuff. Now a good coach can cure this or so could forms.

[Chris McKinley]

RE: "When the kungfu guys tell you you're a modernized cretin, and the modern guys tell you you're a traditional dreamer - you gotta believe you're doing something right.".

****, Braden...talk about feeling pegged. I sometimes feel like I've got nothing but enemies in both camps. Gotsta gotsta preach it, brothah!

[KnightSabre]

I did kung fu for 5 years and also got to do my fair share of forms,tiger,power sequence,pole,sword etc.
The thing I found was that the way you use the techs in sparring was different to the way you did them in the form.

In the form the stances were lower,the techniques more flowery.
The reason for this is in comps you want your forms to look good,if you cut the movements short and make the stances higher then it won't look as good.

The problem this poses is now when you spar and use the same tech you got to get out of the habit of doing it like the form,otherwise you movements will be long and flowery and you'll get pummelled.

Take a boxer now,
when he shado boxes,he moves and punches exactly like he will when he spars,dame when he uses the pads or the heavy bags,his form doesn't change.

Thats the problem I have with forms

[KC Elbows]

Knight,
That's not universally true of forms. Much of the forms work I've been doing lately does not stress low stances, and the goal is to make the techniques occupy smaller movements, basically made less flowery. However, it is true of many styles that the form is different at the beginning than the applications(Longfist comes to mind).

Now, boxing is not my forte, though I've done a little, but combos are essentially short forms, and there are some combos that are common, have been handed down from coach to boxer for years(lineage), etc. Mind you, I am not saying that shadowboxing is form, but if you commonly do a jab-jab-hook, that is not spontaneous, it is a much practiced routine, and exactly the same phenomenon that kung fu teachers use: teach a pre-made form or technique, drill it to perfection, then have them use it in a live situation. Don't boxing coaches have you learn the technique before they throw you in the ring?

I think much of the difficulty here is in what defines form work. Using the example of tai chi, doing the base form alone does not constitute substantial forms work. If you also take individual moves from it that will be part of your personal fighting style, and drill them, that's better. If you combine the moves that make up your core into sensible manuevers, that's even better. I could go further, but I just wanted to state that anyone who considers practicing one form in a set way and nothing else is not, in my mind, doing quality forms work at all.

BTW Blackjack, I had no idea that you were such a scoundrel.:D

[apoweyn]

braden's point, i believe, is that forms, while open to reinterpretation, modification, etc. still remain relatively consistent from one performance to another by an individual, within a school, etc. shadowboxing does not necessarily hold to this.

his statement didn't seem more complicated than this.


stuart b.

[KC Elbows]

I was more taking part in the part of the conversation that started with the Red Fist and Black Jack scuffle, and Knight's comments on it. Shadowboxing, to my knowledge, was not brought up by Red Fists. What I read did bring up combos, which are essentially very simple forms that are useful in a large varieties of situations. When it was said that Red Fists called shadowboxing forms, I could not find a case of him saying this. Combos does not equal shadowboxing.

However, I think Red Fists took the argument the wrong way, and got way too personal for such a minor discussion, but that's how forums go sometimes.

And I agree that form get muddy in shadow boxing and sparring, but isn't the point to get good enough to execute the techniques correctly and thus cause the most damage/achieve the ideal position?

In principle, I agree with Knight, but we were discussing form purely from a fighting standpoint, as opposed to forms competition, at which it brings in making things flowery, lower, acrobatics, etc, which is a whole different problem.

[KC Elbows]

Here's the first time shadow boxing is brought up, by Black Jack:

"I don't really get your point but the difference between a form and something that is two techs or more put together as in shadow boxing is done via freeform, everchanging, not stuck in a routine."

However, I think it came from a misunderstanding. Red Fist was meaning combos, whereas Black Jack responds thinking of two techniques pulled off one after another in sparring, but not drilled combos. However, I'd imagine that even Black Jack would agree without too much trouble that boxing and muay thai utilize combos, which are not different to small forms, that are practiced on heavy bags, etc. This in no way invalidates his argument, free sparring is very important.

And Black Jack, its been a long time since I've seen my buddies who practice kali/escrima, but I recall them doing tons of hand and stick patterns. Are these in the kali you are familiar with? If so, what distinguishes them from forms? I could very easily be confusing the the two, as the same people studied both.

[apoweyn]

kc elbows,

i haven't read the whole thread, and haven't got any interest in choosing sides myself. ninety-nine percent of the time, these things are just misunderstandings anyway, not worth the effort we blow on them. like you said, sometimes that happens on forums.

anyway, as always, you make a good point. cheers kc.


stuart b.

p.s. in eskrima, there are several things peripherally related to forms. let me see if i can get the terminology right. i'm sure black jack can bail me out if i flounder a bit.

there's cadena ('chain') which is essentially shadowboxing (random stick movements designed to practice freestyle), sayaw (forms used by some teachers, mine included), and then various patterns (or combinations, to stick with the terminology of this conversation). in my curriculum, there were combinations like 6-count-arco, 12-count-arco, and the like. but by and large, eskrima tends to be predominantly freestyle. at least, in my experience.

[Black Jack]

KC,

Kali, lets use that as a generic term to start, as there are hundreds of FMA based systems and subsystems, does have patterns and yes I bet some could be considered dead patterns but IMHO these are two man flow drills.

Chris may want to jump in here as he has a much deeper kali background than I, but the dos manos drills you see in kali like hubud-lubud or the handbox drill, or the weapon work like sinawali or sumbrada are two person drills that give the user a "base" to develop his free-form flow.

The goal a a flow drill is not to develop a specific set in stone movement in the next generic step of the drill but at its highest level to be able to mutate into the next movement not based on technique but principle, they are like Chi Sau in a way, start with a base striking stucture and then let it evolve from there.

So in that respect I don't think you can compare them to form work as they will change, they leave the standardized format behind, to learn to be free and flow.

Though kali does have some solo movement drills as well, I believe Lameco Kali has patterns such as kadena and the 1-2-3 movements, though Chris can tell you more about that.

Just my thoughts.

P.S. That's good stuff Ap,

Cadena De Mano-Chain Hands-as I have seen it in the Willow system is a two person training drill used for empy hand h2h-its used to build up reactions and so forth. I would compare that to a CMA "short" two person form, being that it only uses like three to 4 movements at the most, an example would be block, check with the other hand into a grab, palm the elbow joint, as you palm them in the face.

The two students would do this back and forth, back and forth.

[KC Elbows]

Cheers back at ya, Ap.:)

Black Jack,
Interesting stuff. I'm curious to see more from Chris.


Not to muddy the waters, but let's muddy 'em a bit.

I know that, in the past, some tai chi sifus did not generally teach the form as a whole, except to preserve the whole system, and taught movements individually and let the students apply and flow from movement to movement in pushhands and fighting in a way that worked within the system.(Hopefully that made some sense)

Anyway, in that context, was what they were teaching form? Or was it more like the kali patterns, initially form in a very limited sense, but ultimately completely free flowing?

[apoweyn]

cheers black jack. :)

i've heard the term cadena used in different ways myself. as a specific style name, to refer to a two-person drill as you have, or to refer to shadowboxing. i guess 'chain' is a fairly generic word in this context.

in any event, i was thinking of the solo drill. i agree wholeheartedly with your characterization of the 2-man drills like sinawali, sembrada, cadena de mano, hubud, etc. very well said. i may have to borrow your verbiage in the future. :)


stuart b.

[apoweyn]

kc elbows,

that's an interesting question. my personal take is that we're very often describing different sectors of the same spectrum. in other words, regardless of the discipline, there's always a point at which form is stressed. then a point at which application is stressed. then a point at which free flow is stressed. etc.

the specific points on the spectrum may vary from style to style, teacher to teacher, or student to student. but in essence, i don't believe that the end goal of any style is to do right by a form (though individual teachers may take that stance).


stuart b.

[Knifefighter]

There is a big difference between forms and drilling. Drills usually have an "aliveness" and are very closely related to the specific movement you use when doing the movement for real. Forms, on the other hand, are set movements that many times are not able to be done in real time against a resisting opponent. My opinion is that the more forms that are in the system, the less it will be able to be used in a realistic manner. I believe the the more effective styles are those that spend the least amount of time in doing form work.

[KC Elbows]

Apoweyn
I agree. I sort of take the stance that the form should match, as much as is plausible, the fighting.

KF,
I agree. I respect guys that do choy li fut/hung gar, etc, that have 100 forms in the curriculum(are they expected to learn all 100?). However, it seems like those forms must have a lot of repitition in them, and that the style could be more concise.

No offense to hung gar or choy li fut guys, I've seen some fierce guys who practice those, it just boggles my mind the number of forms involved.

I prefer the concept behind some styles, where there's one or two open hand forms, that's it, but the applications are varied.

And I totally believe in the method that I mentioned above, the old tai chi thing, where each movement was more important to the student than learning them chained in a specific pattern. I work on segments of my forms that way, and I see a big difference in my practice from changing over from the "I do this whole form several times, I'm good" school of thought. Oddly enough, my form looks better now, as there are segments of it that I have gotten much more proficient in, as opposed to being just OK all the way through.

And, of course, then I test what I've been working on against others, and find out where there was a flaw in my form, or a hole in the defense I intended, or whether I rely too much on too few tactics.

[Mutant]

Red_Fists, I think your curriculum sounds solid and well-rounded (no pun intended :) )... I like the full-circle concept and agree.

Actually I think most of us are on the same page here (despite all the bickering) and a lot of it is a question of semantics as KC pointed out. Its just a question of, to what degree are forms useful and what percentage of your training should be spent doing forms. I think a possible explaination is that its not a linear process and it varies depending on your level and on what your immediate and long term goals are. Even traditional schools that have produced good full contact fighters don't have the fighters standing around doing forms while training for an upcoming bout (i would hope). Their training would have to look much like the stereotypical muay tai or boxing training if they are in fact a competitive fighter at that level. Even then, forms can be a nice way to cool down, stretch out, feel rooted and circulate chi.

A lot of it just comes down to personal preference and the fact that different people learn in different ways. I still don't think you can build a very good fighter with only or mostly forms. Schools which only teach forms or have only limited, disjoined sparring are in fantasy land (but as discussed previously, some may prefer fantasy land). Some schools may take the 'full circle' approach and i think that is a very valid method that can produce a well rounded martial artist. Schools which skip forms and only concentrate on fighting can produce some nasty fighters, but I think will lack the depth, knowlege and overall skill of a MAist who trains it all. A lot of this comes down to limited training time, so we have to pick and choose how to spend our training time wisely to achieve our personal goals.

Besides, forms can give us something nice to do when we are all old and no longer fighting but still feel like developing & passing along our kung fu :D

Me personally, I barely practice any forms now, just to relax sometimes, otherwise they seem like a waste of my time. But I used to practice forms all the freakin' time and I think (hope?) they were useful for developing.

[KC Elbows]

I'm with you, MW. Originally, the style I study was one open hand form and one spear form. In the eighties, seven more forms were added on, all external except the last(which is external-internal). Unfortunately, I don't feel the first two match the style very well, the third one is good external southern kung fu, the fourth one is northern(its a southern style, so I don't understand this), the fifth and sixth are weapons I don't plan on learning, and the seventh is almost so close to a segment of the original one open-handed form that, while cool, you could practically start on the one form when you're ready for this one.

I've finally started the original open-handed form, I've gone through all the "new" forms, and when I teach, there's probably only one of them I'll teach. Its all the core form, in my opinion, everything else is not necessary(my teacher agrees with me in principle, although he still teaches two of the new forms.)

Give me a limited number of moves that combine into a sensible fight strategy(or is it tactic?) and I'm happy.

[Merryprankster]

KC,

Long time since I read this thread... sorry :)

No. Sparring is not the only way to develop balance and power. However, it is the only way to learn to apply the balance and power you develop to an actively resisting opponent.

I hope that made sense. I'm hopped up on Sugar and Caffeine.... YEE HAH!!!

[Chris McKinley]

Hi all,

Somebody mentioned that there might be a question in here for me concerning FMA. Sorry I haven't stayed current on this thread or I'd've responded sooner. From what I'm reading, you guys have got it right. There are countless variations on the theme for sumbrada, hubud lubud, cadena, siniwali, florete, ocho ocho, etc. They're all designed to take a specific skill set and get in a lot of repetitions in a short period of time to wire it in. They all represent a compromise between the crucible of free-form combat training and the controlled laboratory of solo forms practice.

The Inosanto/Lacoste Kali I practice includes dozens of various drills. In fact, in recent years, most of the criticism has been focused on people who are "drill masters" but who aren't able to apply their complex movements within real-time sparring or combat. Lameco Escrima, my other FMA, also includes numerous drills, getting into the sword & dagger aspects rather deeply in addition to the standard ones.

Personally, I look at such drills as just another facet of a complete fighter's training. Isolating and drilling specific skill sets will propel your ability WITH THOSE SKILLS like nothing else. However, solo practice is where you can correct bad habits, instill good ones, and move from good to excellent in your proficiency. The area of the spectrum between skill drills and all-out full-contact free-form sparring acts increasingly as a field-test, trial-by-fire, and toughening of those skills. All of it is necessary, IMO.

Guys who only spar or only fight NHB will more quickly reach a plateau in their personal ability and are more likely to remain stranded on that plateau permanently, as their bad habits get more and more ingrained. Guys who only practice endless skill drills can easily become "collectors", amassing a huge assortment of techniques and responses, but none of which has been field-tested and battle-hardened in real time. That approach can lead to option anxiety in a real fight and also a false sense of confidence in one's ability. Lastly, guys who only do solo forms practice never develop the interactive sensitivity and timing that comes with working with an opponent/partner. They also get blind as to where their weak spots are in terms of application, and similarly, they don't get the benefit of isolating and refining specific skills.

The most intelligent approach would seem to be one which includes healthy doses of all of it, allowing the person to see how it all fits together and how each part supports the others.

[KC Elbows]

MerryPrankster,
Sugar and caffeine are my drugs of choice.:D

I mean, who needs sleep.

Interesting stuff on the FMA's. This discussion is quite the eye opener. Its sort of turned into a "What is the ideal way of doing form" thread, and a bunch of us seem to be leading to a minimalist approach(not meaning hardly doing form, but doing smaller 'drills' and such).

Sad that this is the shortest post I've written all week. I need to work more.:D

[Prairie]

I've seen several definitions of what a form is to be. I'll restrict my response to those forms which are strictly solo and which have the same essential structure each time they are practiced.

I say the same essential structure because the method of movement changes over time as one gets stronger, more flexible, and gains understanding of what the proper body mechanics for the particular movements. The points about strength and flexibility are, in my view, the purpose of doing forms. Endurance would be another benefit of form practice although a myriad of other training tools will also increase endurance (and strength and flexibility) However, forms are a means of cataloguing techniques and methods of movement and one may as well get stronger while working a form.

The point about gaining understanding of proper body mechanics is important. It's my opinion that this gain in understanding cannot come from form practice alone. One can attempt to copy ones teacher exactly or be told over and over again by ones teacher and not really understand how the body is to work. Only after extensive experimentation with a resisting (to a lesser or greater degree) partner can one begin to understand how the body really should move. The increased understanding from these experimentations can then be taken back to forms practice where the body can hopefully get extra training in moving in the newly learned fashion.

Experimentation can come in many forms. Application training is for folks just trying to learn how the body works (I'll put my hand up for this one). Free sparring would be for those folks who have a good idea on how the body works but need now to figure out how the mind works. When to apply a technique or mehotd of movement is important. How to learn to keep from retreating when one should advance is also important (and the reverse).

It's my view that forms practice, applications training, and sparring are all important parts of a training regimen. However, as I may have implied above, I believe that applications training and sparring are vital to truly learn a system. The form is a strengthening exercise and a means to remember.

Let's also remember that some techniques shouldn't be practiced for real. For example, one cannot practice a a quick neck break on a living practice partner. One can go to a certain point with the partner but the practice of the entire technique with speed will need to be solo.

If I had to leave one part of my training out, the part left out would be forms practice. Thankfully nobody is asking me to leave forms out though as I feel they are important.

[KC Elbows]

Prairie,
I like the statement you made about sparring being about the mind. In sparring, I find out that something I thought would work doesn't, I find out how I am strong and weak, I find out what is missing from my fighting altogether, and I find out the same things about my opponent.

Its somewhat ironic that the most physical part of MA is also the deepest mental aspect, though much of the thinking goes on between sparring sessions, as opposed to during.

[Chris McKinley]

KC,

At least for me, I'm not pushing a minimalist approach to solo training at all. If anything, I'm suggesting that we all need to make our training schedules just that much heavier, not by cutting down on one area of training, but by adding in certain other kinds. ;P

The key is learning to appreciate each kind of training for the magic that only it can give you and not expecting it to be something else. For instance, solo practice is your own personal laboratory for combat skills. No where else do you have such a fine degree of control over just exactly what you are wanting to work on or practice. Now, if we whine about solo practice because it doesn't give us training in 'aliveness' against a moving, resisting opponent, then we are guilty of expecting to get apples from an orange tree.

Like I said before, I think all of it is beneficial because it all supports the development of the whole. Kind of like different legs of a table. The more legs you have, the more stable it gets. Keeping your development strong in all of these areas not only gives you a deeper perspective on your training, it maximizes your ability to "work in" any new improvements you might stumble upon throughout your years as a martial artist, and this can lead to entirely new avenues of growth, interest, and development.

For instance, let's say you're a TKD stylist who's been a tournament forms competitor and a point-sparring competitor for most of your martial arts career so far. One day, you're talking with a Muay Thai friend of yours and he shows you some of the kicks of his style, which you immediately fall in love with. Let's say that your training includes a comprehensive approach, so you take these new kicks and work with them. At first, you only do them as a side project in your solo practice. You're not under time pressure and the safety of your personal solo practice time allows you to play with these kicks until you think you have their execution, at least, refined to a point where you think you've got them down.

Next, you go to a training buddy and, for variety, you suggest working on the new kicks a little bit. At first, maybe, you just take turns holding pads while you practice your newly acquired skills against an actual target. Over time, you get better and begin to pad up and practice throwing your kicks against the moving target of a resisting opponent. All the while, you're practicing in a safe environment with a trusted partner and gradually moving up your training to become more realistic. While the danger increases, so does your control, and the training remains more or less injury-free and productive.

Eventually, this little side project has become so successful that you decide to try your hand at full-contact tournament fighting for the first time. You lose your first couple of fights, but not overwhelmingly. And most importantly, you realize to yourself that you managed to actually land a couple of those new kicks in your arsenal. You keep taking new fights, all the while continuing to refine your new skills with your partner, and eventually you start winning more than you lose. You also find that your point-sparring skills are quite useful in this new context, too. Now you're well on your way to a new side career as a full-contact fighter.

That was just an example. I could have started with someone who only spars full-contact and learns to shore up his weaknesses with skill drills, or learns that solo forms training actually improves his timing and execution in NHB fights. My point is that training outside of your "comfort zone", to borrow a psychobabble term, can lead to improvements in ways you didn't anticipate.

[KC Elbows]

Didn't mean to put words in your mouth.

I was thinking of the solo training. Like you said, in that time you work on specific parts of your arsenal. I meant to contrast that to those who simply do the whole form, but don't really develop specific moves very much, but I forgot to make that distinction.

[Braden]

Just as an aside... I was reading today some articles from prominent JKDers saying that hubud lubud and the like should be discarded from the training program of anyone interested in real combat, as they are not 'alive.' I've got to say, it's the most extremist approach of the phenomenon I've seen yet - rejecting any training method that doesn't consist of trying to lay the smack down on someone trying to lay the smack down on you. Although, it's worth noting that they're not, as of yet, logically consistent - they still advocate all sorts of weight training.

It's just such an unfortunate trend. More and more, the perception of a 'real martial artist' in our society is someone who is a powerlifter who hits his friends regularly. I guess the idea of 'defeating the larger, stronger, faster, younger man with skill' is going the way of the Dodo.

[apoweyn]

well, i suspect it's like any idea we discover or rediscover. we go overboard. every time. someone twigs to the idea that aliveness is important in practice rather than just going through the motions. then before you know it, aliveness is the most important thing. then the only thing.

then, eventually, we come back to some sort of balance.

i hope.


stuart b.

[No_Know]

"So in that respect I don't think you can compare them to form work as they will change, they leave the standardized format behind, to learn to be free and flow. "

It seemed as thought Kung-Fu Keeps the standardized format to learn to be free and flow. A form is a database from which any technique or combination of techniques or partial techniques can be gotten after enough practice and understanding.

Sevenstar Praying Mantis founder supposedly knew eighteen styles of Kung-Fu and encorporated praying mantis flavor to these already understood styles. The styles sometimes conmsisted of a Single technique.

The Gentlemanly Art has techniqes that supposedly work or have their strong points or uses (that why they were there)~. Some of these single techniques accentuate their individual devestatingness like super combos in an arcade fighting game. Combinatins lead to victory. A Kung-Fu form is designed for tailoring combinations. Some of these might get highlighted on instruction of the form. Boxing uses signas to start a combination. So would the Filipino Martial Arts I might think. If they do that, then you do this. If it works this good do this if it works that good do that--mental and strategic. Boxing has fewer techniques than Kung-Fu per se. With so few techniques They can be remembered like arobic steps or routine or dance. Just throw together what works togetheror looks good. A method for retaining a great number of techniques is forms like a song in a language you don't speak you can recall all the parts. Eventually you can decipher the phrases. And one day one might even understand what is being said.

Do what you are shown as best you can. Repeat it (when you can understand and perceive the improvements, you would be instructed with refinements to get it even closer to perfect). Use it where it fits. What works and what helps it work. An Artist paints the Form. Technique or two hundred techniques, it all form~.


You posters have seen forms but don't know people who Do Forms. If you don't see KCElbow's earlier points~

I No_Know, but at Least some of you Really No_Know. Since your understanding or maturity is such that you don't care, that works out. But then, so do all of you. What ever you do. Whyever you do it. You all seem to be doing it. And that can be what matters. Good for you all.