Forms - are they necessary?

[TaoBoy]

I'm the first to admit that forms can be a great way of getting a student to practice certain techniques but I am starting to wonder if they are the best way to transmit the information and the best way to learn movements.

The traditional martial arts have been my area for many years now and my mindset has been slowly moving towards the principles of a more formless art.

I still practice all my forms although now I am starting to dissect them and think about them closely. I find that if I am forgetting a form it is more due to the fact that I am forgetting the sequence rather than the techniques. So, I have started to wonder if the fact that we have to remember the sequence of a number of moves is actually detrimental to learning the techniques included. What is more important the technique or the form?

So, what are the opinions of you folk? Are forms necessary? Are we just holding on to them for the sake of tradition?

I'm interested in the thoughts of traditional and non-traditional stylists alike.

Peace, Adam.

[joedoe]

I see forms as a catalogue of techniques and possible combinations of techniques. In a way it is like the way it is easier to remember stuff if you put it into rhyme, forms are a way of remembering techniques.

[Shadow Dragon]

Adam.

Personally, I think forms are as important as any tool in the MA training chest.

But the training can be over-heavy on the forms side, today many schools rely on forms as they allow them to train larger student groups.

But I think that they are simply a stepping stone on the road to MA mastery and should be seen as such.
Individual Movement should be taken out of the Form and should be trained/understood solo.

Good MA training relies alot on Teacher-Student interaction and that cannot happen in large groups at a kwoon.

Personally, I spend only about 20% of my training on forms perse.

Cheers.

[eulerfan]

My two cents:

Before you can really analyze the moves and come up with applications and such, you need to breed familiarity with them. Having to practice them over and over to get the sequence of a form down is a great way to do that.

[SanSoo Student]

I think forms help basics. If forms weren't made up, then people would not have a grasp on basic attack patterens and rhythms.

[cha kuen]

Forms should be practiced along with touching hands with a partner to apply the techniques. Most schools do too many forms and not enough 2 man work.

Half of the time should be spent on forms (even if you know 20 of them) and half on application and fighting. Most people will work on one set for a half an hour. Then they will work on another set. Whether it's the most basic set or some rare advanced set, you're still hitting air.

Forms, if trained properly with the right intention, should actually HELP your fighting. If you train a form half ass, you're gonna fight half ass. The way you train is the way you will fight.

****Rare kung fu books**** (http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems&userid=taichimaster06&include=0&since=-1&sort=3&rows=25)

[SevenStar]

IMO - forms themselves are necessary, but the multiple sequenced, drawn out forms in cma today are not. I don't have to memorize a 28 technique form to learn the principles of the techniques. I tend to focus (at first) more on memorizing the sequence, then on perfecting the principle. I can eliminate that first step by not having the long sequence. This would result in more forms to learn, as they'd be broken down into single technique drills, but many techniques in forms illustrate the same principle through a different movement, so it still wouldn't be that bad. I would much rather have small forms/technique drills, a la shuai chiao, judo and bjj.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by SanSoo Student
I think forms help basics. If forms weren't made up, then people would not have a grasp on basic attack patterens and rhythms.

attack patterns and rhythms give your opponent something to read. I want sponteneity in my fighting, broken rhythm, proper timing, drawing, etc. - things learned in sparring. the forms will teach the principle of a movement from which you can then begin to see and use various applications of the principle.

[Shadow Dragon]

Originally posted by SanSoo Student
I think forms help basics. If forms weren't made up, then people would not have a grasp on basic attack patterens and rhythms.

I would not say basic attack patterns, but simply one of many possible ones.
Same with applications, you are not shown all possible ones but a few and left to explore more for yourself.

In many styles Students are asked to make up new forms and explain why they choose those sequences.

Re-arranging forms and linking Movements in different ways can give a good insight into the style and ways of using those movements.

This is the same reason why often certain sequences are repeated but followed by others in a form.

Cheers.

[quiet man]

Yes, IMHO forms are important, because they function as a sort of time capsule - they preserve all the techniques in one place, making them easier to learn. And they are also a very good workout.
But Shadow Dragon is right: "Individual Movement should be taken out of the Form and should be trained/understood solo". If not, forms are worthless. You have to understand what you are doing.

[Former castleva]

There may have been some degeneration in form structure to make it more appealing and dance like which is the case when it comes to competing in them and stuff but in their original form they are pure bu.

[Souljah]

In many styles the forms have all the moves that you would learn in the system, they are in many ways an easier way of practicing every/most moves, but in a pattern and not individually.
This can help with various things - ie fluentcy, timing and coordination when the application is learnt.

[mantis-1]

Ok tao you probably already know this stuff if you train SPM in your style.
In Chow Gar Tong Long your first form is the most important and often referred to as the seed of the system, not only will it help you develop your short powers it also helps to re-align your bone structure to the correct positioning to allow that power to be released. And as you know all the sets are Chi gung sets allowing you to develop your iron shirt, throat and ribs at the same time as understanding the individual moves. When and if done correctly these can not be seperated. What it won't do is teach you to fight there is a lot more within the sysyem to teach you that, although it will teach you principles, as all the forms contain progressive moves. By this I mean when performing a move in one of the forms the next move will be in precisely the position that your opponent will be, the originator of the form knew and understood this, very simply if you throw a low level kick out to a shin or a knee, your opponents head will come forward therefore telling you where the next hit should go, this is put crudely but I am sure you understand.


peace

[apoweyn]

it depends, i suppose. necessary to what? not to fighting, evidently. clearly, there are styles that have succeeded and been passed on sans forms.

as a catalog of the style? this one i wonder about. i see some value to that. but if that's the emphasis, it seems like there's been a priority shift.

i'm kinda startled by how often i hear the same person make the following two arguments: 1) forms are trained to ingrain instinctual reactions into the reflexes. 2) forms are exaggerated for training purposes. if they become ingrained in the reflexes in their exaggerated form, what's to prevent them from dropping into a low horse stance, hands chambered on hips?

but that's theory. what i've seen in practice is the opposite problem. people who have trained for years simply don't fall instinctually into the form of their style. they fall into a sort of common denominator.

so... if the rationale is that forms program reactions, i kinda feel like the forms should either 1) be modified to reactions that seem more appropriate to the individual or situation or 2) succeed in actually programming workable reactions.

and yes, i'm fully prepared to accept that people have succeeded in this. hell, i'd love to hear that.

but to my mind, forms are good for engendering in an individual the qualities necessary to the performance of their art. if an art encourages attacking from a strong base, then i'd expect a form that exaggerated the idea enough that the individual develops an intrinsic sense of what issuing power that way feels like. likewise, a fleet-footed style would presumably have forms that convey to the person what it feels like to be light on his feet. so that when it comes time to improvise, the bodily sense is there.

i think those same senses can be conveyed through drills mind you. as many here have said many times, it's just another tool.

or i'm just another tool. i can't remember which.


stuart b.

[nospam]

TaoBoy,

during the height of my competition in both forms and sparring, there was one commonality...a no-mind of what I was doing besides a base consciousness that I was taking the fight to my opponent, whether imaginary (patterns) or real (sparring).

I rarely knew what the heck I did in a clash..why? Because of dynamic interaction...not drill #4 followed by a side kick to the hips. It wasn't premeditated. My techniques would flow from my opponent's yang...I always liken it as a sliver of yin (a sense of movement) that would thread both oue movements together. And in hindsight, it was a combination of pattern work (movement upon movement after movement), training techniques (2-person) and where my mind (mind set) was at any given day- intent.

When I would perform my patterns, unbeknownst to me I mixed my lines up (sequencing) and added lines from other patterns. It was more of a pure form of movement as I say it, as was how my teacher saw it as well.

The sequence of a given pattern, in essence, does not matter. For a pattern is first and foremost a tool. And as history reveals to us, tools change as the environment and the people employing them ...change. To be an effect tool, it must serve a purpose for a greater whole. Whether it be a tool specific to one particular need or a more multitasked function. My lineages patterns have changed from teacher-to-teacher..not because they want to leave a legacy, rather because they understood the purpose the tool served and more importantly...how to use it!

Historically, there are many "traditionalists" out there who would say the sequence holds a great importance. I have my opinion on why, but as I see it as long as their other tools can adapt to change and continue to serve the growth of their respective systems, then it becomes merely one OTHER method of instruction.

My one big problem with patterns is that people become too attached to the tool and have forgotten that at times, different tools are required to COMPLETE the process. Stuck in time, I say. Stuck in Time holding a copper saw. Some might saw if it works, why change?? Change does not need to be monumental in affect. we still use saws, but now they have stainless steel or carbide tooth blades and varying blade angles instead of copper.

So patterns are as effective as the person using them. How and why are you using patterns.

nospam.
:cool:

[Braden]

Let me be the first to derail the thread with a humorous comment about things flowing from Nospam's yang.

...

...

******.

[apoweyn]

hmm... yeah, couple that with the ever-increasing use of the word 'tool' in this thread and you're on to something.

what, i have no idea. :)

[Cody]

I think the forms, the long involved ones, are as a song which can show the art on several different levels. As such, imo, this is advanced material, and not necessary, to be required, or Generally desirable, except in mastering the entirety of a system. In other words, one is doing what has already been mastered.

Short movement patterns, for instance stance forms, are good to develop a foundation for movement where little or no organization existed before.
However, I believe the heart of physical practice is in static and moving stance work, which must eventually be trained to change like the wind; applications which vary in order of movements; and, conditioning according to the flavor of the particular art, which will shine through.
Training of mind/intent, energy, and spirit is the common essence. It should not be saved for last, nor glossed over.

Cody

[kungfujew]

It is pretty easy to say, lets forget them!
On the other hand, they contain all the self defense movements, catalogued by difficulty. (rank order - as your forms become more difficult, the hidden techniques are also more difficult)

My answer (humbly) is that in addition to the above are two very KEY elements:

One: muscle strength, stamina and coordination. You have to admit that you strenghthen muscles that you didn't even know you had. Those obscure muscles are the difference between good well-rounded support of the human structure and the "definition" that weight lifters die for. Their muscles are super strong in ONE positon only.

Second: The forms do combine out techniques in a different order each time, which help us with FLOW. Ultimately, we should be able to flow from any one technique to any other.... with practice.

Ouse' Shinobu!

Zerok

" may we need only a smile to change the world" :D

[apoweyn]

kungfujew,

that's just it though. i like this answer a lot. the only thing i personally have misgivings about is what i mentioned. if the form represents the way the move is supposed to be performed fairly precisely, then ingraining it into muscle memory that way is a good thing. but in 18 years (which isn't a lifetime, i realize), i've never seen a practitioner that effortlessly flowed into anything resembling a form during a 'freestyle' exercise.

what do you think?


stuart b.

[TaoBoy]

Nice replies peoples.

I am not anti-forms. I am just re-assessing their validity. I think -as most have mentioned - that the overly long forms can be more detrimental than not. This is due to the focus on the sequence rather than the technique. That said these forms can really show what can be accomplished after some long study. And extending from that I have trained an 86 movement tai ji form that takes about 25 minutes to complete. This was a killer to learn. On one hand it was amazing to completely lose myself in the moment of the form but on the other I never really got a chance to focus on any individual movement. (This could be related to the lack of attention from the instructors though.)

So, I guess there are the plusses and minuses as with most forms of practice.

My current frame of mind is learning towards what Sevenstar wrote earlier: "I would much rather have small forms/technique drills, a la shuai chiao, judo and bjj."

Thanks all for contributing to this discussion. :)

[nospam]

...well now that wags the dawgs tail a little differently than with my original intent :D

have fun witht hat one..oh, and thanks for the chuckle.

nospam.
:col:

[Sleemie]

Well, we're talking about martial ARTS here...and to me part of the art is the forms. I personally don't think that performing individual moves and techniques are that much of an art. I believe that if you're studying a particular style, you can't separate the forms from the rest of the style, however, if you're studying a style, such as Jeet Kun Do, that was specifically designed to do away the structure of forms, that's a different story. You can't take Hung Gar and say I'm gonna throw the forms out the window and just do the individual techniques and say you're studying Hung Gar.