Linear Forms vs. Geometric patterns [Archive]

MantisifuFW

01-23-2004, 11:49 AM

Oso,

I am by no means the most knowledgable authority of Wong Hon Fun Tanglang but I offer the following for consideration:

Jeuy Law Hawn (Joy Lo Han) departs from the line from East/West to North/South.

Dou Gang departs from the East/ West to North/ South #32-36.

Dai Fan Che departs from the East/ West to North/ South.

Lan Jeet in its final movements has techniques that face outward from the line diagonally.

Bung Bo in its initial movements has angular movements that face inward towards the line diagonally.

Anytime the practitioner does the "Dou Gang" technique, #11,#12 in Dou Gang and #22, #23 in Sup Bat Sou one angles diagonally from the line to the rear.

Say Lo Bung Da and Dai Fan Che are particuarly important in that they address the idea of "fighting in all directions" as if against multiple opponents.

Hope it helps,

Steve Cottrell

ursa major

01-23-2004, 01:08 PM

Good points, yet compared to other systems we do not often make much of a break off the north/south line.

The way I see it our brief excursions off the line (other than the aforementioned PM Exits Cave, 4-Direction Fighting and grifter721's reference) are just a side-step (Bung Bo) or angular retreat (Duo Gang). I would be pressed to compare these to systems that employ x, cross and box patterns eg: HG's Tiger & Crane.

Personally I prefer the north/south line. Having come from a system that did only x, cross and box pattern forms I found 7 Star to be unusual at first. Yet these days I find it most preferable.

regards,
UM.

MantisCool

01-23-2004, 08:16 PM

Well, our branch's Mantis exits the cave is all linear and is also not mentioned by S. Cottrell, but our Lan Jit is all linear ?

Oso

01-23-2004, 08:21 PM

ok, attached is the roadmap to the first form
taught to me simply as 'tong long'

I did it on ms paint so don't expect a picasso;)

btw, start is at '1' facing north.
the first move turns you west

at each corner a direction change is made
w/ a cross step/uncoil

more than one move is made on each road

I do not have this form on tape but hope to soon and will email to anyone willing to look.

Sifu Cottrell, one of your students, big guy black hair, saw it in Cleveland in 2000 at the GL that year.

ursa major

01-24-2004, 09:10 AM

Picasso wasn't a PM guy so what do we care ? (haha).

Oso, just because a form is not linear does not make it any the less PM. What I do find notable is that the form (as per your art work) does not finish by leaving the practitioner in the same location they started from.

It has been my experience that our forms, when finished, typically leave one in a position ending up more or less where one started from. This is a trait shared amongst many styles that I have witnessed or participated in which includes PM and non-PM systems.

If you are curious as to how your PM forms fit into the wider scheme of PM I encourage you to seek further details of their origin and history.

best regards,
UM.

mantis108

01-24-2004, 11:12 AM

Isn't that the shape of the bigger dipper constellation a.k.a 7 Stars or Ursa Major? ;) Do you have the name of the form, Oso?

Warm regards

Mantis108

Oso

01-24-2004, 11:44 AM

um, thanks for the input. you bring up another question I have had for a while:

What is the point of finishing on the same spot as you started?

The fifth form I was taught by this instructor does fit the linear road pattern and is supposed to finish you where you started.

One of my thoughts on the form I illustrated is that changes in foot work could 'collapse' the branching arm back into the square and finish on the starting corner. If a box form is somewhat traditional then maybe someone changed the last road to give this set the obvious shape of (heh, this just hit me) 'ursa major':)

I can think of no 'combative' reason for a form to move so that it finishes on the starting point. What am I missing?

I do see, or at least I think I see, that if the form was built with specific footwork in it, and you weren't doing the footwork correctly then you would be off the mark at the end. Thereby indicating that you either didn't know the correct footwork or at least weren't hitting it right.

I am at a dead end with the person I learned these sets from. Not his fault, I blame the person who taught him for the lack of background. However, my old teacher's reactions to my questions are why I have moved on.

mantis108, I was just taught this as 'tong long' sometimes as 'tong long#1' as the 5th form was titled 'tong long#2'

I was initially told that we were studying 7 star. Then after I discovered that that definitely wasn't true, the story got changed to 'secret door'.

If anyone has a big enough email account I'd be happy to email some of the clips I do have of these sets. The are .wmv and around 1.5 mb. I don't have this one but I do have a couple of the others.

mantis108

01-24-2004, 01:20 PM

Hi Oso,

If I may:

<<<What is the point of finishing on the same spot as you started?>>>

Well, the reason for this IMHO is usually more intellectual or philosophical even spirtual than physical. But on the physical side of thing, it depends on the training methodology. Some styles' forms function sort of like a big long 2 men flow drills. As any good well thought out flow drill should be, they should be able to start and end in the starting position. One should be able to navigate back and forth and never miss the initial reference point. I believe it serves as a reminder of the journey on the philosophical side.

<<<The fifth form I was taught by this instructor does fit the linear road pattern and is supposed to finish you where you started.>>>

Thanks for the info. Personally, I don't like to number the forms. I believe the names are there for a purpose. A lot of the people in the west teach form using number to circumvent the language barrier. It causes more confusion than anything else.

<<<One of my thoughts on the form I illustrated is that changes in foot work could 'collapse' the branching arm back into the square and finish on the starting corner. If a box form is somewhat traditional then maybe someone changed the last road to give this set the obvious shape of (heh, this just hit me) 'ursa major'>>>

Personally, I like this formation better than the box especially if space is available. Linear forms are usually of Shaolin tradition and have military applications.

<<<I can think of no 'combative' reason for a form to move so that it finishes on the starting point. What am I missing?>>>

Well, I can think of 2 reasons. 1) If you defending a position, you don't want to leave it to the opponent. This is particularly important to training troops I believe. 2) If the starting position is your escape route (ie a door), you would want to be able to get back there as quickly as possible. So a linear form functions on short straight line is the best option. By the same token, if you started in a corner or a trap, you would want to get out quickly and drive your opponent in there instead.

<<<I do see, or at least I think I see, that if the form was built with specific footwork in it, and you weren't doing the footwork correctly then you would be off the mark at the end. Thereby indicating that you either didn't know the correct footwork or at least weren't hitting it right.>>>

That's true as well. :)

<<<I am at a dead end with the person I learned these sets from. Not his fault, I blame the person who taught him for the lack of background. However, my old teacher's reactions to my questions are why I have moved on.>>>

I hear you. There are people out there that treat forms as secrat cow and worship them on the pedestal.

<<mantis108, I was just taught this as 'tong long' sometimes as 'tong long#1' as the 5th form was titled 'tong long#2'

I was initially told that we were studying 7 star. Then after I discovered that that definitely wasn't true, the story got changed to 'secret door'.>>>

Ah, I see. :)

<<<If anyone has a big enough email account I'd be happy to email some of the clips I do have of these sets. The are .wmv and around 1.5 mb. I don't have this one but I do have a couple of the others.>>>

I would love to see them. So if you don't mind sending them over to Mantis108 (sifu1@internorth.com) , I will give you my feed back. Thank you in advance.

Warm regards

Mantis108

ursa major

01-24-2004, 02:08 PM

Mantis108 -- definitely a likeness to Ursa Major :D you would think I would have noticed.....:confused:

Oso,
Personally I prefer the linear nature of our forms. When I used to practice HG it was often chaotic if not impossible to have 4 or 5 or more people doing forms in the kwoon even worse (keep the first aid kit nearby) if someone was doing spear, staff or sword. Collisions abounded because the forms had you doing geometric patterns here there and everywhere. No kidding in a really crowded class it was almost comical.

On the other hand having forms in lines makes it really easy for many people to practice simultaneously. So from my perspective it is simply a matter of practicality that I find the PM way beneficent.

About ending where you started from, it is a pretty good way of letting you know if you missed a step or two? I don't know how it is for you but I practice over 30 handforms and when I return to a given form after several (or more) weeks I often misplace steps or sometimes even entire roads so if I end up facing south when I should be facing north or am 'halfway home' well, I know I have some work to do.

Best regards,
UM.

Oso

01-26-2004, 04:07 PM

Hi all, I'm working on ( or rather, my girl is working on ) getting the files on my website. I figured that might be simpler and you can go and download them from there. The site should be up later tonight and I'll post when it is.

Oso

01-26-2004, 09:09 PM

http://www.ashevillemartialarts.com/ninjassuck.htm

ok, that's the page with the video clips on them.

due to my poor technology level all the forms are in two parts but B picks up right where A leaves off.

vid quality is .wmv not to hot in other words. but, they are relatively small.

all the sets here were done at fairly slow speed and I haven't really worked these in a while. Been busy on Pong Lai stuff. :)

A short description of each set follows.

CLOUD HANDS

this runs a circle a la bagua but with 12 steps around the circle and 3 back accross the center at the end. spear hands and eagle claws and lots of flanking.

MONKEY

A great deal of our groundwork philosophy came from this set. nearly every move is supposed to be a take down. never done this one very well cuz i'm a big fat azz. There should be a split at one point where I'm doing a hurdler's stretch.

Double Stick sets

These are the first two I learned. There is a third but I suck at it.
Tainan has said that these remind him of some of his saber sets.

Trash away gentlemen. :)

I will hopefully have more to offer in video pretty soon.
Just got diagnosed with a partially separated shoulder so Feb will be a slow month for me martially. Need to rehab.

BTW, the site is newly redesigned. With the new framework up I will be adding still pics and vids from class and my sordid past soon.

I can also hook you up with the web designer.

Mr.Binx

01-27-2004, 12:19 AM

The monkey form kinda hit something in the back of my head. I have noticed that alot of the pictures and videos that I have picked through regarding eight-step praying mantis are very ground heavy (rolls, hand-plants, low stances, straight top-to-bottom pull-downs from overhead [rather than the twisting, spiral, bring-downs of sevenstar], etc.) and the monkey form, although loose, seemed to have left this exact same aftertaste in my head as a few of the eight-step forms I found did. Could any eight-step peeps verify a strong monkey-influence in their line of tanglang? Don't feel bad if you need to point out to me that I am getting a completely wrong impression. Can't learn if I'm afraid to ask people questions, neh? :)

Tainan Mantis

01-27-2004, 01:03 AM

Oso,
Many styles of PM have forms that finish and start on a different location as well as face a different direction.

Some schools may have changed this over the eyars.
EG,my shrfu has 3 teachers of hsiao fanche. He told me that everyone version, quite different, but all finished different spot and facing a different direction.

Not even all my shr hsiungs know this as he changed it to start and stop on the same spot.
Other wise, he said, people will think that you forgot something in the form.

PM has an old proverb about how when the mantis walks out the door it never turns back and hence no bother trying to start an stop on the same spot.

To me, it just goes to show that the forms are colections of tecniques that should be trained with a partner, not for looking good.

Oso

01-27-2004, 06:28 AM

Mr. Binx:
One of the few other people to see these forms, seung ga fat, also said he could see an bagua/8 step influence. FTR, the first move from the low x block/catch is a spiraling throw. One of the major themes we had was to evade by flanking while catching the attackers limb or head and taking them down with a spiraling movement.

My opinion is that there is SOME PM in these sets but that they were created 2 or 3 steps back of the line from me. I know that the guy I learned from passed them to us as he received them. His teacher was all over the globe physically and I think martially. He settled down for a while and began to teach what he knew, and used, and for whatever reason, decided to call it PM. I just can't get anyone to admit that.

TM, where does the tradition to start/stop on the same spot originate?

To me, it just goes to show that the forms are colections of tecniques that should be trained with a partner, not for looking good.

good thing for me ;)

grifter721

01-27-2004, 11:47 AM

I think forms are supposed to begin and end where they begun to show discipline as well as skill. Much like modern wushu....they have to execute a from within a certain amount of time, if not points are deducted away. Much like in 7 star the beginner sets to intermediate sets are easy to begin and end in the same spot. But in the more advanced sets where the footwork is more difficult and the steps are faster, you get into problems as you get to the end. You have to figure that one out. Plumb Flower falling down form, for example, although not an andvanced set, is hard to begin and end at the same spot, the ending 'big wheel' motion, then the reverse chop motion kind of messes it up....But yet it is possible to begin and end where you are begin. Thats how it is in Seven Star Mantis.

My 2 cents.

Oso

01-27-2004, 02:11 PM

But Why?

I don't see any difference between accurately starting and finishing at Point A versus starting at Point A and finishing at Point B IF that is how the form should be played. Just as much accuracy is required to do either.

It's the developement of the two that I'm curious about.

mantis108

01-27-2004, 05:46 PM

I agree with Tainan Mantis that mantis forms are not necessary start and end the same spot.

Thanks for the link. I have difficulty downloading directly from there. I managed to download the monky clip though. It's quite an interesting form. I think the ground elements in the form are based off a ground and pound mindset. I don't see the classical ground combination which can be found in many styles. The combination basically goes like:

Pa Hu (sprawl), Chuan Tui (get back to guard position), Tornado Kick (Upa drill), Chuan Tui, and Wugongtan (kip up).

I can see you have lots of forward rolls and your punches are quite impressive.

Good clip.

Warm regards

Mantis108

Oso

01-27-2004, 07:32 PM

mantis108, thanks and I'll check the links again.

applications were a ground and pound but not stationary.
we never worked a 'mount' per se but rolls accross a prone opponent using the body to strike as well as the hands.
also a lot of apps where limbs were grabbed and twisted as you rolled across them and away.

MantisCool

01-27-2004, 08:56 PM

I agreed with Grifter that forms should begin and end at the same place or near the same place.

Lets say we marked on the floor a, b, c, d, and e. and 5 persons are asked to perform the same set and starts at a. After finishing 1 person ends at a, and the other at b and so on. So, where is the standard? Who is right and who is wrong? Thats why we must start and end at the same place so that everybody have a guideline to follow. We have all forms starting and ends at the same place except 1 or 2 which I believe is due to some ommission of steps which was lost from one generation to the other.

The Plum Blossom Falling Down is not difficult to end at the same place, you just perform your big wheel motion backward further down to the place you started the set.

German Bai Lung

01-28-2004, 03:03 AM

Since I first was confronted with the suggestion to end forms where they started from, I was thinking about... now 10 years.. ;)

My thoughts:
- I see it like Mantis Cool or grifter: the benefits are to check out if everything is right and to work on your forms if not.
- BUT: people are very different in shape and constitution. So some can´t end the form on exactly the same spot. Due to the fact, that they did some steps much longer than normally. Some guy jumps maybe a lot further etc... why shall I stop this especially of their movements? Maybe thats a good benefit sometime in a fight...
I mean: everyone is different, so the execution of one form is different too.
But I agree: end must be "Near" the starting point.

Oso

01-28-2004, 03:34 AM

Good Morning (5:30 am here) !

ok, so I can totally see your points on forms that were built to start and end in the same place (or near which makes more sense to me given varying interpretations of moves by differing peeps).

But, I still don't see why that's any more valid than starting at A and ending at Z if each move from A thorugh Z is performed as it was designed.

I just feel like there has to be a point in history where forms tended to be created linearly vs. geometrically.

IMHO, it seems more natural to not be linear. I've never sparred where I went back and forth and would be dropped for pushups or sitting in a horse for a 'break' if I did. In fighting you are going to be all over the place.

Why would you want to constrain a form to a linear ideal when it's exactly opposite of the ideal fro good fighting?

(mind you, I'm just thinking out loud here)

:)

BeiTangLang

01-28-2004, 06:01 AM

Just because you do forms in a line does not mean that you cannot alter your directions when fighting! Thats why they are called forms & not sparring or fighting!

As far as where the forms end, why not just accept that different forms end in different places & move on. There are greater mysteries in mantis than that. Several people have givien great reasons. The problem with these reasons is, that they are 3rd-Nth generations opinions of what the answers should be, because the originators of the forms are all dead. No answers there, just assumptions. As for finding a point in history when this changes, I doubt you will find one.

As far as your last comment, in my opinion it is not the linear direction that you should be concerned about, but the linking of techniques performed consecutively to accomplish the intent of the form that is important. When attacking I am for sure going to be coming at you. If you angle, so will I & I will be coming at you again (ie, the course of action may have varied, but with the idea of a line being made up of an infinate number of points, I can change my "linear-angle" on any of those points to re-target).

Mantis also uses footwork for evasion, re-adjustment & escape.
I would say many of these techniques are not readily identifiable from the forms. They are not done in a straight line.

Anyway, back to my point, just because forms are linear, the sparring/fighting does not have to be.
Best of luck in finding the info you want,
~BTL

18elders

01-28-2004, 06:38 AM

I agree with BTL, i think you are concentrating too much on the direction of the moves linked together. they were developed to help train your techniques and timing with a partner. We have had people say 2 person sets are no good. They do not understand the purpose of the sets. You are not stuck to the move in a particular direction and at any time you can turn it into a finishing move and take your opponent down. When you start to do the 2 person sets and understand the moves better you will see it is not as linear as you think, the subtle angles, foot work and body movement.

Oso

01-28-2004, 12:52 PM

Tense this morning, BTL?

Just because you do forms in a line does not mean that you cannot alter your directions when fighting! Thats why they are called forms & not sparring or fighting!

didn't say you couldn't.

all I'm trying to get some response on is "Why are most forms done in a linear fashion?" Most of the answers don't really adress the question beyond 'that's the way they are taught'

As far as where the forms end, why not just accept that different forms end in different places & move on.There are greater mysteries in mantis than that. Several people have givien great reasons. The problem with these reasons is, that they are 3rd-Nth generations opinions of what the answers should be, because the originators of the forms are all dead. No answers there, just assumptions. As for finding a point in history when this changes, I doubt you will find one.

when did I indicate I didn't accept that? I'm trying to dig a little deeper than that. I agree there are greater mysteries but this is the one on my mind at the moment. :) And you'll have to excuse me if I'm not discouraged by initially not finding an answer.

As far as your last comment, in my opinion it is not the linear direction that you should be concerned about, but the linking of techniques performed consecutively to accomplish the intent of the form that is important. When attacking I am for sure going to be coming at you. If you angle, so will I & I will be coming at you again (ie, the course of action may have varied, but with the idea of a line being made up of an infinate number of points, I can change my "linear-angle" on any of those points to re-target).

I agree with everything you say. You can say the same thing about a non-linear form and all forms should be taught with the exact philosophy as you have outlined above. I'm not trying to discuss technique however. Just a simple curiousity about the linear packaging of forms. I've learned sets in all manner: I patterns, T patterns, Square, cross and others. I find value in all of it. But the predominance in northern forms tends to be linear......and SO I am curious about that.

18elders:

what's up??? I hope to be down there again in late March.

the addition of the two person definitely changes perspective. I'm not really talking about Pong Lai stuff as I know so little at this point. Just a general kind of question about a general observation. :)

How are Oscar's arms? Heard he broke one or both of them?????

BeiTangLang

01-28-2004, 01:27 PM

Originally posted by Oso
Tense this morning, BTL?

LOL!,..Nope just came across that way I guess.

Originally posted by Oso
didn't say you couldn't.
[/B]

Sorry,..I guess I misunderstood when you said, "IMHO, it seems more natural to not be linear. I've never sparred where I went back and forth and would be dropped for pushups or sitting in a horse for a 'break' if I did. In fighting you are going to be all over the place.

Why would you want to constrain a form to a linear ideal when it's exactly opposite of the ideal fro good fighting?"

Once again, IMHO, its because the linear constraint you speak of in the forms is just to give the person guidelines of the system/series of movements to use. Good fighting will never be learned from just doing forms, but excellent combinations will.

In addition, lets just say for teachings sake, what is the best for teaching a group of students in a contained area? Guessing that a set number of students in almost impossible, Creating geometric designs on a floor for them to be able to follow would be diffult in the least. However, a line, beit a crack between the stones on the floor, a piece of tape, carpet-line or whatever, you can line up several students; column & row, & be able to teach them all at the same time without them running all over each other.

Originally posted by Oso
all I'm trying to get some response on is "Why are most forms done in a linear fashion?" Most of the answers don't really adress the question beyond 'that's the way they are taught'
[/B]

Like I said earlier, chances are a distinct answer will never be known because the creators of the forms are long gone.

Originally posted by Oso
when did I indicate I didn't accept that? I'm trying to dig a little deeper than that. I agree there are greater mysteries but this is the one on my mind at the moment. :) And you'll have to excuse me if I'm not discouraged by initially not finding an answer.
[/B]

"But, I still don't see why that's any more valid than starting at A and ending at Z if each move from A thorugh Z is performed as it was designed."-Oso

Its not any more valid. I suppose again, I missunderstood your comment.

Originally posted by Oso
I agree with everything you say. You can say the same thing about a non-linear form and all forms should be taught with the exact philosophy as you have outlined above. I'm not trying to discuss technique however. Just a simple curiousity about the linear packaging of forms. I've learned sets in all manner: I patterns, T patterns, Square, cross and others. I find value in all of it. But the predominance in northern forms tends to be linear......and SO I am curious about that.
[/B]

I hope you find whatever your looking for.
Best Wishes,
~BTL

Tainan Mantis

01-28-2004, 08:52 PM

In old training method of the army(for large groups) the soldiers are locked in a straight line. They advance and retreat based on the sound of drums and, sometimes, motion of flags.
This method was taught to the largest population of people and was most often using long spear.

Many times in history mistakes were rewarded with beheading.
In fact, during training the soldiers couldn't turn their head to look in different directions even. Only follow the orders.
So it is unlikely that this method would change much with such a deeply ingrained fear.

Chi Jiguang, famous Ming general, explains that when the troops are in formation against the enemy, just about to begin battle, a single soldier turning his head to look behind him will fill all those behind him with fear.

So in light of this information we can see where the linear method as well as starting and stopping on the same location may have originated from.

Conversely, there is the training method for smaller groups.
They run in circles around each other performing 2 man sets.
Everyone is fighting simultaanuesly and there is no rest.
Remnants of this have been preserved to this day, called Song Jiangzhen in Taiwan.
This can incorporate many tens of people each with different weapons.
It trains fighting against different weopons and making quick decisions.
The pattern of running, stoppin and speed are regulated by drums.
This is also an effective, though different method.

In this light we see that starting and stopping on the same location will never happen.
This method of training has also been preserved in some schools of PM.
We have it called "sun moon training."

So in conclusion it is best to keep an open mind as both methods we have argued about so far have their place in trad MA and PM.

Just do the way you are told and be observant of other schools and you are sure to learn something.

MantisCool

01-28-2004, 09:25 PM

IMHO, when we fight we fight face to face. Where do we turn here and there? Even if the opponent move side to side, you too move as well but still face him! In 7-star mantis, we do side step. retreat and also turn back and I think that's more than enough.

When we do linear form we can move faster and with combination. In linear form you develop speed and in fighting its the speed that counts. I think most southern kungfus in the olden days are box or + form they tends to hit hard but were slower. Their style of fighting is like trading one to one blow and see who hits the hardest and can stand the blow! They are stokier and the northerners are taller and thus their kungfu evolved to suit their built and spacing.

Coming back to the Starting and ending point question, If we are to perform in group of 4 or more and if we doesnt end at the same place some of them would be crashing against the wall or falling off the stage! If let say a form was not finished at the same place as the starting why cant the old masters add a few steps or strokes to even up? So I THINK, there might probably be mistakes in the form. That's my 2 cents!

Oso

01-28-2004, 10:05 PM

So in light of this information we can see where the linear method as well as starting and stopping on the same location may have originated from.

Tainan, nice bit of history, thanks. the mind is open and the cup is empty, always.

Next question though is that, while the linear patterns worked best in that time and place, in modern CMA the focus is not on unit tactics but solo, mano e mano fighting. It is rare to see a heavy emphasis placed on positioning and other elements of fighting in relation to multiple opponents. IME, the MMA group is just as guilty of this.

So, could it not be supposed that the linear forms could evolve out of the unit tactic mode?

mantiscool:

Where do we turn here and there?

multiple opponents. I think in a self defense situation in modern times it is naive to think you will only fight one person. Even if you beat down on one dude you will surely see him and his buds the following week and if you are not prepared to consider multiple opponents then you will be the one beat down.

I will say, probably with much controversy, that linear forms SEEM to lend themselves to thinking in a one on one manner.

FTR, I totally agree, the linear format is the only possible format for a large class/school.

18elders

01-29-2004, 05:26 AM

just a thought: perhaps just for simplicity reasons in recording the movement in a poem? or to help hide the applications of the moves?

Oso- Yep, Oscar broke one arm. He had to have the bone cut and some plastic put on the bone because of the way it splintered.

Oso

01-29-2004, 06:04 AM

BTL, thanks, I'm just curious about this minor aspect at the moment as I move from old teacher/teaching to new teacher/teaching.

In addition, lets just say for teachings sake, what is the best for teaching a group of students in a contained area? Guessing that a set number of students in almost impossible, Creating geometric designs on a floor for them to be able to follow would be diffult in the least. However, a line, beit a crack between the stones on the floor, a piece of tape, carpet-line or whatever, you can line up several students; column & row, & be able to teach them all at the same time without them running all over each other.

in the category of fwiw, we handled the geometric patterns the same. you can 'nest' the forms w/ odd patterns by overlapping them. If you and I start a geometric set and we are far enough away from each other so our arms and legs don't bash into each other then we can both do the same geometric form at the same tempo. Granted if you have a dozen peeps doing this at the same time at different tempos then chaos will certainly ensue. Doing this always gave me good sense of paying attention to more than the guy in front of or behind me.

my old sifu would also have us line up so that we would run into each other. We were supposed to still do the forms but as we intersected another student we were supposed to either change tempo or modify the direction in order to evade each other.

my old sifu was very focused on mult-man aspects in his teaching.

18elders:

I've heard the masking bit before, oddly enough the term given me was 'bread board'. That must be a transliteration gone wrong. :)

'splintered', ugh. Tell him that's why they allow you to say 'uncle' and tap in jujitsu. Was it from a lock or a bad fall?

mantis108

01-29-2004, 12:19 PM

Great info there, Tainan. While the military influences in MA are great, I think there could be some other technical reasons as well.

I think we can look at it this way:

1) the shortest and the fastest way to go from point A to point B is a straight line. This is most ideal to overcome your opponent in an efficient manner.

2) Many styles begins their technique training with single technique drilled repeatedly. Most of them are drilled both left and right side with moving from one stance to another. This again forms a line drill. Old PM called this training aspect numerous postures.

3) In the Lanjie book by Shr Zhengzhong and his Kung Fu Brother, which was given to me by Tainan, there is a mentioning of Mantis first walking through hands 18 variations (rough translation). The first line of this section mentioned "to walk through hands first use Jabe ring step (Yuhuan Bu). It gives 18 different combinations that can be drilled in line, which seem to be moves that are drawn directly from the Yilu Zhaiyao (first essential). If we look at the 3 mother forms of the TJPM lineages, we could see the reminance of Jabe ring stepping in the beginning and the end of the each form usually make up of 4 to 5 roads (or lines). This also happens to Yilu Zhaiyao which in my mind is a later creation. So older PM IMHO would have begun with Yuhuan Bu (with high or low wrist elbow) and ended with Yuhuan Shou which has the waist chop as a variation. The old PM forms don't seem to have a concern of getting back to the starting spot but put importance on starting and ending with Yuhuan Bu moves. This to me is about illustrating the first 4 characters (Zhan Nian Bang Tie) of the 12 characters principle. I think it is in this way that the 12 characters principle is expressed holistically in the forms. In other the words, Yuhuan Bu is key to unlock a lot of the great mysteries of PM from a TJPM perspective.

Mantis108

MantisCool

01-29-2004, 07:43 PM

Oso,

Right, it is naive to think that we always fight one to one BUT it is also naive to think that we can fight multiple opponents.

Those who think that he can fight multiple opponents will be beaten up instead.

FTR, linear pattern doesnt mean we cannot fight multiple opponents. It strikes fast and finished off or injured the first one before handling the other one. We cannot expect to fight one side than turn to the other side and then turns back again!

Oso

01-29-2004, 08:18 PM

MantisCool, I will have to respectfully disagree. All kinds of variables.

can I fight multiple opponents as skilled or better than I am? probably not.

can I fight multiple opponents close to my skill level?. I don't think so either.

but, I know I can succesfully fight multiple street brawlers and succeed.

relative skill level is always a factor but I don't think you can say 'no one can fight multiple opponents'.

naturally, this is just my opinion based on my experience.

MantisCool

01-29-2004, 09:38 PM

Oso, I agree with your variables.

Based on my experience, I too can fight several opponents but when you fight and win it is only that battle alone when the opponents come back again you will definately lose the war!

There are newspaper reports everyday where somone was beaten up or got killed and when you read the stories further it is always a revenge! The loser is most of the time the winner in the beginning. He think he can handle anything and therefore let down his guard.

When I said, no one can fight multiple opponents, I meant good faith because you can win the battle but will lose the war. The person you have beaten will come after you when you are least expected!

Oso

01-29-2004, 09:50 PM

i see what you mean now.

yes, it is a shame that the concept of honor is lost in today's society. you are absolutely correct that you must count on any altercation expanding to include friends relatives etc.

part of our course as 'warriors' if you will, is that we must accept defeat as readily as winning. imo, that is part of the character building of any combat art.

as a bouncer, I new it was time to quit when I felt like I needed to cary because I had ****ed so many people off in the course of doing my job.

lol, i was in a redneck college town, so wed and thurs nights I had college boys out feeling their oats for the first time and fri and saturday was crusty redneck dudes. the worst was when those two crowds overlapped. ;)

so...tactically it is possible to defeat multiple opponents but strategically it's not wise to fight anyone.

'goodnight gracie'

Tainan Mantis

01-30-2004, 03:31 AM

mantis cool,
What I was referring to in large group practice where you notice"turning here and there" I thnk you will notice in your own forms, especially of weapons.

In large groups of weapon fighting forms, over 6 and maybe 100 people, you deal only with the person in front of you.
To insure that it is difficult to be struck from behind you must run forward as fast as possible, so you only have a strike or two on each opponent before you move on to the next one.
The running pattern is regulated by the form.

But in 2 man fighting there is also a lot of turning.
No need to find some super MA master, just watch a boxing match on TV. You will see them shifting location perpetually.
Same goes for randori trtaining or most anything(maybe not sumo)

How much more so turning goes on in PM when you can grab strike and throw.

Oso,
I don't know the answer to your question. But it is interesting to note that even the 7* forms that Taiwan and HK have in common don't always share the linear characteristics.

Forms like beng bu and cha chuei differ that in Taiwan sometimes they leave the line of travel in places where they stay on the line in HK version.

Also I will rush forward to attack my enemy and it is linear, but if I apply a throw which doesn't work, his escape or counter is often on a different line of travel.

Oso

01-30-2004, 06:02 AM

Also I will rush forward to attack my enemy and it is linear, but if I apply a throw which doesn't work, his escape or counter is often on a different line of travel.

in broad generalization, I can say that in all of my old forms every attack sequence could finish in a throw (personally, I almost always looked at it that way though others didn't). Almost all the throws would use spinning or spiraling to execute the throw. after the throw we would be facing a new direction and the next 'road' would start from there against a new attacker.

Oso

01-30-2004, 06:07 AM

Originally posted by Tainan Mantis
mantis cool,
What I was referring to in large group practice where you notice"turning here and there" I thnk you will notice in your own forms, especially of weapons.

In large groups of weapon fighting forms, over 6 and maybe 100 people, you deal only with the person in front of you.
To insure that it is difficult to be struck from behind you must run forward as fast as possible, so you only have a strike or two on each opponent before you move on to the next one.
The running pattern is regulated by the form.[/i]

this is in theme with the military origin you spoke of earlier.
this is cross culture and has been used by every military force in the world when they used 'hand to hand' weapons.

hmmm, there might be a parallel drawn between moving away from this methodology and the overall decreasing casualty rates
of wars throughout time....but I'm only on the first cup of coffee so I can't think any deeper on it at the moment.;)

MantisCool

01-30-2004, 09:56 PM

Oso.

You are right! There are very few gentleman around now. Their querrel wont end with you until they get their due back. We cant be looking back our shoulder everyday.

Tainan,

What I am saying is that, even if your opponent move to the sides or back you still move as well but still face to face with him.
This means it is still linear IMO. Whereas, in square pattern or others the form is meant to face several opponents. IMHO, this type of forms are outdated already. As I have mentioned earlier, it is not advisable to think we can ALWAYS handle multiple opponents like in the olden days. But, nowadays, I have noticed a change of styles to this type of forms. The best example is Wushu. In Wushu , most of the time, the turning is only done after several linear movements. Well, thats my thought. I might be wrong because I might have missed out some pointers.