forms for black belt/sash

[mkriii]

How many forms should a black belt know in order to have a black belt? five? 7? 10? more than ten?

For my black sash I had to know 7 (gung li, tiger, snake, leopard, dragon, long fist, crane) empty hand forms and 3 weapons (staff/bo, broadsword, whip chain) forms. In addition to those required forms I've learned some forms from here and there. These forms include a monkey fist form, 7 star praying mantis form, a five animal plus lohan form, tiger/crane form, and nan chuan form.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Dude, doesn't that depend on the style?
Some may only need to know 3, some 5 some 15 some 30.

[mkriii]

My name is Mark not Dude. But anyways my point of asking this question is this....if you have a form with the basics of your style (kicks, punches, blocks, etc....), a form with intermediate techniques, and a form with advanced techniques....how many more forms do you (style) need? wouldn't it all be repetitive? Wouldn't it all be repetitive? Of course with 5 animal styles you would need a form for each animal style and then maybe 1 or 2 that had a combination of all the techniques in it. But to know 20 or 30 or even 600 forms like some systems claim to know is just rediculous (in my opinion). No need to know that many forms.

[MasterKiller]

My name is Mark not Dude. But anyways my point of asking this question is this....if you have a form with the basics of your style (kicks, punches, blocks, etc....), a form with intermediate techniques, and a form with advanced techniques....how many more forms do you (style) need? wouldn't it all be repetitive? Wouldn't it all be repetitive? Of course with 5 animal styles you would need a form for each animal style and then maybe 1 or 2 that had a combination of all the techniques in it. But to know 20 or 30 or even 600 forms like some systems claim to know is just rediculous (in my opinion). No need to know that many forms.

I would also argue that learning forms from styles "outside" you system can be just as counter-productive.

My first black covered 10 empty hand sets, 2 weapon sets, and Tan Tui. While I've learned more weapons sets since then, I still only practice those 10 hand sets and the Tan Tui.

[David Jamieson]

It depends on your school.

For instance, if you do wing chun, you don't have many forms, if you do CLF, you may have a lot of forms, if you do Hung Gar you have a few less, if you do Mantis, a different amount of forms again and so on and so on through the styles.

Besides the fact that sashes only have meaning within the school they are handed out, otherwise, it's you that has the kungfu...or not. :)

[mkriii]

then by that rational you would say that cross training is counter-productive which is what MMA is made up of, right? So you don't believe in adding grappling skills into your repetuire(sp?)?

I think that learning a form here and there would not hurt or be counter-productive to your training as long as you keep your main focus on your specific style. Now if you were studying a chinese martial art (which uses more circular movements except for Hsing I Chuan which is linear) and then went to something like Tang Soo Do which is almost entirely linear then I would say yes this is going to hurt your training. But a form here and there I don't see it hurting, maybe helping in some ways because you'll see how other style may block or set up certain techniques, etc....

[MasterKiller]

then by that rational you would say that cross training is counter-productive which is what MMA is made up of, right? So you don't believe in adding grappling skills into your repetuire(sp?)?

What i like about MMA is that, because of the openess, you can add techniques without modifying, discarding, or changing what you already do. Take what you need and adapt. From that perspective, I don't think its counter-productive.

But, something like adding a Hung Gar form to my Long Fist would just be silly to me.

[David Jamieson]

picking up an extra form or two after you have developed a foundational understanding of what you already have is fine in my point of view and not counter productive at all.

however, if you haven't putthe time and effort into completing one thing, then getting something brand new and contrary into the mix or built on contrary principles would indeed hinder oes training regimen depending on what their goal is.

Truly, if you are going for straight up fighting and you want to be there quickly, then in my opinion, forms are not the way to get there.

You cannot learn to swim without actually getting into the water in other words. And if you get in too deep waters without having the basics of swimming, you will perish.

the same applies in fighting.

specific focus on form and performance of form in a solo environment is only part of the picture of a martial artist.

they must have will to fight, the strength and endurance to do so and lastly techniques, derived from form or otherwise have the least amount of importance in regards to attributes and what's in the tool box.

[mkriii]

What i like about MMA is that, because of the openess, you can add techniques without modifying, discarding, or changing what you already do. Take what you need and adapt. From that perspective, I don't think its counter-productive.

But, something like adding a Hung Gar form to my Long Fist would just be silly to me.

Well to be honest the reason I picked up these other forms that are "outside" my particular style is because I had gone away to college and found some other people on campus that did Chinese Martial Arts so we would get together and work out and exchange forms with each other. It was more of a way to work out and keep in shape than anything while learning something new at the same time. I was going away to college that was abbout 2 hours away so driving back home to train at my teachers school everynight would have been costly on the wallet (using up gasoline).

[mkriii]

What about doing Hung Gar Kung Fu or Sil Lum Kung Fu and learning aTai Chi form....say maybe learning the Yang Long Form or Chen style Tai Chi form. Would that be silly to you? Just curious.

[SoCo KungFu]

What about doing Hung Gar Kung Fu or Sil Lum Kung Fu and learning aTai Chi form....say maybe learning the Yang Long Form or Chen style Tai Chi form. Would that be silly to you? Just curious.

Nothing wrong with that. The taiji will help refine body mechanics. In my northern mantis kwoon I studied Yang and Chen. In my Hung Gar kwoon they also trained Yang and Wu (though I didn't train taiji there as I really just didn't care to learn another form).

There is nothing wrong with cross-training. It all depends on your approach though. You need to find a way to make all the different elements come together though. That's not always possible. While they say a style is just a style and its the person that counts, that's not always true. Some styles have a certain strategic focus. You have to understand the strengths and weaknesses, as well as what that methodology is. Then you can adapt accordingly. In my experience it has been all good in going from Northern mantis to hung gar. If anything it made my mantis better as well.

As to the black belt forms Q....its been said, depends on the system. And more importantly it depends on your goals to be honest. You don't need a single form to fight. Not a one....but you might need a couple dozen to carry on a lineage to the next generation.

[Lucas]

taiji principles, IMO, compliments any art.

[Toby]

Now if you were studying a chinese martial art (which uses more circular movements except for Hsing I Chuan which is linear) ...Huh? Hsing I is linear? News to me ... Mine's full of spirals.

[Drake]

Actually, I like "dude" better.

[David Jamieson]

Huh? Hsing I is linear? News to me ... Mine's full of spirals.

To someone who hasn't studied, the 5 looks linear because of the paths to and fro. But I get where you're coming from as far as where the forces are.

[sanjuro_ronin]

taiji principles, IMO, compliments any art.

Yep, its actually very hard to find arts that DON'T compliment each other in one way or another.
Many systems that have what it appears to be opposite power generation principles actually compliment themselves as one is in reality the "advanced" version of another.


Dude.
:D

[SoCo KungFu]

Dude...........................................

[David Jamieson]

Dude!!!!!!

[sanjuro_ronin]

Dude!!!!!!

Dudes !!!!!!!

[zhangxihuan]

i guess it depends on the school. My former school had about 15, (all of which were rather elementary in terms of movements and styles)

my current school you do one excessively long one (around 80 moves or more) for your red belt. then after you do a long empty hand one that has about 100 moves. Then you select one long weapon (usually people pick staff) and either jian or dao (but it has to be an advanced form).

but each school is different. I do think some stuff is VERY repetitive in some schools- to the point of stupidity. Perhaps its just so people can make money, i'm not sure. All I know is at one school i learned some forms rather incorrectly, then went to another one where I learned one form that was very very long and had all the same moves plus more.

[SoCo KungFu]

Dudes !!!!!!!

Duuude :)

[mawali]

My name is Mark not Dude. But anyways my point of asking this question is this....if you have a form with the basics of your style (kicks, punches, blocks, etc....), a form with intermediate techniques, and a form with advanced techniques....how many more forms do you (style) need? wouldn't it all be repetitive? Wouldn't it all be repetitive? Of course with 5 animal styles you would need a form for each animal style and then maybe 1 or 2 that had a combination of all the techniques in it. But to know 20 or 30 or even 600 forms like some systems claim to know is just rediculous (in my opinion). No need to know that many forms.


megga dittoes!
It depends on which style you study and your own teacher because there is no standard curriculum in CMA. Depending on how you were taught, in CMA it is not that you learn intermediate techniques but you build on the basics and progress to integrate the form and its function.
If you have good instruction in CMA, you could be good enough in 1 year!

[Samurai Jack]

Funny ya'll mention Hsing-i and belts...

A school I trained at briefly considered adopting a belt program, but quickly dismissed the idea.

We all agreed that organizing our system into arbitrary check points like how many forms someone knew would be counterproductive to actually grasping the point of the art. My Sifu put it well when he said, "I could show you how to beat up a black belt with one or two techniques, but that dosen't mean you have gongfu. What are you here to learn?"

[Rapason]

I strongly agree.

I dont think that learning multiple forms or styles that may even seem totally opposite from each other is necessarily counter productive. I think it is all up to the practitioner to understand and realize the essence of the forms they know and how they are to be applied.

If you can maintain the distinctions but realize the complementary aspects of different forms, again realizing and maintaing the essence of each form when practicing or applying it, I dont see a reason why you couldnt learn all the forms in the world!

As far as the Black belts and sashes go, I think they can be fun and all - and hold alot of meaning, but I certainly agree with Samurai Jack's Sifu, they are necessary for developing good gongfu! :D

Dao-an,

Rapason

[mkriii]

Funny ya'll mention Hsing-i and belts...

A school I trained at briefly considered adopting a belt program, but quickly dismissed the idea.

We all agreed that organizing our system into arbitrary check points like how many forms someone knew would be counterproductive to actually grasping the point of the art. My Sifu put it well when he said, "I could show you how to beat up a black belt with one or two techniques, but that dosen't mean you have gongfu. What are you here to learn?"

How would it be counter productive? Belts are no big deal and have nothing to do with being able to comprehend or retain information. I don't see how your sifu came to this conclusion that belts would be counter productive to grasping the point of the art. Please explain this to me.

[sanjuro_ronin]

How would it be counter productive? Belts are no big deal and have nothing to do with being able to comprehend or retain information. I don't see how your sifu came to this conclusion that belts would be counter productive to grasping the point of the art. Please explain this to me.

I can't speak for his sifu, but I know many teachers in the MA that don't use belts because they see no need and other because they view it as personal growth and progression, and how do you strandardise that with a colour belt?
Most FMA, for example, don't use belts either.

[mkriii]

I can't speak for his sifu, but I know many teachers in the MA that don't use belts because they see no need and other because they view it as personal growth and progression, and how do you strandardise that with a colour belt?
Most FMA, for example, don't use belts either.

I understand that some teachers want to stick to the traditional ways and not use belts or sashes but to say that it will be counter productive, I don't understand that comment.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I understand that some teachers want to stick to the traditional ways and not use belts or sashes but to say that it will be counter productive, I don't understand that comment.

If the goal of a MA is fighting skill, then only that can be the measure.
If the goal is personal growth and development, any standardized symbol is irrelevant and can be viewed as counter-productive to the goal.

Kano probably didn't do anyone a great favour when he made belts popular, though his intentions were good.

[mkriii]

To someone who hasn't studied, the 5 looks linear because of the paths to and fro. But I get where you're coming from as far as where the forces are.

I've never done Hsing I but everyone that I've seen do it, it looks pretty but linear (done in a straight line). My Sifu does Hsing I and it looks linear to me. But like I said I never did Hsing I. I tried a couple classes but just didn't like it. He had me starting out with teaching me the step and punch. From what I remember when you stepped you kinda did a stomp with the front leg. Is that correct?

[tattooedmonk]

Huh? Hsing I is linear? News to me ... Mine's full of spirals.It's not, it looks linear to the untrained eye. It is done using eliptical movements.

[IronWeasel]

It's not, it looks linear to the untrained eye. It is done using eliptical movements.



My (recent and limited) understanding of Hsing-i is that it is linear in orientation, but the blocking is circular and intended to close the centerline and the strikes are angular and from the oblique.

[Samurai Jack]

mkriii: Ranking is counterproductive to acquiring the gongfu because it sets a student up to have an arbitrary goal. The inner purpose of Hsing-i is to link intention with physical movement.

What this means in the larger scheme of things is that the purpose of practice is simply to practice. That's it. If you assign a set of goals to the practice, then it becomes a means to an end. Then people tend to focus on future-goal-oriented thinking.

In Hsing-i there is but one goal, and it happens in the present moment; linking the mind with the body in the moment that movement is occuring, thus Hsing (form) I (intention) Chuan (boxing). If you are focused on the future (I want that belt!), or on the past (I got that belt!), then you are missing the point.

Iron Weasel: Even in the most linear seeming movement there are twistings happening throughout the pelvis, the waist, the ribs, spine, ankles, knees, elbows, wrists... pretty much everywhere. That's why we say it's not linear.

Crossing hands with a Hsing-i practitioner most people are surprised to find thier attacks being deflected away by all of those tiny spirals. It looks linear, but as soon as you touch the Hsing-i man, say trying to parry a linear looking beng (straight punch), you'll feel those spirals as your parry is deflected away. You might even be thrown even though the trajectory of the beng dosen't change. This happens because of those little spirals.

Ask your teacher to show you. In less than five minutes he could probably convince you. It's hard to describe using only words.

:)

[Toby]

It's not, it looks linear to the untrained eye. It is done using eliptical movements.I was being facetious.

[IronWeasel]

Iron Weasel: Even in the most linear seeming movement there are twistings happening throughout the pelvis, the waist, the ribs, spine, ankles, knees, elbows, wrists... pretty much everywhere. That's why we say it's not linear.
:)



When I think of linear styles, I think of it as your position relative to the centerline of your opponent. Some styles have you moving and stepping off onto a 45 and may contain forms with circular patterns of footwork.

The Hsing-i drills (mostly) seem to move in a straignt line, although the blocking is certainly circular, albeit, subtle.

[Samurai Jack]

Iron Weasel: You aren't correct in your observations concerning the footwork either. It took me awhile, but I found a clip on youtube showing what I'm talking about. Here's a link to a new thread I started in the Internal forum showing the clip:

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?p=858575#post858575

[IronWeasel]

Iron Weasel: You aren't correct in your observations concerning the footwork either. It took me awhile, but I found a clip on youtube showing what I'm talking about. Here's a link to a new thread I started in the Internal forum showing the clip:

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?p=858575#post858575



Roger that!

Good clip...that's a nice looking drill! It clearly demonstrates the circular application.

Thanks for digging that up.


IronWeasel