The importance/unimportance of FORMS

[AdrianK]

Forms forms forms.

Practically every martial art has em, but the interpretation of their usefulness varies from culture to culture, style to style, and teacher to teacher.

So, what are forms?

I understand their use as reference points, everyone practically knows this, or should know that forms generally have the majority of the curriculum within them, and can be interpreted plenty of different ways.

But what else?

If External development(muscles, coordination, etc.) - Can the application be separated from the form, thereby isolating the development of these external attributes?

If for Internal development, what is your definition of "Internal" attributes? What "Internal" attributes do these forms develop, and can the development also be isolated from the form, thereby making the form nothing more than what it is, a reference point?

Can the internal and/or external attribute development within the form, be taught without the form?


Forms are quite a good subject for debate. :D

[Drake]

If you are just going through the motions... then except for some form of light exercise and technique refinement, they are useless.

However, if you approach them critically, can visualize their uses, and how to cut things out of them and mix and match in order to be combat effective, then you have something.

[AdrianK]

So if you're talking about combat effectiveness, is there any difference between forms and doing drills using those same movements, either in the air, or with a partner?

[David Jamieson]

What forms do you know thoroughly and practice yourself?

What benefits have you gotten from them?

I think you can answer your own question here if you have those two pieces.

[hskwarrior]

This documentary featuring Chu Chi Ling, the narrator has a pretty decent explanation on the meanings and purpose of forms

Tiger and Crane Form[ (http://www.fooooo.com/watch.php?id=-VQW55fdJxA)
oops, sorry, i posted the wrong link....its the right link now.

Yeah, i went back and watched it again, and agree even more with the narration. He also mentioned the essence of the Tiger and the Crane......these two elements (in essence) are also part of Jeung Hung Sing's Choy Lee Fut (Hung Sing Kuen). Our school is no doubt more of a Hung Mun fighting school, and would explain those two elements being present in our system. The more i study the Hung Mun Secret Society, and their secret signs, postures, and so forth, the more i realize it's not a GUNG FU thing i'm seeing, i'm seeing secret signals designed as means of identification.

[AdrianK]

I think you can answer your own question here if you have those two pieces.

The point was to get varying opinions on forms.

[Hendrik]

Can the internal and/or external attribute development within the form, be taught without the form?




It is clear and no debate is needed.



1, which form?

Not all forms are the same, some are advance some are basic, some doesnt have the internal components some totally screw up.....




2, for advance form Definitely CANNOT.


But then first one needs to know what does one really develop or cultivate with the Internal and/or external components.

[AdrianK]

2, for advance form Definitely CANNOT.

So scientifically, what does an advance form develop that cannot be translated into any other set of movements?

[Hendrik]

So scientifically, what does an advance form develop that cannot be translated into any other set of movements?



First , you said,
"Can the internal and/or external attribute development within the form, be taught without the form?"

but now you change your question.

"what does an advance form develop that cannot be translated into any other set of movements?


I dont want to argue or debate with twisting word and changing topic because that is not my interested of my posting.








For those who is interested in

Why I said "for advance form Definitely CANNOT. as an answer to " Can the internal and/or external attribute development within the form, be taught without the form?


The definition of form in TCMA ---- form is momentum compose by set of movements with a theme.




An advance form have a theme, and the theme is often a type of momentum. and a momentum is a flow of movements instead of a single movement or discret execution of single movements.

So, to support the execution of the momentum, the "external" or the momentum type needs to be describe and the "internal" or the conditioning to support the momentum 's "execution needs to be in place.

analogy:
IE: A moon lite sonata is not just a collection of set of musical tone. It is a set of musical tone with a theme and one better know how to handle the musical instuments to implement the music.

[AdrianK]

"Can the internal and/or external attribute development within the form, be taught without the form?"

but now you change your question.

"what does an advance form develop that cannot be translated into any other set of movements?

Its essentially the same question.
Internal/External Attribute development taught without the form - Meaning for example - If a form has me do three squats, can't I just do those three squats on their own, without the rest of it?



The definition of form in TCMA ---- form is momentum compose by set of movements with a theme.

Who says that is the definition of form? You mean *your* definition specifically?



A moon lite sonata is not just a collection of set of musical tone. It is a set of musical tone with a theme and one better know how to handle the musical instuments to implement the music.

At the same time, simply playing moonlight sonata over and over isn't the only (and certainly not the best) way to develop your skills as a musician.

Moonlight Sonata is not a required piece, either. You can develop your skills with many pieces of music.

[Hendrik]

If a form has me do three squats, can't I just do those three squats on their own, without the rest of it? -----

if the name of the Form is "three squats and nothing else" sure.

but if the name of the form is "frog momentum " then it is a different story and btw frog breath differently too.






Who says that is the definition of form? You mean *your* definition specifically? ----

if the Chinese do according to you, then they dont have to name thier form.




Those who is interested can read the following ancient old piece (as old as 1650's )---- one of the

example on momentum form and thier implementation requirement, including the breathing and how to use different part of body to create the momentum ---勢.


<白鶴仙師祖傳真法> 中的 <方七娘白鶴拳十五勢>，就載有 : [跌、砍拳…招陽、……]十五個勢法，並注明如何動作及攻防意義之所在。…….這十五個勢應為當時最早見之於拳譜中的勢法，當是當時 所傳教的。

比如十五勢拳譜中所寫：

[招 (昭) 陽。白鶴拳法之五：

凡拳起手，只要招 (昭)陽，無論他用何勢，可用此勢，大門放過，小門直入。蓋此勢兩手顧鼻面，短牙顧中攔切，戒分 腳退後。]……。


三) 兩手昭陽、吞吐節力：雙手沉肩、墜肘、坐腕成「昭陽手」，分成三節，肩至肘為內節(根節)，肘關節為中節， 腕關節為尾節，要做到內節如鐵一般堅實，與肩身成一整體；中節吞墜，尾節如膠如漆，靈活多變。

雙手來去出力發勁，出手時吐氣(吐)，收手時吸氣(吞)，一吞一吐互相配合無間，堅持「中門不讓，子午不離 」。

練習時與肩、頭、背、胯、膝要貫串一氣，互相呼應，如有橡筋互相牽引、拉扯，吞肩坐節(墜肘)，發胛力，勁 達指尖。出手時節中隨身與胯同向，不可縮入開出，手節對膝，承接全身各處之力。








At the same time, simply playing moonlight sonata over and over isn't the only (and certainly not the best) way to develop your skills as a musician. ------


You are right. if you define what is a Form. However, when it is TCMA, those chinese certainly doesnt think like you.





Moonlight Sonata is not a required piece, either. You can develop your skills with many pieces of music.------


No one said moonlight sonata is the required piece for everyone.

Sanchin form of White crane is not, SLT form for WCK is not. TaiZu long form for Shao Lin is not. none of them is if you practice MT or BJJ.


But if you practice White CRane of Fujian style that is a different story.





Finally,
What is your point? to understand to discuss what and how things done in TCMA or to win arguement and debating ?

if it is for winning arguement and debating, count me out. I am not interested.

[Drake]

Actually, there are some excellent musical pieces out there that comprehensively improve your skills, regardless of what style you normally play. Complex jazz, for instance, will guarantee improved guitar skills.

[Hendrik]

Actually, there are some excellent musical pieces out there that comprehensively improve your skills, regardless of what style you normally play. Complex jazz, for instance, will guarantee improved guitar skills.


I totally agree with you!

I myself learn different form from different styles because it widen my horizon. certain things which "look the same" turn out to be very different in handling.


In my understanding of TCMA, a Form is like a musical pieces. there are many many excellent piece out there. and to know a piece is not just learning how to play a few keys.

A form is a "symphony", a form needs to be played until one fuse into it, and even with the same form, one never do the same form twice in the same manner because the body condition, the emotion, the focus shift....etc. can never be the same.

similar to the same song can be sing in many ways with one's style and emotion fusing in it..... it is certainly not some mechanical robotic programing which is learning 3 squat or five middle punch.

[AdrianK]

Finally,
What is your point? to understand to discuss what and how things done in TCMA or to win arguement and debating ?

The point is to find what people around the world think of/understand of their forms.

So much talk of not knowing kung fu without knowing your forms, but are forms necessary to know kung fu? I don't believe so, but I'd love to see an argument that could prove this to me otherwise.

Scientifically, theres nothing I've ever seen of any form, or heard of any form, that cannot be separated from itself and isolated and achieve the same results.

Your argument really isn't doing anything to prove it to me either. Your arguments are extremely vague and you speak in an interesting combination of non-specific and overly specific terms, none of which make any sense to me.

[David Jamieson]

The point is to find what people around the world think of/understand of their forms.

So much talk of not knowing kung fu without knowing your forms, but are forms necessary to know kung fu? I don't believe so, but I'd love to see an argument that could prove this to me otherwise.

Scientifically, theres nothing I've ever seen of any form, or heard of any form, that cannot be separated from itself and isolated and achieve the same results.

Your argument really isn't doing anything to prove it to me either. Your arguments are extremely vague and you speak in an interesting combination of non-specific and overly specific terms, none of which make any sense to me.

You still haven't stated what forms you know and understand and what benefits they have brought you.

In this statement, you are actually demonstrating a little lack of understanding in regards to what is and what is not kungfu.

I don't think you want an argument that will dash your beliefs, whatever those are as you are not stating them, you are more or less trying to bait others it seems as opposed to expressing your experience and asking for comparison.

so, original question: What forms do you know and what benefit have you gotten from their practice.

second question: how do you think that would be different from another persons experience with practice of form?

[Hendrik]

You still haven't stated what forms you know and understand and what benefits they have brought you.

In this statement, you are actually demonstrating a little lack of understanding in regards to what is and what is not kungfu.

I don't think you want an argument that will dash your beliefs, whatever those are as you are not stating them, you are more or less trying to bait others it seems as opposed to expressing your experience and asking for comparison.

so, original question: What forms do you know and what benefit have you gotten from their practice.

second question: how do you think that would be different from another persons experience with practice of form?



I totally agree.

[AdrianK]

You still haven't stated what forms you know and understand and what benefits they have brought you.

In this statement, you are actually demonstrating a little lack of understanding in regards to what is and what is not kungfu.

I don't think you want an argument that will dash your beliefs, whatever those are as you are not stating them, you are more or less trying to bait others it seems as opposed to expressing your experience and asking for comparison.

so, original question: What forms do you know and what benefit have you gotten from their practice.

second question: how do you think that would be different from another persons experience with practice of form?

:rolleyes: So this has turned into a discussion regarding my experience with forms. Okay...

1.) The entirety of the Wing Chun curriclum of forms - Benefits are limited to references. Individual portions of the form show proper breathing, stance work in yee gee kim yeung ma, coordination through repetition of movements BUT there is nothing within the form that cannot be separated and applied to something else.


2.) I believe there are plenty of people out there that believe that form is some kind of chi power building phenomenon and that only by practicing a set of movements a certain, perfect way, can one achieve the benefits.

Which from a scientific perspective, is a ****ing joke.

[wetwonder]

[QUOTE=
Tiger and Crane Form[ (http://www.fooooo.com/watch.php?id=-VQW55fdJxA)
oops, sorry, i posted the wrong link....its the right link now.

[/QUOTE]


I love that video, thanks. I've been doing hung gar for almost four months, and this is my hopefully fresh take on forms. We are borrowing for the most part movements of the tiger and the crane. The movements, offensive and defensive, are not natural to us. They are learned.

When I started doing first form, I found each technique to be difficult and/or awkward, and more so as I got deeper and deeper into the form. Now, I just about am at the end of learning the entire form, and I've done portions of it about 600 times I would guess since starting. Now the movements are becoming integrated into my innate sense of movement. For example, I catch myself doing certain things differently. When I reach into the back seat of the car, I catch myself swing my arm back like I'm doing a rainbow punch. When I try to block the dog from getting out the front door, my back foot swings around like I'm going into a forward stance. When I take stuff out of the dishwasher, I catch my self bringing it up to the cupboard like doing a verticle block.

So for me, the repetition of movements has started to become ingrained into my muscle memory. As I start doing the two man forms now, each technique pulled from first form comes out almost without thinking. So to sum up, forms appear to make the movements part of us. That may be the "internal" aspect.

That's my two cents for now. I reserve the right to change my opinion at a later date.

[Lai See]

Could a moderator please explain why have mine and others posts been removed from this thread? An interesting discussion as I saw it was emerging.

Thank you.

[David Jamieson]

Could a moderator please explain why have mine and others posts been removed from this thread? An interesting discussion as I saw it was emerging.

Thank you.

all posts made to any of these forums on teh 16th were lost due to a system failure

[Lai See]

Thank you for the reply, however my post was yesterday, the 25th.

[spaced]

Forms forms forms.

Practically every martial art has em, but the interpretation of their usefulness varies from culture to culture, style to style, and teacher to teacher.

So, what are forms?

I understand their use as reference points, everyone practically knows this, or should know that forms generally have the majority of the curriculum within them, and can be interpreted plenty of different ways.

But what else?

If External development(muscles, coordination, etc.) - Can the application be separated from the form, thereby isolating the development of these external attributes?

If for Internal development, what is your definition of "Internal" attributes? What "Internal" attributes do these forms develop, and can the development also be isolated from the form, thereby making the form nothing more than what it is, a reference point?

Can the internal and/or external attribute development within the form, be taught without the form?


Forms are quite a good subject for debate. :D

Adrian,


speaking from my own experience, forms are their to teach you specifics, ie, rooting, stepping, breathing, sinking, lifting, floating, attacking, defending, turning, straight lines, circles....the list goes on.

Anyone can learn a form and perform it, but it takes true practice and dedication to actually understand them and translate them into your kungfu.


Again, you may disagree, so do tell us what you are looking for in terms of martial arts. I can give you my opinion on wing chun

[hskwarrior]

Man, everything that needs to be said about forms is PERFECTLY EXPLAINED in that video........yet you guys keep on going in circles about the same thing.....looking for the answers........when that video contains the perfect example why gung fu people practice forms.

[David Jamieson]

Thank you for the reply, however my post was yesterday, the 25th.

apparently there was another system failure yesterday as well.
I lost some posts throughout the forum as well and so did a few others.

ah well, impermanence and all that! :)

[Lai See]

apparently there was another system failure yesterday as well.
I lost some posts throughout the forum as well and so did a few others.

ah well, impermanence and all that! :)


OK thank you for the reply.

[AdrianK]

Adrian,


speaking from my own experience, forms are their to teach you specifics, ie, rooting, stepping, breathing, sinking, lifting, floating, attacking, defending, turning, straight lines, circles....the list goes on.

Anyone can learn a form and perform it, but it takes true practice and dedication to actually understand them and translate them into your kungfu.


Again, you may disagree, so do tell us what you are looking for in terms of martial arts. I can give you my opinion on wing chun


Yes, I understand that they are like references, in that they teach you many(if not all) the applications, physical templates, concepts and training methods of a particular style.

Generally you can learn a huge amount about a style just by learning the first few forms.

However, my views on it are specifically that from a training perspective, they're not required. You can become a competent fighter without them.

I'm not saying they aren't great training tools, I should clarify, this is mostly in response to several peoples assertion that Bruce Lee didn't have an understanding of wing chun, simply because he didn't learn biu gee or the other 68 movements of the wooden dummy.

So the basic point is, you can understand a style without its forms.

They're great reference points, great learning tools. But the idea that a certain flow of extremely specific movements is required to understand a style, or to develop some kind of proficiency, is unrealistic.

Of course, we have most people in the martial arts communities who believe differently. But thats just my view on it.

On a different note, I believe its a great method of self-expression... I have done hundreds of different versions of siu lim tao and chum kiu specifically, which has changed and evolved throughout the years i've practiced, and my life experiences.

It goes beyond tempo, and into ideas I've practiced in other styles, or ideas I've thought up myself, that get incorporated into the forms. Of course, I also know the original forms and practice those as reference points, and never have forgotten them no matter how I've changed my own personal forms.

[spaced]

Yes, I understand that they are like references, in that they teach you many(if not all) the applications, physical templates, concepts and training methods of a particular style.

Generally you can learn a huge amount about a style just by learning the first few forms.

However, my views on it are specifically that from a training perspective, they're not required. You can become a competent fighter without them.

I'm not saying they aren't great training tools, I should clarify, this is mostly in response to several peoples assertion that Bruce Lee didn't have an understanding of wing chun, simply because he didn't learn biu gee or the other 68 movements of the wooden dummy.

So the basic point is, you can understand a style without its forms.

They're great reference points, great learning tools. But the idea that a certain flow of extremely specific movements is required to understand a style, or to develop some kind of proficiency, is unrealistic.

Of course, we have most people in the martial arts communities who believe differently. But thats just my view on it.

On a different note, I believe its a great method of self-expression... I have done hundreds of different versions of siu lim tao and chum kiu specifically, which has changed and evolved throughout the years i've practiced, and my life experiences.

It goes beyond tempo, and into ideas I've practiced in other styles, or ideas I've thought up myself, that get incorporated into the forms. Of course, I also know the original forms and practice those as reference points, and never have forgotten them no matter how I've changed my own personal forms.

It seems your issues with forms is about the fighting side of it. You say you can become a competent fighter without learning forms - well this has been proved in western boxing and kickboxing, where forms are not taught but instead you are simply taught how to punch and kick. I may be wrong on what angle you are coming from?

But I have to disagree where you say that you "can understand a style without learning the forms" Most if not all things taught in a style, will be included in of the 10's of forms in that style. Yes, a teacher can teach you the different types of attacks etc involved in a particular style, without doing the forms, but the forms encompass and tie in everything togetherm which takes me back to breathing etc.

This is a great debate, and everyone is entitled to their own opinions

[AdrianK]

You misunderstand, idont have a problem with forms, i only have a problem with people overstating their importance. I personally spend time every day to practice them.