i highly respect form practice.
flaying your arms around and stealing names from northern kung fu isnt exactly my thing tho.
Printable View
i highly respect form practice.
flaying your arms around and stealing names from northern kung fu isnt exactly my thing tho.
Good, cause no one should be flaying (FLAYING---WHATEVER THAT MEANS) their arms around while stealing names from northern kung fu.Quote:
i highly respect form practice.
flaying your arms around and stealing names from northern kung fu isnt exactly my thing tho.
i love the smell of irony in the morning
I like to use a steamer. But, the 100,00 plus students who DO practice forms couldn't give two squats about the five people on this forum who doesn't like forms practice. LMAOQuote:
i love the smell of irony in the morning
its funny when american kung fu people think they matter.
I know right?!?!?!......WTF were they thinking?Quote:
its funny when american kung fu people think they matter.
Kung Fu has so many forms and so few fighters.... boxing has so little form but so many fighters.
How are forms justified from a martial return-on-time-invested point of view? Not an emotional response. But what is the justification if Kung Fu focuses so much time on form in training and competition but isn't producing fighters?
you also havent produced any fighters.
and when you went to china looking for real kung fu. you went to shang hai.
david ross can critisize forms. you dont have any authority to do so.
Nice. good observation there.Quote:
Kung Fu has so many forms and so few fighters.... boxing has so little form but so many fighters.
I won't argue over why forms this, forms that....BLAH BLAH BLAH. either you do forms or you don't. NO MENTION of fighting when you practice forms. when it comes to fighting, you train to fight. you don't do forms. When you practice forms, then forms are what you practice. either you do or you don't. simple really.Quote:
How are forms justified from a martial return-on-time-invested point of view? Not an emotional response. But what is the justification if Kung Fu focuses so much time on form in training and competition but isn't producing fighters?
this is martial arts. you dont get an a for effort.
you competed. david ross students comepted and won
i dont like wing chun, but i dont train wing chun. so i dont go to the wing chun section forum and bich about it.
It has been shown and stated over and over that forms were not designed to develop fighters/fighting, they were a system of cataloging techniques and "applications".
Many systems have NO forms and produce excellent fighters.
Forms are not needed and have never been needed to develop fighting skills.
None of that means they serve no purpose. just that they are not needed for developing fighting skills.
It still is. this isn't going to go back the the idea of Shaw Brother movies is it?Quote:
Kung Fu is --- used to be --- a martial art. If the forms aren't for fighting, what are they for? Are you telling me there is form training for the sake of form and then also a different set of training for the sake of fighting?
That would explain things.
Why does that seem to shock you? If you don't practice forms, you will never understand them. Those that do, know there is a huge difference. sorry you can't see that man.Quote:
Are you telling me there is form training for the sake of form and then also a different set of training for the sake of fighting?
is it possible for any of the FORM HATERS to comprehend that? i'm still waiting for that day to come.Quote:
It has been shown and stated over and over that forms were not designed to develop fighters/fighting, they were a system of cataloging techniques and "applications".
ExactlyQuote:
Forms are not needed and have never been needed to develop fighting skills.
None of that means they serve no purpose. just that they are not needed for developing fighting skills.