Youknowwho and others please comment

[YouKnowWho]

a student must be taught the basics and principles of a throwing are before they will be able to visualize the application within a form.

Agree with you 100% there. After you have learned the throwing principles, whether it exists in your forms or not is no longer important. We should not let forms to set boundary for us.

Are there any neck surrounding concepts in Zhang Quan?

If we look at this clip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YexR...ature=youtu.be

The elbow bending does look like "head lock". Please notice that the arm came back from a straight punch instead of from a haymaker. Also the other arm has no arm pulling intention.

If we say that the form creator tried to hide "head lock" in his form, I would say the form creator did not deserve that credit.

Wing Chun people are most sensitive of all CMA people, it becomes a bore to discuss this system because no one wants to learn anything. I have found some good techniques to counter clinch and throw, and even this they say "insults their tradition".

'"Most" of them want to keep their system "pure" and refuse "cross training". I had used the WC Bong Shou from a neck tie position all the time.

[Dragonzbane76]

After you have learned the throwing principles, whether it exists in your forms or not is no longer important. We should not let forms to set boundary for us.

exactly! I've always felt that forms confine and don't allow for more abstract thinking. Like it was set in stone and that was it. If a teacher thought it was done for a single purpose then they taught it that way with no room for "outside the box" Not say all just in general. I've had teachers that taught form apps. with many different meaning but I've also had those that teach a singular way.

[Faux Newbie]

Form is for reference. No one reads Chekhov because he had a great dictionary. No one asked Hemingway to release another thesaurus.

[YouKnowWho]

the move you posted is punch and OPPOSITE side lift leg, this I agree with, I do NOT think it is the same movement ... in my example, punch and lift SAME SIDE leg...

This one has the same side arm and leg. The "intend" is not there because the body is not rotating.

http://imageshack.us/a/img847/6121/kungfudemo.jpg

[mooyingmantis]

If a teacher thought it was done for a single purpose then they taught it that way with no room for "outside the box" Not say all just in general. I've had teachers that taught form apps. with many different meaning but I've also had those that teach a singular way.

One of my past Chinese teachers was like this. He taught one application for a move in a form. He chided others who saw any other applications to the movement. I believe that he was correct in believing that the original creator of a form had one application in mind when they created the form.

However, I do not believe that it is wrong to allow other interpretations of a movement. If the same body mechanics can be used multiple ways, so be it.

[LaRoux]

Form is for reference. No one reads Chekhov because he had a great dictionary. No one asked Hemingway to release another thesaurus.

Getting fighting moves from a form is about a useful as getting fighting moves from reading Chekhov or Hemingway.

[GoldenBrain]

Getting fighting moves from a form is about a useful as getting fighting moves from reading Chekhov or Hemingway.

I hear you say this a lot, but I really don't get your line of thinking in this regard. There are all manner of punches, kicks, throws and other applications in forms. Forms are just one way to catalog techniques and body mechanics. Isn't a front kick, straight right punch…etc. still a front kick, straight right punch…etc. no matter if it is in a form or practiced individually?

Also, I don't think there's anybody here suggesting forms are the only way to practice/learn fighting techniques. It's only a small percentage of the entire package. You still have to hit a heavy bag, lift weight, grapple, spar…etc. or you won't' have a clue how to use the cataloged techniques that are in the forms or taught separately.

[YouKnowWho]

After so many years of TCMA training, kicking to the groin and punching to the face is still one of my favor initial attacks. It came from the most basic longfist form Taitui #1 (the 1st combo of the most basic form).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNlPktNreXM

[LaRoux]

I hear you say this a lot, but I really don't get your line of thinking in this regard. There are all manner of punches, kicks, throws and other applications in forms. Forms are just one way to catalog techniques and body mechanics. Isn't a front kick, straight right punch…etc. still a front kick, straight right punch…etc. no matter if it is in a form or practiced individually?

Also, I don't think there's anybody here suggesting forms are the only way to practice/learn fighting techniques. It's only a small percentage of the entire package. You still have to hit a heavy bag, lift weight, grapple, spar…etc. or you won't' have a clue how to use the cataloged techniques that are in the forms or taught separately.

Just look at the ridiculousness of trying to pull out grappling applications from the forms in this thread for a perfect example of how ridiculous the whole pulling out techniques from forms is.

Valid techniques come from application not from a catalog.

[GoldenBrain]

Just look at the ridiculousness of trying to pull out grappling applications from the forms in this thread for a perfect example of how ridiculous the whole pulling out techniques from forms is.

Valid techniques come from application not from a catalog.

I agree about the grappling. It's hard if not impossible to make a form for grappling moves, especially ground grappling moves, and you need a partner to completely understand the techniques. There are however valid striking, locking, throwing and sweeping techniques in forms but you absolutely have to train them with a partner at some point, and participate in sparring to fully understand their application.

The way you word it makes it seem as though you mean "any" fighting applications from forms is ridiculous. If the practitioner is not taking things beyond the form then they are limiting themselves, but that still doesn't mean the application in the form is any less valid.

[LaRoux]

I agree about the grappling. It's hard if not impossible to make a form for grappling moves, especially ground grappling moves, and you need a partner to completely understand the techniques. There are however valid striking, locking, throwing and sweeping techniques in forms but you absolutely have to train them with a partner at some point, and participate in sparring to fully understand their application.

The way you word it makes it seem as though you mean "any" fighting applications from forms is ridiculous. If the practitioner is not taking things beyond the form then they are limiting themselves, but that still doesn't mean the application in the form is any less valid.

Any fighting applications taken from forms is ridiculous.

[LaRoux]

Even Judo and Jujutsu have Kata.

It's just a stupid for them as it is for any other system.

And you won't find judo practitioners trying to pull out techniques from their katas. They learn their techniques in practice against partners.

[Jimbo]

Judo katas are two-person practice. They aren't the same as karate kata/kung fu sets.

[bawang]

there are no secret wrestling techniques in kung fu. if its wrestling, its called wrestling.

[bawang]

Agree, but not talking about wrestling. Talking about techniques in forms and whether they exist or not.

if a technique in a form is wrestling its called wrestling. the poem will say "this technique is for wrestling"