Quote Originally Posted by LFJ View Post
!!! :d :d :d

BPWT wrote:
That's really my point. The forms, including the dummy form, are all about reference points and yes, in relation to our body structure, and also limits connected to actions... I agree... but all of these things (references, structure, limits) are all in relation to something - and that something is the opponent.


Grumblegeezer wrote:
The wooden dummy is obviously an abstraction originally derived from the human form (that originally would have been an opponent or training partner). It is also obviously no longer a human form. Like others LT also said that that it functions as a "protractor" that properly understood allows the practitioner to correct his movements and structure. It teaches many other things too. But to say that it isn't derived from the human form is simply being dogmatic.

That seems perfectly logical to me. And this does not exclude the idea of the dummy representing a tool to help you develop proper lines, angles, not to "overreach" and everything else that you and Graham have stated. But to say that the dummy in NO WAY represents the human form is just silly and dogmatic, as Steve said.