Forms vs reality?

[Ardith]

Forms are a waste of time. One only becomes a better striker by strengthening bones and punching other people in the face.

Playing with imaginary friends only makes people think you're insane.

[jubaji]

Ah.........................................no.

[shaolin-warrior]

Oxymoron to say the least. Break them down into techniques and the techniques are violent.

[jubaji]

If you're a first or second degree and your forms or katas haven't become increasingly violent in content, then your missing something.

Violent forms, eh? .................

[aku aku]

Forms at the novice levels, and I mean no disrespect by that term, are generally weak in content. So I can see your point of view if you're a colored belt ranking. If you're a first or second degree and your forms or katas haven't become increasingly violent in content, then your missing something. Either your just going Through the movements without any comprehension of what your actually doing, or your instructor isn't teaching you all that there is to learn from your system. What style do you study?

I'm not questioning the level of violence or the amount of material in forms. It's just that forms seem to present stuff in a very formalized and stylized manner. When you see people sparring it's much looser with higher stances, different stances, faster movements, shorter movements, hands held up instead of on hips, etc. I'm just wondering why the difference? Why aren't the forms done closer to the way you would spar or the way the moves would look if you were fighting?

[shaolin-warrior]

Forms at the novice levels, and I mean no disrespect by that term, are generally weak in content. So I can see your point of view if you're a colored belt ranking. If you're a first or second degree and your forms or katas haven't become increasingly violent in content, then your missing something. Either your just going Through the movements without any comprehension of what your actually doing, or your instructor isn't teaching you all that there is to learn from your system. What style do you study?

[medic06]

I ment generally that it is not been developed as a fighting style but more of a way to focus chi etc...... however i did not deny that it does have combat applications


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&d...ition&ct=title

You got it backwards. . .

[suhieb]

............................


Who the hell told you that?

I ment generally that it is not been developed as a fighting style but more of a way to focus chi etc...... however i did not deny that it does have combat applications

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:Tai+Chi&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title

[Red Rum]

This is all amusing....

Forms in wing chun are important as it trains everything together all at once. You could do drills and learn technique. You could meditate. You could do chi sao. But the form does all the structure, footwork, movement, meditation (..) and positioning all in one go. It is not something to rely on (ie someone who does just forms will not be a good martial artist), but they come in handy.

[Troll Virus]

Hello,

This was never made clear to me in my limited exposure to kung fu. When you do kung fu for real, either for sparring or self defense, how closely are your movements expected to match the moves in the forms? You need to have an understanding of the term you use (Kung Fu) before asking that question.

'Kung Fu' is neither a style, nor an commonly defined code of practice

The question might seem silly but a lot of the kung fu I was taught seemed kind of choppy and not as quick and flowing as I would expect a fighting art to be, are the forms supposed to show the 'proper' movements that you should strive for or are some of them exaggerated to illustrate certain principles or what?

Herein, lies the thrust of most MA discussion forums.
So many arts, are full of 'technique collector' jewels and mystery, that the pedestrian observer is left struggling to make sense of it all.

It all makes sense when you actually have to perform for real.
Those that tell you they have done so, often turn out to be the most ignorant.

In particular, ignore those who use any kind of sporting format to justify comparison.
When you see that, you are observing idiocy.

[makiwara]

The way I have always seen Kata (quanfa, Forms) is as an encyclopedia of techniques. They get your body used to moving and help you discern what types of techniques can flow togther with others. They help in balance and footwork as well. They are but one of many usefull tools in the martial arts. If you focus only on Kata you can move real pretty but can lack in proper timing, distance, and more. If you ignore kata you can lack cohesion and elasticity of movements.
I have always considered practicing one thing over and over again Standing or Moving Basics; good for control and begining muscle memory. Fighting is a science, and like any science has many facets that all work together to acheive it's form and function.
As for Tai Chi, my mother, (50 years old) did Shorin ryu for Five years, and now does Tai Chi. She practices it with combat in mind and has often foiled my brother (another seasoned martial artist) and me. I watch her practice and for every move or technique she does I see a plethora of applications. Never Knock an Art, Lest it Knock You Back.

[shaolin-warrior]

Hello,

This was never made clear to me in my limited exposure to Kung Fu. When you do Kung Fu for real, either for sparring or self defense, how closely are your movements expected to match the moves in the forms? The question might seem silly but a lot of the Kung Fu I was taught seemed kind of choppy and not as quick and flowing as I would expect a fighting art to be, are the forms supposed to show the 'proper' movements that you should strive for or are some of them exaggerated to illustrate certain principles or what?

Thirty spokes share the wheels hub,
It is the center that makes it useful.
Shape clay into a vessel,
It is the space within that makes it useful.
Cut doors and windows for a room,
It is the holes which make it useful.
Therefore benefit comes from what is there,
Usefulness comes from what is not there.
LAO TSU

[jubaji]

Tai Chi is not an art that is designed to fight or be used in combat

............................


Who the hell told you that?

[7r14ngL3Ch0k3]

FORMS ARE THE EQUILIVLANT OF KATA'S !!!!

Tai Chi is not an art that is designed to fight or be used in combat more to focus and allow your Chi to flow but it just has combat applications that give you "ideas" of what to do in a situation.

Suhieb

The taichi forms ive seen posted here are alot different than any Kata or shadow boxing-type forms in other arts. The taichi forms are like yoga almost while other Kata's are more like Taebo...

[suhieb]

I stand with the previous posts i made about Forms vs Reality before this thread went downhill :P