Forms vs. Aliveness

I went ahead and started this thread here in the Battlefront because it would probably end up here anyway....

This idea was seeded by some posts in another thread.
That thread has since been locked. This thread really has no connection to the point of the locked one other than the few comments that were made within, that obviously had no bearing on the other thread being locked.
I made a post in the other thread that I would start this thread later so here it is.

First of all some comments that were made in the other thread...


By me

“	I don't know a good form from a bad one and I have never seen anyone do a form, good or bad, that showed me any relative applicable skill.	”

by Sammygirl

“	Not sure I can explain it accurately, but let's say -- a MMA coach teaches his students a certain choke move, then once they can do it OK, moves on to different material and never goes back to the choke move. If the coach never reinforces the training, the student's skill never improves beyond "OK." And probably backslides to the point where he couldn't use it if he tried.	”

This was where my thought process began to wander...

This statement by Sammy tells me that there is a great disparity in the way forms based styles work and the way "aliveness" based styles work, or at least the differences in philosophy and focus of each. The mindset is so disparate between the two that they are foreign to one another and that may be why there is such a large gap in understanding and definitions between the two.

It seems to me that in a forms based style or system that the primary goal is on the means to the end and not the end itself. The practitioners seemed to be more focused on regurgitating a set of movements that have been memorized and to do it by a set of standards that have been predetermined by someone else. This perfect regurgitation is the goal. These styles even have competitions based on the efficacy of how well these sequences of moves are performed and regurgitated. There is hardly ever any emphasis put on the efficacy of these sequences or the application of them. When there is some attention payed to the application (point sparring competitions) it hardly, if ever, resembles the forms themselves and seems so far removed that most any onlooker would be left wondering what the point was.

Styles or systems that focus on "aliveness" also do forms. These are in the guise of techniques or small drills designed to instill principle and basic fundamental movement. I'm sure everyone is familiar with single technique drilling or even a boxer's "shadowboxing"... The difference is that these drills and exercises are understood to be only the means to the end and not the end itself.
For an "aliveness" practitioner the end is the application in a live setting. Once the principles are learned the actual "forms" can be discarded because they are of no more importance. They were simply the carriers of an idea... the principle.

Take for example a simple guard pass. Too often I have had students tell me "my guard pass was sloppy and did not look as fluid and crisp as it did when you demonstrated it". I tell them that the object was not to regurgitate my movements perfectly but the object was to pass the guard. The technique was simply a blueprint, a flowchart showing them the way. These students get caught up in mimicking movements in a flawless pattern and never realize the goal.

Now, like I have stated in the past, I believe forms have their place. They are great for children and beginners for many reasons. They are also a great repository for accumulating techniques and remembering them for being passed on. They should not, however, ever be elevated to the status of being the goal or the "end" itself. Knowing 2000 forms is useless if you can't apply them.

Getting to Sammy's statement of the choke...
In an alive system a move like the choke is shown and gone over in detail. It is also reviewed often because newer students come in that need to learn it for the first time. As an instructor, if I see a student perform incorrectly or simply see a slight flaw that could be tightened up I offer immediate correction. The thing is that in an "alive" system these guys are spending most of their time rolling or sparring and are using this technique every night. It's not like in a forms setting where it will be lost for months or never even touched upon again. Every night when these guys are training "alive" they are using the techniques and principles they have learned in the past and the ones they just learned that evening. They will continue to use them and continue to be refreshed upon them when I (or another instructor or simply another training partner) sees something they could have done better in a certain position. In an alive setting nothing you learn is ever forgotten because it gets used constantly. As a matter of fact, in an alive setting these things only get better... or should I say the application of the techniques/principles gets better.

The bottom line is that a simple means to an end should never be mistaken for the end itself, or in the worst case, actually replace the end altogether. I think that's the major problem that plagues modern popular martial arts, McDojos and forms based styles today. They have lost their efficacy in combat not only because of the lack of "aliveness" but because the focus has turned from the application to the regurgitation and the theory.

Peace-
Cam

__________________
Rock On!
Cam
"Raise up your mind....."

They also have a place asthetically- they add the "art" to martial.

__________________
Faith itself, compelled by the Holy Spirit, possesses an inner dynamism that necessitates deeper understanding. ~Thomas Weinandy O.F.M.

“	They also have a place asthetically- they add the "art" to martial.	”

I disagree. I think when they become the focus and the goal they become something entirely removed from "martial" altogether and are simply only "art" with no function other than aesthetics.

Without application there can be no "martial" aspect.

In the west we have a word for that... dance.

Peace-
Cam

__________________
Rock On!
Cam
"Raise up your mind....."

But do you not see a perfectly executed guard sweep as beautiful? Or a Judo throw where someone is flung far into the air or a knock out punch?

I think they're all very nice! Not in the nice looking sense, but in the sense that you can appreciate the application of such good technique, timing and ability.


I think with what you said Cam, I can kind of see your point of 'if someone is shown it they use to fight'. Unfortunately though, I've noticed in Judo a lack of desire for people to use certain throws. For example, people get their one or two favourite throws and use nothing but. People have a favourite strangle for the back mount, and instead of taking a more appropriate strangle for the situation, they take their favourite. Say, trying to get an impossible RNC instead of just doing a clock choke.

At least with form based practice people are forced to use techniques that they do not like and they gain a more complete tutoring.

Some aspects of form training missing.

They are designed not just as technique repositories but as physical (and mental) training. Just as boxers famously used skipping as cardio training without ever planning to take a rope into the ring and skip round it so forms are used to open and strengthen the body.

Just as yogis repeat certain patterns of movement, thought, and breathing and attain samadhi so traditional martial artists repeat forms to attain certain changes in the mind and personality. Just as yoga is not gymnastics so forms are not dance.

Different styles emphasise different aspects of forms and different teachers teach forms in different ways.

Most styles have two person forms - another dimension not yet discussed. The benefit of a two person form over two person drills is more flow from technique to technique is trained.

__________________
Consider Phlebas, who was once handsome and tall as you
High mountains are a feeling
I don't need to sell my soul, he's already in me

Inferus, you are absolutely correct and I touched on that idea in a post I made a while back. The topic was touched upon in my first post (#8) in this thread

Who should really concentrate on forms?

Basically, principles applied correctly and successfully equal perfect form, but still, the application is the goal.

Everyone will have their favorite techniques and their not so favorite. People will study the same art and no two will apply it the same. How they interpret it and apply the principles is the actual art. Making everyone regurgitate a predetermined set of movements in a static pattern held to tight and unyielding standards is actually the antithesis to "art". It's like comparing an original recording artist to a cover band. There is no "art" in being a cover band. You are simply mimicking something else to a predetermined set of standards. So to say forms puts the "art" in martial art is ludicrous nonsense.

Peace-
Cam

__________________
Rock On!
Cam
"Raise up your mind....."

John, the point is not detraction of forms. The point is the presence of forms with the absence of aliveness/application and the goal of each. Forms are great in all their incarnations but the downfall comes when they are viewed as the end and not the means to the end.

Peace-
Cam

__________________
Rock On!
Cam
"Raise up your mind....."

“	the point is not detraction of forms	”

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound defensive - merely trying to add in some of the other end purposes of forms that often get forgotten.

__________________
Consider Phlebas, who was once handsome and tall as you
High mountains are a feeling
I don't need to sell my soul, he's already in me

“	Now, like I have stated in the past, I believe forms have their place. They are great for children and beginners for many reasons. They are also a great repository for accumulating techniques and remembering them for being passed on. They should not, however, ever be elevated to the status of being the goal or the "end" itself. Knowing 2000 forms is useless if you can't apply them.	”

Well said Cam,

Coming from a system of well over 500 forms I can tell you that there is basically no practical application applied to the forms taught because learning the forms themselves is a means to the end. This is what I am struggling with now. The forms are what make up our system and the applications are over looked. This style is fantastic if you are into constantly learning new forms but if you want to use them in actual combat...not so much. I have on a number of occasions asked "what am I going to use this for" with answers anywhere from "that's up to you" to "this is too deadly to show in application". I think one positive of this type of training is that you're always doing something different so your muscles are don't become accustomed to one certain excercise. Other than that we don't stop long enough to review any applicable science behind what we learn so it's pretty much just a dance. With what Cam said it is good for beginners and children though because they learn as many attacks as possible and they can develop where they want to go with their knowledge from there.

__________________
I'm very important. I have many leather-bound books and my apartment smells of rich mahogany.

“	that's up to you	”

Traditionally it was in some schools. You were taught forms and basic drills and expected to get together with other students and mix the two together and work things out for yourselves.

__________________
Consider Phlebas, who was once handsome and tall as you
High mountains are a feeling
I don't need to sell my soul, he's already in me

Fortunate for us, we only have one form... what's even more interesting is the name of it... 'The Dance'.

I have been shown a lot of the applications within our one form, and the best part about it.... it has been shown to me in many different ways, under many different circumstances. It doesn't change because of something someone else has done.... that in it's own right is what makes it effective.

__________________
It's all about the nitty gritty.......

I don't know of any traditional JMA that use the long winded one man kata, excluding Okinawa. I used to do the longer forms in TKD and was our team's #1 forms & breaking competitor. With that said, and having transitioned to a more 'alive' enviroment, I can't really see any applicationin the TKD forms. There are a few, such as the knee to the head in Taeguk Chil Chong (I think). I think the problem in arts like that is that the application of the forms is never explored in two-man drills or randori and so over time they become nothing but empty movements, devoid of any real intent or purpose.

__________________
"When you see a good move wait - look for a better one."
- Emanuel Lasker

two words should be enough to get forms...communication and development

all the rest is chatter

__________________
You are not where you have been and you are not where you are going you are only here.

there is a gross misunderstanding of form on Cam's part. I don't even know where to start.

I have seen MMAist go through forms. Which is a technique done solo but unless someone is on the other end, if I have no experience with what he does, it looks like bullsh1t!

There is muscle memory, visualozation, teaching yourself fluidity, structure, balance.

Then it's later applied with resistance - introduced gradually depending on the technique.

Formas are just that - stringed techniques that also developes a certain "body".


Just because a teacher dosn't understand the move within a form dosn't make the form trash. You don't say neuclear physics is trash because you are ignorant of the text withint the books, it's formulars and principles.


The aliveness comes from what Cam is alluding to, practice with an opponent, taking techniques out of the forms.

This has been addressed more than I can count.

It's like a broken record. It's clear people want to see what they want to see.

__________________
May the force be with y'all.

“	Originally Posted By: Lugaldamhara Inferus, you are absolutely correct and I touched on that idea in a post I made a while back. The topic was touched upon in my first post (#8) in this thread Who should really concentrate on forms? Basically, principles applied correctly and successfully equal perfect form, but still, the application is the goal. Everyone will have their favorite techniques and their not so favorite. People will study the same art and no two will apply it the same. How they interpret it and apply the principles is the actual art. Making everyone regurgitate a predetermined set of movements in a static pattern held to tight and unyielding standards is actually the antithesis to "art". It's like comparing an original recording artist to a cover band. There is no "art" in being a cover band. You are simply mimicking something else to a predetermined set of standards. So to say forms puts the "art" in martial art is ludicrous nonsense. Peace- Cam	”

Yep and to be able to teach the art to someone else, you need to be able to remember all the movements, with CMA's forms I guess this is the way. You might not ever use all of these movements, but someone else might want to know the ones you never learnt! Forms help keep the main techniques available I guess!