A different question about forms, kata and patterns

You mean that videos should be posted without comment or response now?

 

I dunno man. In general we take a scientific approach to things except when it suits us. It's not practical, that's fine. You like doing it, I have no problem with it and I doubt anybody else does either.

The problem arises when people tell you it is practical because it's a downright lie with the exception of perhaps kali and stick striking for memorising and naming strikes.

 

This sort of comment--which is not just an attack on practices of many mainstream martial arts, but an attack on the integrity and the motivations of people who practice them--has become frustratingly common in MAP, and, in my opinion, probably plays into why so many subforums of MAP have become ghost towns in recent years. Aaradia, myself, and others have written lengthy posts explaining why we personally find forms practice a useful component of our training. To then have someone just say "well I don't want to spend my time doing that because I'd rather do Y" would certainly be fine, but to literally call us LIARS? I'm not lying when I say that forms practice has helped me with my focus and body mechanics, which are the benefits I personally attribute to the training. If you think I'm intentionally dishonest in saying so...I don't know what to say.

It is frankly exhausting to go to a forum about my hobby and to hear comments in every single thread about not only how (1) my personal hobby-of-choice is trash because it's different from this other hobby-of-choice, (2) I am a dishonest person for asserting that I personally have found value in it. It's exhausting.

 

I didn't say that it wasn't useful in some context or that you didn't find value in it. I'm just pointing out that it is an unnecessary practice on the scale of effective/pragmatic exercises.

I certainly didn't call it anything trash or anything like that. That's putting words in my mouth.

 

Actually, what you said, and what I quoted, was "The problem arises when people tell you it is practical because it's a downright lie"

Nobody here is claiming that it's necessary (i.e., you can't get good without it). Some people are saying it's been helpful for them, and you called all of us liars.

 

Someone posted a video and asked for a response. Mitlov and yourself thought those responses were lame/boring/not cool/derogatory/whatever so directed your collective ire on people for responding to a video, without ever saying a word about said video.

We have to respect "personal truths" now? Okay, but icefield has done lots of form training, hasn't he? Whatever, I get the message. When you say "personal truth", you are talking about one in particular: yours, and any that agree with it.

Don't worry though, I don't want to bend you two out of shape again, so I'll ignore future videos or posts about the utility of forms.

 

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Maybe personal familiarity is clouding your judgement on the stick-fighting you've done. Is that a scientific approach?

 

Know you were half joking but

I think a distinction needs to be made between two man forms using the exact movements stances etc you would in sparring/fighting and one man forms which look totally different lol

And even now with the advent of practice sticks armour shock knifes etc you can train much more realistically than in the old days

The problem comes when you chose not to and still do the compliant drills and forms only then your Kali starts to look unrealistic

Maybe that's the whole problem with forms one and two man they were a way of passing on material that was too dangerous to pass on any other way, but now with modern protective gear they really are not needed or not needed anywhere nearly as much

 

Learning goes both ways its been pointed out by many forms are sub optimal if one is looking to actually be able to fight yet those doing it still say its helpful but can't provide any proof.

And simply say you lot don't understand, some of us have been there found better ways for us and you chose to ignore that because it does not fit into your preconceived ideas

No on e is knocking forms for fun or personal development but saying its not the beat way to learn to fight

 

If you are not claiming it's optimal then I'm not calling you a liar am I? my comment referred to those who call it a necessary part of development or that somehow it is a practical exercise relayed to fighting. I don't mind if someone says it helps them personally or that it benefits them in anyway on a personal level.

I have issue when people say that it's practical is all because it's not. No high level TKD person will put much thought into it or any high level athlete really, although there are obvious exceptions.

Then there's all the martial arts that do well in the absence of kata too. There aren't really any lost techniques and some of them have been around a lot longer.

If they don't bother with it its because it's not fundamentally important to their sport. Where am I wrong?

 

We have ample evidence of how those who wish to fight and who wish to get better at fighting train, and the vast majority of those either do no forms or very little form training.

We have ample evidence of what happens when those who spent the majority of their time in forms and compliant drills fight in a limited or no rules environment.

So we have evidence that forms are sub optimal and might even hurt if your primarily goal is to be able to fight better,

All we have to do is look at how fighters train and replicate that on a smaller scale if you wish to be a better fighter.

If someone trains 10hours a week, and only 2hours of that is sparring and fight training and the other 8hours forms and drills law of averages says they will get better at fighting because of the time put in.

But whether that's down to the forms or simply training so much is an open question, the other question would be if they spent 8hours sparring and two hours on the other stuff would they be a better fighter...

 

I'm a big fan of Iain Abernethy. I think he's at the forefront of making Karate kata more relevent and he's a big proponent and defender of them as a part of his, and others, practice. You can't find a bigger fan of forms/kata than him really (although he's someone that has streamlined how many he does rather than being a forms "collector").
And not even he, in all his writing and video content, has ever said forms/kata are "a necessary part of development". He likes them. He finds value in them. He likes the tradition of them. The link to past masters. He likes the to use them as solo training and a method of visualisation. But he never for one seconds say they are the only way to train or are indespensible or even necessary.
There are, of course, hardliners that might take that tack but I don't think Aaradia or Mitlov or myself are in that group for all that we find value in forms or kata.

 

Completely agree with that and I don't have a problem with it.

 

I'm confused because when you say it's an outright lie to say that kata training is "practical", this is what I think practical means:

Nobody is claiming that they're indepensible or necessary, but that's not what "practical" means. To me it means something like this.

I'm trying to figure out why you called me a liar for basically saying this same thing.

 

I haven't called you a liar though? I have never said "Mitlov, you are a liar".

Practical = integral part of fighting. Useful or effective for fighting. Anyone that claims that you need to do it to get better at fighting.

 

Cheeky mode facetious reply: For that matter, you don't strictly need martial arts to get better at fighting, either