Hrrrmmmm

[Adam S]

"why don't forms contain a practical applicational format?"

they do

but Dimitri brought up an excellent point

[Ian]

Forms are a tool to make your body move differently, to eventually turn in into a coherent unit that is mobile and powerful.......

Dmitri,

Why do most forms tend to emphasise right-handedness? To me that seems like a poor way to teach the body anything (to only do things on your strong side).

Also, why are forms so unfocused, with regards to body development? Again, seems like a lousy way to ingrain body principles, compared to simpler, more focused drills e.g. circle walking, cloud hands, aunkai drills.

[GrahamB]

I think forms are 'one sided' (as opposed to right hand sided) because back in their murky pasts they came from using weapons, and you tend to use a spear on your strong side, same with a sword.

[Methods]

Your right Graham, as well why application is taught and practiced a certain way as well. Lack of experience and knowledge creates some serious righteous attitude here.
This video is not really good at all, and I dont agree with many of the applications being implied - yes implied because they wouldnt ever work in real time, but literally its really not too different than everything else out there, I think talented or not most tend to follow the herd naturally.

[Dmitri]

Well you're all correct, I should have worded that part in a less "extreme" manner, i.e. yes, forms do contain some "techniques" i.e. movements that can be applied exactly as they are in the form...
But IMO it is a lot more about body/mind work than being simple "shadow boxing" done slowly.

Chris's question still stands though, and it's a damn good one, "why aren't a lot of these techniques martially viable."
I don't know the answer. I could speculate, e.g. one thought would be that historically most (not all, but definitely the vast majority) of people who transmitted (and continue to transmit/teach) the forms are not fighters by trade or even by interest. But that's just a speculation.

The short of it is, I've got my art, I like it, and I'm sticking to it. I will (and have) "adapt" it as I deem needed to be more practical/efficient and hopefully a better learning/teaching tool, but I'm not going to start hopping around and do a little of this and a little of that and try some other that's more fashionable or what-have-you. Everything I've done "on the side" has always been to enhance/enrich/feed ideas into what I practice.

As for "unrealistic" applications (which are a majority, at least in our form) -- you would never in a million years see me going for something like "single whip" in a non-rehearsed context, it simply is not going to come up (it actually might but chances are microscopic). But, perhaps practicing that movement in the context of the form and doing that unrealistic "application" of it and figuring out how it might work (or not) and feeling how your body interacts with your opponent in that particular peculiar setting/position gives your body information it would never get otherwise. Which I think aids the overall learning process -- given that the emphasis in practice is in the right place.

IME all the actual "applications" are learned only in the context of non-cooperative two-person work, and are not "techniques" but "ideas" and principles. There's a finite number of places on a human body you can hit or ways to twist or bend a limb to do damage, etc., so once you understand how that stuff works, "techniques" will simply make themselves based on your relationship/engagement with your opponent.

why are forms so unfocused, with regards to body development? Again, seems like a lousy way to ingrain body principles, compared to simpler, more focused drills e.g. circle walking, cloud hands, aunkai drills.

You may be right... I thought about it a lot. What, say, Sam Chin's training does compared to what your "standard Yang taiji" training does may indeed be a helluva lot more productive. May be. Ya gotta remember though, it's not as much the art as it is the person/school. Some people may be doing aunkai or whatever drills for a hundred years and never get anything out of them. In IMA, it always (IME) comes down to how you practice what you practice. What we do at our school probably shouldn't even qualify as "Yang taiji" anyway, partly because of how we go about body/mind development, etc. (Not something that can be put in writing though, IMO.)

[Ian]

why are forms so unfocused, with regards to body development? Again, seems like a lousy way to ingrain body principles, compared to simpler, more focused drills e.g. circle walking, cloud hands, aunkai drills.

You may be right... I thought about it a lot. What, say, Sam Chin's training does compared to what your "standard Yang taiji" training does may indeed be a helluva lot more productive. May be.

I'd say definitely. Putting aside the aptitude of the individual for a moment and focusing solely on the merits of a system, I'd say a long-ass taichi form is a lot more diffuse and unfocused compared to the ILC 21 form. Results kinda speak for themselves as well. Short forms and drills are awesome. Long forms - must admit I don't see the point.

Also the practice of trying to make techniques from forms 'work' against a live opponent is completely alien to me. Again, I probably just don't get it, but this movement seems more efficient and effective than whatever's being demonstrated in the OP by orders of magnitude.

[GrahamB]

Another reason for training a 'long' form that I've found is the mind training. You really have to build up serious amounts of concentration not to get lost in something long like the long Yang form.

And the whole 'making forms work' thing - I'm with Dmitri - it's just a series of examples to work with. It's not like a catalogue of techniques like (some) Karate Kata.

If you want to practice a way of moving, it's helpful to have some examples to work with.

Ah - form and no-form. An inseparable part of the whole. The Yin and Yang of martial arts.

[Andy_S]

These are all good and valid questions.

The art, FYI, is Chen Taijiquan. I did not realise this for years, but in the village method, "applications" are really very little taught.

If you want to get involved in fighting there, you learn/do the PH, a stand-up grappling format. (Not the same as the set PH technqiues, which are drills that instill jins, lead to qinna applications and serve as bridge to the shuia PH, but are not the same as the shuai PH).

In shuai PH, you learn certain techniques, and you learn to apply those technqiues. And - shock horror! - the techniques of shuai PH are separate from the form, and bear only a minimal resemblance to them. But yes, many of the structure and energies are applicable,and I was very surprised at some basic but effective shuai "applications" of single whip, and a couple of other "techniques." Hint: It is the shape/energy of the move, not the finish/termination of the move (as seen in form still photos, for eg) that is important...which explains why a lot of fighting does not look like forms.

Anyway...anyone trying to learn these PH techniques by reverse engineering them from the form is barking up the wrong tree.

Once one is reasonably good at the shuia PH, you are comfortable in the close range - where Taiji excells. From there, you can throw, lock and counter throws and locks, then add in all the nasty stuff that is peppered throughout the forms - punches to groins, head controls, elbows - but which is tricky to practice live as it is damaging stuff. You can then take it to san sau, but there are very few people doing that. (At the village school two years ago, nobody was doing it when I was there.) Oh and YES - Taiji does not include ground fighting.

As regards the questions above:
Why are form techniques so often not martially applicable?

I think because most people who get heavily into forms are not fighters. If fighters learn forms and want to apply them, they get involved in drilling standard moves, shuai PH, etc (which are semi-free movement drills) that lead to actual sparring, or sparring-type practices.

Anyone who simply learns applications - "He does attack A - you respond with technique H from Form 6 !" - is...well, the best of luck to him.

[Dmitri]

I'd say a long-ass taichi form is a lot more diffuse and unfocused compared to the ILC 21 form.

I'd say a "long-ass taiji form" requires more concentration, maintained for a longer period of time.

I'll say it again ('cause, like, it's important and stuff ) -- it's a lot less about about WHAT you do and a lot more about HOW you do it.

[Ian]

I'd say a long-ass taichi form is a lot more diffuse and unfocused compared to the ILC 21 form.

I'd say a "long-ass taiji form" requires more concentration, maintained for a longer period of time.

I'll say it again ('cause, like, it's important and stuff ) -- it's a lot less about about WHAT you do and a lot more about HOW you do it.

concentration.. you need just as much of it practicing any IMA drill for an extended period of time. I've never really bought the concentration angle, because I concentrate just as much in long forms as during drills.

you mentioned ILC. don't you think when you practice stuff like that you get more of a laser-like focus on developing the required shenfa? seems like a much more efficient use of one's time.

anyway I'm intrigued - how do you go about body development in your class? I remember reading a long while back that you'd stopped doing forms (was that you?).

[Dmitri]

you mentioned ILC. don't you think when you practice stuff like that you get more of a laser-like focus on developing the required shenfa? seems like a much more efficient use of one's time.

My post here after my first workshop with Sam (a few years ago) compared the experience with "eating IMA concentrate with a spoon" (as opposed to drinking it dissolved in water). So yes, there's a lot of focus and very little or no "fluff" in their work.
There is more than one path to the top of the mountain though. I never dedicated myself to seriously practicing their stuff so I can't tell if it's better or not. It SEEMS better but that's all I can really say; it's only words. I've developed the whatever few little things I can do by doing my art, and that's the only perspective I can truly speak from; the rest is pure speculation and assumptions IMO.

anyway I'm intrigued - how do you go about body development in your class?

Like I mentioned earlier, it's impossible to write down. Besides, it's tailored to the student so details of instruction would be slightly different for each person, depending on where they are in the work, their natural talents, goals, etc. We just do form and push-hands. Really. It's the how, what the emphasis it on, is what matters.

I remember reading a long while back that you'd stopped doing forms (was that you?)

Yeah it might have been me; I've only done the whole form in class; haven't done it on my own for several years now -- only doing short parts and random improvised stuff based on how I feel at the moment. But that's not how I got to where I am now -- that was done with the "long-ass form" and two-person work.

[DeusTrismegistus]

I disagree with the forms not being applicable to fighting. I have had slanting fly, roll back, press, from the yang form all used against me just as they appear in the form while doing "live non compliant" sparring. I have successfully used slanting fly, brush knee, and playing guitar from the yang form exactly as they appear in "live non-compliant" sparring. I have had xingyi tiger used against me exactly as it appears in the form. Now many of these are not easy to use and it requires a lot of practice. I wouldn't teach them as go to self defense moves for beginners, but that doesn't mean they can't be used if trained properly.

[C.J.Wang]

why don't forms contain a practical applicational format?

Because (at least in my limited experience) forms are not "collections of techniques". (Not IMA ones, anyway.) Or at least they shouldn't be IMO.

Unfortunately this isn't a very widely-spread view of forms, so there ya have it.

Agree with Dimitri.

Let's say in the form when your arm extend forward, most people would focus on the arm that goes out and try to think of ways to use this external movement to attack and defend.

For IMA, when your arm extend foward, it'd be more pertinent to think about, for example, what the other arm is doing, and what effects does do the motion of the arms have IN YOU, not your opponent.