Which forms go well together

[DarthJimmer]

Mmm, something got lost in translation. Still, a slash isn't Shii-cho, and a spin isn't Ataru. Spins and slashes are just techniques.

I didn't mean to imply that you weren't athletic, since I have no way of knowing that. I'm not really criticizing you, merely suggesting that you focus on making your basics as fantastic as possible instead of worrying about whether your moves are Ataru, Shii-cho, or anything else. There are tried and tested fundamentals that need to be grasped if you're just formally starting out in a curriculum, because it's much easier to learn and improve once you've got them. Oh, the "unpredictable" comment wasn't directed at you.

 I went back and read your first post. At first I thought you were trying to dispute the notion of mixing forms. Now I realize that you were just saying a person needs to master the basics and not worry about forms. Since I hadn't realized, I responded under that false pretense. I tend to agree with that first post, and most of it was just explaining that I already understand that and why I chose to say what I did initially. I never thought you were trying to say I wasnt athletic or anything btw ahah I was just trying to explain my choices. It's kind of hard not to speak about things in terms of the way you're being taught, even if it isnt technically the definition. I know they are just techniques, I'll try to specify better. I never thought you were trying to argue, I realized you were just giving your suggestion/opinion even when I misinterpreted. As was I, just obviously not towards the correct one.

I think because I'm looking at each form as a whole, that's what I am able to refer to a certain technique within that form. I'm not just cherry picking from here and there without thinking about it. I also said I wanted to eventually work up to that. I know you have to have patience and its a long process. I was just talking theory.

[DarthJimmer]

This is why we have set up the TPLA system the way we are. Combat cannot be limited to the types of characteristics that the books and video games use as plot devices and such. It is obvious that the wookiepedia articles are based on the storytelling elements of a martial arts style. The descriptions are better represented (in our minds) as pieces of whole. So the first four Forms in our system are ways to group techniques into thematic ideas. Shii-cho being the most basic, the terms and concepts are then shared by each of the other Forms. Makashi is main saber to saber technique base, Soresu the defensive, and Ataru the power/movement part. Forms 5-7 are "hybrid" Forms, taking the basic set down byt the first four and combining them into specific applications and/or philosophies.

For one to "specialize" with our system would be a very organic process; using the basics to find your strengths and weaknesses and then your highest percentage techniques. Wether yo are doing it for fighting or choreography, the Form will be an expression of your effort and imagination.

This is just the way we do it. I am anxiously awaiting new and differing interpretations of these.

I can honestly totally understand that. I dont think there would be any other better way to teach. What you are doing with TPLA is awesome. Im eager to watch the coming videos, and would also love to see other interpretations myself!

[Master VorNach]

merely suggesting that you focus on making your basics as fantastic as possible instead of worrying about whether your moves are Ataru, Shii-cho, or anything else. There are tried and tested fundamentals that need to be grasped if you're just formally starting out in a curriculum, because it's much easier to learn and improve once you've got them.

POINT !!!

[DarthJimmer]

 I went back and read your first post. At first I thought you were trying to dispute the notion of mixing forms. Now I realize that you were just saying a person needs to master the basics and not worry about forms. Since I hadn't realized, I responded under that false pretense. I tend to agree with that first post, and most of it was just explaining that I already understand that and why I chose to say what I did initially. I never thought you were trying to say I wasnt athletic or anything btw ahah I was just trying to explain my choices. It's kind of hard not to speak about things in terms of the way you're being taught, even if it isnt technically the definition. I know they are just techniques, I'll try to specify better. I never thought you were trying to argue, I realized you were just giving your suggestion/opinion even when I misinterpreted. As was I, just obviously not towards the correct one.

I think because I'm looking at each form as a whole, that's why I am able to refer to a certain technique within that form. I'm not just cherry picking from here and there without thinking about it. I also said I wanted to eventually work up to that. I know you have to have patience and its a long process. I was just talking theory.

[ScorchMark]

I like Makashi and Djem So.

I understand that each form is part of the whole and that one should not become too attached to form. One must make the form work for them - not the other way around.

At the same time, I'm trying to learn the basic routines and sets of each of the first few forms. I'm practicing strictly in form at this point so that I might gain valuable insights from the arts. Each form employs a different mindset and to recognize that, fully understand it, helps me at least see important pieces to add to my own style.

Just a quick question. Does Djem So seem like a combination of Makashi and Shii Cho to anyone else? The way I interpreted it when I saw it was that it took the strengths of both to counter the weaknesses of both. It's a strong style like Shii Cho that has more power that Makashi, yet focuses on the finesse and skill of Makashi. It's not as simple as form 1 but not as elaborate as form 2. It's good against single or multiple opponents (unlike form 2 I believe which is best for 1 v 1?). It seems to be a bit more about the sweeps and strikes than form 2, but it uses some of the key concepts learned with that form.

But I am no expert, please forgive my ignorance if I have incorrectly labeled something - or if my observations are misguided. I have no training but I do have eyes and ears. And sometimes they are wrong. Sometimes the things that come out of my mouth are wrong too ^_^

[DarthJimmer]

whoa whoa whoa, I have no idea how my last post (a quote of my own quote) got there! weird.

[Nhylus]

I have to agree with most everyone. The forms are more philosophy than actual fighting moves. Each and everyone can make their own interpretation over them. To me, Ataru is a mindset, not just spins and moves. It's aggressive, its keeping your enemy on their toes, and can be used strategically against multiple opponents. The best thing you can do against multiple opponents is to never focus on just one. Get one enemy's guard down or footing off and then immediately transition to the other opponent. Repeat until you see the opportune strike. For me personally, this has been how I've won a few 2v1's and 3v1s.  Ive lost plenty though and it really is the best teacher. The forms are mindsets to be used simutaneously in combat. Because in a fight, you won't remember your dulons or specific moves. You should always try to be thinking a step ahead of the opponent, regardless of form.
One last thing, while fancy flourishes, acrobatic moves, and spins are synonymous with Ataru. They are seldom useful in a duel. More intimidation factor than actual practicality.

[Master Nero Attoru]

I really want to comment here, but it seems as if this conversation has played out pretty extensively!  It always starts out with a simple enough idea, such as people wanting to mix styles of combat to try and define their own preferred approach to saberplay.  What it comes down to is that "Forms" are a very flexible idea, and as Master Nonymous mentioned there are a variety of ways to interpret them.  I am generally inclined to think of the Forms as a progression, as Masters Nonymous and Vornach have laid out with the TPLA curriculum, but of course this is not the only way to view it.

I could probably write an essay on this topic, but I feel that Masters Nonymous and Vornach as well as Tanq have contributed a large portion of my input already.  You have the capstone Forms such as Niman or Juyo which take the concepts from each previous style and combine them, but at the same time it's not so easy to "use some Soresu with a bit of Makashi" as a rule of thumb.  You could claim such a thing, and for a more experienced combatant I would accept it, but for a beginner you might find yourself more vulnerable than you think.  Soresu's strategy is a tight, impenetrable defense, which would be compromised by a swordsman who attempts to lash out with Makashi strikes.  One might think that Soresu's defense could fill the gaps in Makashi, but that essentially compromises the whole point of Makashi, which is to set up traps for your opponent using clever bladework and distance.

I guess my point is that those early Forms are pure and focused, so the combination of them without a proper blend has the potential to cause more harm than good.  Of course, when it comes down to it this is all for fun anyway, so I'm certainly not trying to get serious with you guys   If you want to fight with a "Shien style that uses Shii-Cho footwork", go right ahead!  They are, after all, only toys when all is said and done...

[Deceptae]

One last thing, while fancy flourishes, acrobatic moves, and spins are synonymous with Ataru. They are seldom useful in a duel. More intimidation factor than actual practicality.

I beg to differ. the fancy moves may seem impractical and purely for intimidation, which to a certain extent, they may be, but when used the right way, they can make a big difference in a fight. an age old debate in the parkour community comes to mind: the practicality and usage of flips. some find flips to be unnecessary and arbitrarily flashy, but when used correctly, a front flip can make for a cleaner and easier vault over a tall object, and they give you the opportunity to re-position yourself for better balance upon landing.

likewise, a good spin can seem arbitrarily flashy, but the intimidation and confusion of where the blade will go next can mean the difference between an easily blocked strike, and one that was able to make it's mark due to the defender's inability to accurately guess where to block. additionally, spinning provides an opportunity to get a better grip on your saber, and get into position for a better stance. plus, being able to use your environment as an extra asset gives a whole new aspect and dimension to the fight, and gives you the advantage of being able to easily evade your opponent's attacks, or dish out more powerful or unexpected attacks.

[Darth Nonymous]

I beg to differ. the fancy moves may seem impractical and purely for intimidation, which to a certain extent, they may be, but when used the right way, they can make a big difference in a fight. an age old debate in the parkour community comes to mind: the practicality and usage of flips. some find flips to be unnecessary and arbitrarily flashy, but when used correctly, a front flip can make for a cleaner and easier vault over a tall object, and they give you the opportunity to re-position yourself for better balance upon landing.

This is a bit different than the issue with using fancy acrobatics and showy moves during live combat. While in a vault the goal is to clear the obstacle, Fighting has a few more variables to it. Like the Fosbury Flop, the flip changes not only the position of the body but also it's momentum and geometry while in flight. These are criteria that can be taken into account in parkour. In dueling with the sabers, those very things become a detriment to you and make you more vulnerable to the opponent. Combat requires what people like to call "economy of movement" which is why such techniques are generally eschewed in fighting.

Training such techniques, however is a valuable practice that more people should take up. The physical benefits alone will improve your performance. Flashy forms and choreographies are great for that and do have a cascade effect on one's ability.

likewise, a good spin can seem arbitrarily flashy, but the intimidation and confusion of where the blade will go next can mean the difference between an easily blocked strike, and one that was able to make it's mark due to the defender's inability to accurately guess where to block. additionally, spinning provides an opportunity to get a better grip on your saber, and get into position for a better stance. plus, being able to use your environment as an extra asset gives a whole new aspect and dimension to the fight, and gives you the advantage of being able to easily evade your opponent's attacks, or dish out more powerful or unexpected attacks.

Be able to spin is a great skill and one should be proficient at it. However, I can't say that any of my experience in weapon based combat conforms to the above. As I said, in combat there ar specific things that need to be looked at to achieve the goal. While spinning my seem confusing tot he one spinning, from the outside, an experienced sword fighter will not find it confusing at all. Spins are circles and are difficult to stop or change in mid arc. When an opponent spins, what I see is their back for what seems like an eternity, the direction that they have to go, and the ample opportunity to strike. I do not feel confused or am I unaware of where the blade is.

Again, being able to spin and spinning while practicing is important, when an opponent passes you you must change direction and re target, often you will be pushed one way and must conter rotate to stay covered, and simply being able to do all of that indefinitely without getting dizzy.

So good for practice and training. But as was stated, seldom useful in a dueling senario.