Traditional sets are useless for the modern Kungfu practitioner

[Matt F.]

Traditional Kungfu sets were composed as a means to remember Kungfu patterns and sequences - for learning, for self-practice, for easy recollection, for teaching, etc. At the time they were composed, written word and hand-drawn diagrams were the most technologically advanced method of data collection. Storing complex movements, patterns, and sequences via either of these methods was inefficient at best. The memorized routine of the traditional set was the best method of storing these complex movements.

Modern Kungfu practitioners are no longer constrained by written word and hand-drawn diagrams. Today, nearly everyone is walking around with a video camera in their pocket, and sharing information has become so easy that people often do it without thought. There is no longer a need to memorize long strings of patterns and sequences. So much information and detail can be stored in your pocket, and recalled at a moment's notice, that the effort to learn, remember, and practice traditional sets is a waste of time.

Traditional sets are useless for the modern Kungfu practitioner... Change my mind!

[Tim]

You could be onto something there Matt.

May be it’s better to practice one or two movements over and over again. First learn the form, then the force training of it, then the application. Get that really good then move onto another few movements. Why waste time learning a long fancy set. Unless it’s for show!

[drunken boxer]

I will wager Matt and Tim Siheng do not consider traditional sets a waste of time, but this thread is our version of clickbait, bait which I will happily take!

1. In terms of combat, yes I think practising one or two moves the way a boxer does, is better for combat than practising 155 patterns or whatever it is that some schools of taiji dance do. But Sifu and our school recognise this by recommending picking one sequence and practising it over and over. Nevertheless, this point is in support of the motion!

2. Whilst we can "know" and "learn" and "remember" sets from videos and websites, remembering or learning the set by watching it is not the same as doing so by practising it. When I practise a set it is how it feels to me which is most important, ie the feelings of internal force, flow, stability etc in different parts of the form. If I stopped practising one of my sets for 2 years say, and then forgot it, and then went to learn it from a video again, I would worry that I would get the form correct but not the feeling. They say a picture is worth a thousand words, and I think practising is worth more than a video.

To be honest though, I've learned a LOT of sets in this and other kungfu schools and I have actually had both experiences, ie where I have not practised a set for a long time, then practised it again and it hasn't felt the same, hasn't felt as good. But I have also had the experience where everything came back, just like riding a bike. So this point can't make up its mind if it is in support of the motion or not!

3. I remember on a course years ago at the UK summer camp, we had done chi kung the day before, and were learning a kungfu set. We know that our Taijiquan or our Shaolin Kungfu patterns can be practised as chi kung, but Sifu asked us which was better chi kung, practising strictly chi kung patterns or using our kungfu as chi kung. I thought the answer would be the specific chi kung patterns would be better, but one of the instructors said that the kungfu was a better and move advanced form of chi kung and Sifu agreed. So there is a hell of a reason for practising kungfu sets! This point goes against the motion and in my view overrides the other two.

So yes I think it is worth practising traditional forms in modern times, as long as you don't rely on this practise for combat application, and as long as you practise them as chi kung.

[Matt F.]

I will wager Matt and Tim Siheng do not consider traditional sets a waste of time, but this thread is our version of clickbait, bait which I will happily take!

1. In terms of combat, yes I think practising one or two moves the way a boxer does, is better for combat than practising 155 patterns or whatever it is that some schools of taiji dance do. But Sifu and our school recognise this by recommending picking one sequence and practising it over and over. Nevertheless, this point is in support of the motion!

Clickbait???

To be 100% honest, I'm not totally sold on the idea of traditional sets. As you rightly point out, traditional sets are just a collection of information, and it really comes down to how you use that information that makes the difference. It doesn't much matter how you store the information, if you never actually get around to using it. The Kungfu set is the method that is typically used to store the info in Kungfu schools, but I wonder if this is due to tradition, or if there is an inherent benefit to this method that is lacking in other storage methods.

2. Whilst we can "know" and "learn" and "remember" sets from videos and websites, remembering or learning the set by watching it is not the same as doing so by practising it. When I practise a set it is how it feels to me which is most important, ie the feelings of internal force, flow, stability etc in different parts of the form. If I stopped practising one of my sets for 2 years say, and then forgot it, and then went to learn it from a video again, I would worry that I would get the form correct but not the feeling. They say a picture is worth a thousand words, and I think practising is worth more than a video.

To be honest though, I've learned a LOT of sets in this and other kungfu schools and I have actually had both experiences, ie where I have not practised a set for a long time, then practised it again and it hasn't felt the same, hasn't felt as good. But I have also had the experience where everything came back, just like riding a bike. So this point can't make up its mind if it is in support of the motion or not!

Same here. I've definitely had this experience. My concern here is that there may be too much importance placed on the feeling of "doing the set". The set flows wells, feels connected/powerful, etc. But those are attributes of the routine, itself, and may not have any actual carry-over into applying specific techniques. Certainly there is benefit of flowing from one pattern to another, but would there be more benefit to a free-form practice than the specific routine of a set?

I think there can be too much focus on the set, knowing the set, doing the set, and doing the set well. When this happens, the set becomes something other than a collection of information. It takes on a life of its own. This is the path to becoming a "set collector", in my opinion/experience.

3. I remember on a course years ago at the UK summer camp, we had done chi kung the day before, and were learning a kungfu set. We know that our Taijiquan or our Shaolin Kungfu patterns can be practised as chi kung, but Sifu asked us which was better chi kung, practising strictly chi kung patterns or using our kungfu as chi kung. I thought the answer would be the specific chi kung patterns would be better, but one of the instructors said that the kungfu was a better and move advanced form of chi kung and Sifu agreed. So there is a hell of a reason for practising kungfu sets! This point goes against the motion and in my view overrides the other two.

So yes I think it is worth practising traditional forms in modern times, as long as you don't rely on this practise for combat application, and as long as you practise them as chi kung.

I've had this experience, no doubt. Though I'm not totally sure if it is as simple as Chi Kung pattern vs. set, or if it has to do with total volume of pattern. For instance, we typically do 10-15 repetitions of Lifting the Sky and then enter chi flow. Sets, however, are 36, 48, 108, etc patterns long. How strong would the chi flow be after 108 repetitions of Lifting the Sky?

There is definitely a major mind component/benefit from practicing a set as Chi Kung. The patterns in a set are constantly changing, and this requires more focus than just flowing through a single pattern multiple times. Can you keep the necessary focus without breaking from a Chi Kung state of mind? This is certainly good mind training. I wonder how this might compare to practicing all 18 Lohan Hands in one session. Say, 6 repetitions of each pattern, one pattern after another, through all 18. I gotta imagine that chi flow would be something nutty. However, in doing so, you've basically just practiced one of the most traditional Kungfu sets in history. So... this could be a major benefit!

-Matt

[drunken boxer]

Thought provoking answer, thanks Matt! More clickbait No, perhaps it wasn't clickbait then, but you can see how I thought it might be as there seems to be a forum offensive being mounted at the minute to encourage more discussion! And not that there is anything wrong with well intentioned clickbait!

To be 100% honest, I'm not totally sold on the idea of traditional sets. As you rightly point out, traditional sets are just a collection of information, and it really comes down to how you use that information that makes the difference. It doesn't much matter how you store the information, if you never actually get around to using it. The Kungfu set is the method that is typically used to store the info in Kungfu schools, but I wonder if this is due to tradition, or if there is an inherent benefit to this method that is lacking in other storage methods.

I have trained in a few other schools, and in some of them 90% of their training was around long complicated sets. It didn't help for combat, not just with me but with other students too, and there was little or no chi kung within it, so that kind of set practise is useless. If you gave me a choice even maybe on some of our courses or classes I might choose one with more forcebuilding, more combat applications and sparring, and less or shorter sets. But I also have to conclude that if Sifu includes set practise, which he does, then there must be reasons. I also think I can feel some of the reasons from my own practise.

Sifu is a traditional master, but I don't think he believes in tradition for traditions sake. He keeps the traditions where he thinks they are the right thing to do. But he innovates in other ways. I think it must be good to practise sets therefore not just because of personal experience, but because Sifu teaches us to do so. However if Sifu makes an announcement on his website that he has changed his mind or we should practise sets less from now on I would have to listen!

Same here. I've definitely had this experience. My concern here is that there may be too much importance placed on the feeling of "doing the set". The set flows wells, feels connected/powerful, etc.

I think practising a set is good as chi kung, as a force and flow development exercise. In that sense there isn't much harm I think in being a "set collector" any more than being a "chi kung pattern collector".

But can people place too much importance on that aspect as opposed to other aspects of training, then I'd say yes.

But those are attributes of the routine, itself, and may not have any actual carry-over into applying specific techniques. Certainly there is benefit of flowing from one pattern to another, but would there be more benefit to a free-form practice than the specific routine of a set?

In terms of combat, yes I think more free form practise is required as well. Practising single techniques over and over, practising one combat sequence many times, practising freestyle against the imaginary partner etc. After all Sifu's advice for the 30 opponents is to practise one sequence many times, its not to practise many sequences or sets once each.

I've had this experience, no doubt. Though I'm not totally sure if it is as simple as Chi Kung pattern vs. set, or if it has to do with total volume of pattern. For instance, we typically do 10-15 repetitions of Lifting the Sky and then enter chi flow. Sets, however, are 36, 48, 108, etc patterns long. How strong would the chi flow be after 108 repetitions of Lifting the Sky?

Really really interesting question. I can only speak on my own feelings from training like this, not authoratitively. There are feelings I get in certain sets where chi flows through my legs in a certain way, through my back and dantien, my whole body, or where it consolidates in various hand patterns etc that I do not believe I would get if I practised lifting the sky 108 times or 1108 times. However - I might get a far stronger chi flow from doing the same volume or amount of repetitions of lifting the sky. I might get more health benefit, I might develop more and better flowing force. Or I might not, I don't know.

But in terms of relating our practise to combat, whilst practising a combat sequence or single pattern many times might be at least necessary on top of set practise, and probably far more beneficial, I don't think practising lifting the sky many times would be as beneficial for combat as, say, practising Precious Duck over and over would, or practising combat sequence one. Practising those forms helps develops the flow and speed and balance and stability of being able to flow into that punch, being in a stable, agile stance to deliver the punch, being able to consolidate and explode force in that punch and so on, I think. What do you reckon?

There is definitely a major mind component/benefit from practicing a set as Chi Kung. The patterns in a set are constantly changing, and this requires more focus than just flowing through a single pattern multiple times. Can you keep the necessary focus without breaking from a Chi Kung state of mind? This is certainly good mind training. I wonder how this might compare to practicing all 18 Lohan Hands in one session. Say, 6 repetitions of each pattern, one pattern after another, through all 18. I gotta imagine that chi flow would be something nutty. However, in doing so, you've basically just practiced one of the most traditional Kungfu sets in history. So... this could be a major benefit!

Again great question, but I can't even attempt to answer this one having never practised all 18 lohan hands in one session for comparison!

[Alex McLeod]

Again great question, but I can't even attempt to answer this one having never practised all 18 lohan hands in one session for comparison!

Ooh boy. First satori experience for me was at the final session of an 18 Lohan hands course with Sifu in Orlando. The final session we did all 18 in a set. I got expansion beyond the body from the Merge with the Cosmos course, but I was still me, just bigger. The 18 Lohan hands all at once was like I didn't exist anymore. Just to give you an idea of what that set can do to you. I think we only did between 3 and 5 reps for each pattern, not 6.

[Matt F.]

Thought provoking answer, thanks Matt! More clickbait No, perhaps it wasn't clickbait then, but you can see how I thought it might be as there seems to be a forum offensive being mounted at the minute to encourage more discussion! And not that there is anything wrong with well intentioned clickbait!

But I also have to conclude that if Sifu includes set practise, which he does, then there must be reasons. I also think I can feel some of the reasons from my own practise.

Hahaha, yeah, the original post was probably a bit click bait-y!

I feel like I could easily, and effectively, argue either side of this topic in a debate. For every reason to include traditional sets, I can think of a counter point. Likewise, for every reason to remove them from practice/syllabus, I can also think of a counter point.

Sets as a teaching tool, especially in the way Sifu teaches (small, short courses), are an invaluable piece of the puzzle. They allow for a concise package of techniques, tactics, and force training that is really fine tuned to the specific course. The set that Sifu composed for the Cosmos Palm course was a perfect example of this. It gave all participants a baseline from which we worked all weekend. We did the complete set for flow, we did force training alone, we practiced the combat sequences, we pulled the sequences apart to practice techniques, we put techniques together to form our own sequences. Everything came from the set, but it was a great example of how to use a set for training, not just practicing the routine of the set.

-Matt

[Matt F.]

Ooh boy. First satori experience for me was at the final session of an 18 Lohan hands course with Sifu in Orlando. The final session we did all 18 in a set. I got expansion beyond the body from the Merge with the Cosmos course, but I was still me, just bigger. The 18 Lohan hands all at once was like I didn't exist anymore. Just to give you an idea of what that set can do to you. I think we only did between 3 and 5 reps for each pattern, not 6.

Awesome!!!

[sancrica]

Dear Shaolin Wahnam Family,

Thank you Matt Sidai for starting this thread and thanks to all the participants for their contributions.

While reading it, one question arose in my mind:

Could the order of patterns in traditional sets be chosen in a certain way as to enhance combat efficiency?

In my opinion, I believe so. Do you think that the order of patterns in traditional sets has a particular purpose? (easier to memorize, combat efficiency, ...) What are your thoughts on this?

With Love, Care and Shaolin Salute,

Santi

[Zhang Wuji]

Personally, I am sold on traditional sets. I will express my opinion with a number of questions.

1) Are traditional sets really just vessels for information collection and retention? Or as sancrica noted, can they be a means to show the order that is most suitable for combat efficiency?

2) Would you agree that Tang poetry, Song verses, Shakespearean sonnets and other great literary pieces are akin to kungfu sets? In my view, they are masterpieces, and examples for the users of the language to aspire to. You cannot learn to speak English by reading a Shakesparean quotation, but you would be dazzled and inspired by the beauty of the expression. Like learning a traditional set, reading Shakespeare requires you to have the foundations in place.

3) Are sets a distillation of what we have learnt, or simply a textbook or encyclopedia?

I have a friend who was in the special forces who eschews learning any martial art that requires him to practice drills and sets. He only goes for arts with immediate application and sparring. But that is because he is naturally athletic and aggressive. Slow learners like me have benefitted from practising solo drills and the Taijiquan set for so long that certain crucial movements have become part of the muscle memory.

4) So, my next question is, do traditional sets have any value in egalitarian teaching and transmission?

[Zhang Wuji]

I've had this experience, no doubt. Though I'm not totally sure if it is as simple as Chi Kung pattern vs. set, or if it has to do with total volume of pattern. For instance, we typically do 10-15 repetitions of Lifting the Sky and then enter chi flow. Sets, however, are 36, 48, 108, etc patterns long. How strong would the chi flow be after 108 repetitions of Lifting the Sky?

There is definitely a major mind component/benefit from practicing a set as Chi Kung. The patterns in a set are constantly changing, and this requires more focus than just flowing through a single pattern multiple times. Can you keep the necessary focus without breaking from a Chi Kung state of mind? This is certainly good mind training. I wonder how this might compare to practicing all 18 Lohan Hands in one session. Say, 6 repetitions of each pattern, one pattern after another, through all 18. I gotta imagine that chi flow would be something nutty. However, in doing so, you've basically just practiced one of the most traditional Kungfu sets in history. So... this could be a major benefit!

-Matt

This is like running a 5 km (slightly over 3 miles to the Americans) versus a CrossFit or other holistic HIIT workout, or even a fartlek where you also run but with varying speeds and intensity. When you run at a steady rhythmn over a period of time, the heart and rest of the body are no longer adapting to the stress but have settled into a complacent routine. Repeating a single pattern 100 times seems to come within this category - it is true that at 30 plus reps of Lifting the Sky, the energy generated is insane, but that is qualitatively quite different from cycling through a full Taijiquan or qigong set.

The same problem of repetition happens when practising a set that one is too familiar with - you also lapse into complacency. So, you bring the level of your practice up by adding modifications, combat simulations in the set, or like what i love to do, go for a 200 metre sprint or some kind of HIIT, and practice a short set. The practice then becomes not a mindless repetititon but a challenge to maintain perfect form, flow and force. Imagine being barely able to catch your breath and still having to execute fairly complex Shaolin kungfu patterns. If I had to also deal with remembering what form to use, that would be overwhelming.

[Andrea]

Many inspiring reasons have been given already.

On a personal note I simply enjoy practicing them. I would find it boring to practice single patterns or short sequences only. And I would certainly miss out on the skills the practice of a carefully combined and complex series of movement offers me at the physical, mind and energy levels.

People often think "traditional" means "old" and "no more relevant". Or if they are "traditionalists" they claim tradition it is something "sacred", something one should not touch or risk a loss of identity.

In my opinion both attitudes are wrong. Traditional Kungfu Sets have been alive. What makes them traditional is that many generations of Kungfu masters and practitioners have added their experience. Not in an encyclopedia, but in something we can experience, a form that one can practice and discover new aspects hidden by these past masters. It is a fantastic and lively way to store this experience. And once a modern practitioner has a solid foundation it becomes more like a vocabulary which may allow him or her to create specific forms or sequences for his own training or for others.

In our Shaolin Wahnam school we have both - traditional sets and modern sets, created by Sigung. And we benefit from both of them.

[David Langford]

Sets are interesting for more reasons to list, but I just wanted to mention the tendency for individual sets to contain an entire system of martial arts, such as with Eighteen Lohan Fist, Eighteen Collection Mantis, or Five Animals.

One can break a set apart in terms of sequences to see the overall strategies and tactics that are employed in a specific martial art.

Going further one can break apart individual techniques within those sequences to their base principles and concepts of offense and defense, which can often reveal many combat applications.

We get the transmission, but a lot of set, sequence, and application training is required to develop the understanding that comes from unpacking the transmission, such as what each hand is doing and why, and how each technique reveals specific ways to tame your opponent and attack your opponent, how footwork, taming, and attacking fits together into the overall skill of "Asking the Way," how different body movements bring about certain results, and what stances and footwork are being employed and why. Because Kungfu is Alive all of this is interchangeable. Tame, Strike, Kick, Throw, Grip. Once it all becomes the same then a set moves from being an alphabet to a fluent language.

Luckily Sigung teaches us how to achieve this, by training skills, specific applications, application sequences, and specialized sets many times a day while paying special attention to taming and safe entry.

[Fräänz]

Each method of storing information has it's pros and cons. Like in financial investment, I would spread the use of instruments / methods.

Patterns are sometimes in the order they are found, because they can form an efficient combat sequence. Or a combination of patterns can form a different application than each pattern by itself (disarming movements can be quite complex). Patterns for a set can be chosen to express a certain spirit / way of fighting or as David put it „contain an entire system of martial arts“. By exchanging sets you can exchange parts of it in a compressed way. (This could be one of the reasons why some sets were kept top secret in the past). I think a set is a frame where you can learn / train / apply your skills on / in.

[Grimlock]

It seems that no one is arguing anymore that sets are useless, just that they can be abused as being the only thing you need to ever practice to improve your kung fu. I agree that practicing a set without any methodology beyond the set's routine is incomplete. As others have pointed out, methodology is crucial. For us in Shaolin Wahnam, our methodology around practicing sets and our Shaolin Arts as a whole is what makes our training so systematic and cost-effective.

I don't believe sets are crucial in the sense that there is no other way to develop the skills you can develop through practicing a set using a good methodology. I am, however, hard-pressed to think of another vehicle that is as cost-effective. Especially if you consider a "complete" set like Flower Set or Triple Stretch that has force-training, a complete repertoire of patterns, and even effective combat sequences used by past masters built-in. Even just doing such a set once gives you a little bit of everything. I would have to create an entire practice routine myself to otherwise get the same benefits, and I wouldn't have the same assurances that a master assembled it and deemed it useful enough to pass on to posterity.

Such sets also give me an effective means of grouping all of that information together into one chunk, which makes for easier mental storage and thus the capacity to retain more information (like other sets ). It's true that for memorization purposes, due to videos, there is no longer the need for a successor to have an entire martial system in his/her memory, but having all of those patterns in your head to draw from is still valuable. For example, you can quickly figure out applications from different sets in a given scenario and understand how different sets are connected, which would be difficult and not nearly as cost-effective if you had to turn to videos. Sets also help you get a strong flavor of the tactics and style of applications of a group of patterns. You might be able to do the same with a group of sequences, but your thinking is going to be heavily influenced by the applications baked into the sequences, making it more difficult to see other applications than with the patterns in a set. Take the Cross Roads at Four Gates set and combination set as an example. Going just by the combination set (which has a wider variety of patterns than the solo set), which patterns could be used for felling? Going just by the solo set, which patterns could be used for felling?

STOP READING HERE IF YOU WANT TO FORM YOUR OWN ANSWERS FIRST

Beyond the explicit applications in the combination set (Bar the Big Boss in sequence #4, and Snake on Ground in sequence #2), nothing jumps out at me. When I think through the solo set, it more quickly becomes apparent that Beauty Looks in Mirror, Lohan Hits Gong, and even Sharp Knives Trim Bamboo can additionally be used as felling patterns.

As a bonus, because I have learned and practiced several other sets, I see the parallels between Sharp Knives Trim Bamboo and Bagua Palm Techniques (from Essence of Shaolin and Shaolin Pakua set, the latter of which I haven't even learned/practiced), Z-character Palms (Dragon-Tiger, Dragon Strength), and Pure Blade Cuts Grass (Baguazhang). This leads to even greater informational chunking. That could probably come from learning sequences exclusively, but at that point, you could make a strong argument that talking about Dragon-Tiger sequences vs. Baguazhang sequences rather than the Dragon-Tiger set vs. Swimming Dragon set is a matter of semantics.