PDA

View Full Version : Styles and Systems



reemul
10-05-2001, 05:07 AM
How many of you have read the new article on Styles and Systems. This is something I have been saying for long time. I wonder how many people who have said they study a style are going to change up and claim they study a system now.

Xebsball
10-05-2001, 06:44 AM
Hmm...

Mine is a system.

-------------------------
"Faltou luz mas era Dia, o Sol invadiu a sala. Fez da tv um espelho, refletindo o que a gente esquecia."

Scarletmantis
10-05-2001, 08:25 AM
What article?

"Master, here is a stick. Please beat me for my insolence." - KC Elbows

Xebsball
10-05-2001, 08:45 AM
The article on the Ezine:

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/index.html

-------------------------
"Faltou luz mas era Dia, o Sol invadiu a sala. Fez da tv um espelho, refletindo o que a gente esquecia."

illusionfist
10-05-2001, 10:10 AM
I too have always used this distinction.

System= comprehensive body of concepts and techniques.

Style= players interpretation of said concepts & techniques.

Peace :D

Johnny Hot Shot
10-05-2001, 11:06 AM
You say tomato, I say tomato. I say potato, you say potato...Let's call the whole thing off!!!

"Life's a great adventure, mate."
Jacko Jackson

Kung Lek
10-05-2001, 08:52 PM
The System I study = Shaolin Kung Fu

The Styles I practice = Hak Fu Pai and Bak sil Lum

peace

Yuen
10-05-2001, 09:03 PM
Kung Lek is right. System is a base of an art, which is called the same type of art universally. Style is a branch of that art, for example Goju-Ryu is a style of karate and Choy Lee Fut is a style of Shaolin kung fu.

reemul
10-06-2001, 06:11 AM
;)

Kung Lek
10-06-2001, 04:57 PM
;)

Kung Lek

Martial Arts Links (http://members.home.net/kunglek)

Stumblefist
10-06-2001, 05:26 PM
I tried to read the article. My conclusion is that i am suffering from brain damage because it stoped making sense when he got into the 3 bridges. I don't think that had much to do with the distinction. I think i will get my brain repaired and give it another try.
...
If the definition is as kung lek and yuen say then everybody must practice both a style and a system.....except for those poor unfortunates who have lost the system and are only practicing a style?

"A wish to go to Heaven is the very beginning of falling into Hell."

CanadianBadAss
10-06-2001, 07:46 PM
Well... At my school we mostly do wing-chun, but we also do drunken monkey for grappling, and we do a bit of tai chi at the end of each class... So I think the way those styles are combined and taught makes up the system I'm learning.

|) /- | | |
| / |_| |__

Mr. Nemo
10-06-2001, 08:14 PM
I think I understood the article. Here's some examples of the distinctions as I understand them.

Roy Jones Jr.:
System: western boxing
style: nimble counterpuncher with a strong, accurate left hook

Lennox Louis:
System: western boxing
style: outside fighter/boxer. Generally uses long arms and a long jab to outpoint his opponent. Uses a strong overhand right for KO's

Tito Ortiz:
System: MMA-style wrestling
style: generally gets takedown from the clinch. Uses the fence to limit opponents' options. Follows up with ground and pound utilizing lots of elbows.

Mr. Nemo
System: bagua
style: emphasizes angular footwork as well as circular. Prefers throwing to striking. Prefers the waist-level roundhouse over other kicks.

Chang Style Novice
10-06-2001, 10:17 PM
Styles suck (uh...just ignore my login name)

Now substance, substance kicks fanny!

_______________________
Powered by NymphoPop

Gold Horse Dragon
10-07-2001, 06:41 PM
System vs Style...they are just words and it depends on the context in which they are used.
For example Nam Sil-lum Hak Fu Pai translates as Southern Small Forest (Shaolin in Mandarin)Black Tiger System but can also mean style. Shaolin is a generalized umbrella term for more than one system or style of martial arts either systemized, codified or developed from other systems or styles imported into the Temple(s) or systems or styles directly invented in the Temple(s). But if you are speaking about an individual's 'Style' in his chosen kung-Fu System/style, then it refers to that individuals personal expression of the teachings he has learned in the system/style...and eveyone is different...the student's performance will not 'exactly' match the movement and expression
of his sifu and the sifu will not be a carbon copy of the Si-Gung. We all have different body types, mentalities and personalities which will influence to some degree the expression of the movements of the system/style. So to re-itterate...There is no difference between System and Style when used in the 'context' of talking about the 'charactersitics' of the system/style...for example southern sil-lum vs northern sil-lum, but if you speak of an indivduals personal expression of that system/style...then that is his 'style' of expressing the system/style he has learned. If his expression of the system/style is so very different from the style/system that it goes against the characteristics of style/system...then it is no longer the system/style and the student had better get back on trac.
So..both system and style mean the same when used in the same context and one is not less than the other in advanced principals and techniques.
They (words) are only "A finger pointing to the moon..do not focus on the finger or you will miss all that Heavenly Glory"-Chan/Zen quote used by Lee Shao Lung (Bruce Lee) in 'Enter the Dragon'.
As far a 'fighting/self-defense ability goes...it is the 'man' who 'uses' the system/style to defeat an adversary, not the other way around.
GHD

EARTH DRAGON
10-07-2001, 08:32 PM
A good kung fu system will have the whole pie not just pieces, it should have techniques to make you totally well rounded like left and right,upper and lower and inside and out. If you have no techniqes that require you to have total control over every part of your body then you are missing a little piece of a big picture and you are training in a style. Ask your self this is the system your are in is a total complete system or just a style of kung fu? do you have healing? accupunture?accupressure? bone setting? herbology?tui na? do you have internal? tai chi? qigong? meditation? and do you have complete combat skills? punches kicks? throws? jointlocks? pressure points?iron body? iron palm? ground fighting? when you look into the depths and if you research you will be quite suprised!
Kung fu is not always about fighting and what works in combat for that is just a small part of your training, it is designed to train the entire body as a whole. So you can not judge and delete what you think is right or wrong or what works for fighting becuse if you do you will weaken the foundation of a total complete system! that is why so many total systems have been lost and become extinct, and what remains are simply styles like so may of non chinese now practice.

http://www.kungfuUSA.net

Gold Horse Dragon
10-08-2001, 04:10 AM
Earth Dragn wrote: "If you have no techniqes that require you to have total control over every part of your body then you are missing a little piece of a big picture and you are training in a style".
Yes you should have a complete style or system, but not having one does not make it a 'style' as opposed to a system...all it is an incomplete system/style. Style is not less than a system...they are both the same. And...very, very, very few people if any would have control of every part of their body...so by your definition there is no such thing as a system.
Non-Chinese...your being a bit racist there guy...are you saying only Chinese have the complete stuff...if you are this is complete and utter nonsense. A few systems/styles have sifu who have studied the healing and meditaion aspects you have outlined and I agree it goes to making a sifu that can better look after his students...but these are not required to make the system/style 'complete'. And yes I agree that Kung-Fu is about much more than just fighting.
GHD

EARTH DRAGON
10-08-2001, 05:34 AM
after reading your post Im a little confused about your point of view, I did say that the difference of a complete system vs. a style is that of internal/ external , healing as well as fighting. I did not mean that if your style does not teach kicking or hand tecnique that it is not a style, aikido has no strikes but it is a internal style of karate but far from a complete system.
As for the chinese people if you ask the old timers they will agree that teaching non chinese has its repercussions in the chinese community. In china masters usually only teach the true art to their family members and they hold their skills close to their hearts and beleifs that kung fu is much apart of thier heritage as caligraphy and cooking, and never should their superstitious ancient beleifs be wasted on lazy americans for that is how they veiw non chinese who try to learn and become part of their already dieing ancient culture and history.

http://www.kungfuUSA.net

[This message was edited by EARTH DRAGON on 10-08-01 at 08:49 PM.]

buddhistfist
10-08-2001, 05:47 AM
True it is the "man" who "uses" the system/style to defeat an adversary but the System/Style makes the man. In my opinion :D

tnwingtsun
10-08-2001, 12:27 PM
I belive Bill Gates uses a system.

KnightSabre
10-08-2001, 12:49 PM
My System is a ground fighting "style".
The "style" is BJJ ;)

"You're Good Kid Real Good,But As Long As I'm Arround You'll Always Be Second Best See".

Gold Horse Dragon
10-09-2001, 04:43 AM
My point is: there is no difference between a system and a Style...the words are synonomous and used interchangeably...having something missing from a so called system does not make it a style instead, as you stated in your post.
There are many non-chinese sifu who have inherited the art (including the superstiions) from their Chinese sifu and who are now the keeper of the art and will pass it one day...in fact most of the most loyal and hardworking students in North America and in Hong Kong are Non-Chinese and most photos from the 80's up of Chinese sifu with their most trusted students show the majority of students as Non-Chinese. You do not have to be a cow to know what milk is. These Chinese sifu were/are not racist and show much more expanded and advanced thinking than the sifu you have described.
GHD

EARTH DRAGON
10-09-2001, 06:03 AM
Ok then in your opinon can you explain what a incomplete system is?

http://www.kungfuUSA.net

Scarletmantis
10-09-2001, 06:24 AM
Aikido is not a style of Karate, Earthdragon. Are you really a Kung Fu teacher?

"Master, here is a stick. Please beat me for my insolence." - KC Elbows

Gold Horse Dragon
10-10-2001, 04:32 AM
Systems/styles evolve through time...so there may be no such thing as an incomplete system, but rather just more advanced and less advanced or just different systems/styles. The only context in which one may speak of an incomplete (not the best word) system/style is when speaking of a system or style from a particular sifu in the lineage tree and not having all that he taught...but other sifu through time may have advanced the system/style beyond the parameters of the sifu who came before...for example Wong Fei Hung added forms that from what we know were not in the origial Tiger system/style from the Sil-lum Temple.
GHD

EARTH DRAGON
10-10-2001, 05:55 AM
yes I am a kung fu sifu trained by a chinese grandmaster not an expert on japanese martial arts. You can't ask a dentist to speak about open heart surgery either.

golden horse,
then what do you call tae kwon do? a complete system? they dont even have hand skill.
my point is that there is a lot of styles out there which lack the internal side of martial arts, they pay attention to fighting and only fighting which is a small piece of the pie. If all you have is fighting or external abilities how can you call it complete? actually real kung fu in china is taught healing side first then the easier fighting side later for healing ones own body was the original reason da mo taught the yi gin ching and the shii soei ching to the monks of shaolin was becuse of their practice of buddahism left them weak and unhealthy. So It is clear that if you only have knowledge of one side of a whole picture then you are missing something, and if something is missing then it is not complete.

http://www.kungfuUSA.net

Gold Horse Dragon
10-10-2001, 06:24 PM
Not so Earth Dragon...a complete style must be viewed in its own context and sifu ie. is there anything missing that the style's sifu taught. If comparing it to other styles, then it may be less advanced or more advanced depending on how deep it is. Tae Kwon Do does have punches and to discuss it you have to speak of it within its own context.
Healing is not taught first in most Chinese Martial Arts and sometimes it is not even in the style's curriculum or is reserved for the most advanced students or those interested. Because a system/style does not include the healing aspects does not make it incomplete from a martial art standpoint. My point is if the healing aspects are not there, then it is th sifu who is not yet complete as a teacher/master. People often confuse external and internal...when really understood, there is no such distinction, as one cannot have the internal without the external and vice versa.
GHD