Okay What is the POINT

[Unstoppable]

Speccically what is thePoint of Studying Kung Fu and could it Be USED in practical Terms for Combat. i have Been dicusing This with My Feinds fellow Students and So Forth ....... So Many people are Scared to Say 'Kung Fung is for FIghting!" but I think That is what It is For. What is Your opinion!

Is th

[dnc101]

You forgot the catagory "All that and much, much more."

[BrentCarey]

True "REALTY" fighting

Why would you want fight real estate?

[BrentCarey]

I couldn't really vote because I didn't find choices that I agreed with. I have been studying martial arts for well over 20 years, kung fu for something like 13 years, and teaching for well over 10 years. I am diametrically opposed to "fighting".

This is a semantic statement, but draws an important distinction. I use the term "fighting" to describe two or more people engaged in combat, each of them trying to harm the other for some reason. As my mother used to say, "It takes two to fight."

While I am opposed to fighting (as I defined it), I emphasize the importance of good self-defense. In self-defense, two people are engaged in combat, but their goals and methods are different. The attacker wants the harm the defender for whatever reason, but the defender just wants to prevent that action through whatever means necessary. Granted, sometimes this means that the defender must injure the attacker, but that is not the defender's goal, and is only made necessary through the attacker's own actions.

A self-defense situation should last about 2-3 seconds. Fighting often drags on for several minutes. Whenever I see the buzzphrase "reality fighting" or "streetfighting", I assume that the practitioner is looking for fights and/or accepting challenges unnecessarily - violence for the sake of violence. Others may have a significantly different view of what these terms imply, but in my experience, students drawn to those terms are generally violent or have other significant character weaknesses.

This post is not meant as a grammar attack (my last post was meant in good humor). Instead, it is meant to highlight some important distinctions between various aspects of martial arts.


Peace,

Brent Carey

[Unstoppable]

Some Excellent Points Brent! Thanx a bunch! :)

[SevenStar]

chinese animal martial arts? What happened to NAMAT??

[Souljah]

lol @ BrentCarey
alot of the things mentioned are the reason I study MA

Bro, were you in a rush when you wrote the poll entries, 'pilosophy' 'realty' jks


:D :rolleyes:

[Dreadnaught]

It's funny that "Street/reality" is number one in the poll right now... assuming that people mean self defense rather than "fighting" as Brent Carey described it, that would be most people's number one reason for training is the most unlikely thing (in that list) that they will actually experience...

[dnc101]

I've read a few of your posts, but never got around to saying hi, neighbor. I went to school in Spokane, and as cities go it is a nice place.

[Budokan]

LOL @ NAMAT.

[Braden]

People seem happy to accept someone who says they practice scales on the piano for the primary purpose of being a better piano player, even though they will never sit for a royal conservatory exam. But when someone says they practice martial arts for the primary purpose of self defense, even though they will never get in a fight, everyone gets riled up. Wierd.

[rogue]

You forgot meeting highly flexible womens!:D

[anerlich]

My opinion is that for you it should be somewhere between Hisotry, Pilosophy and LEARNING TO TYPE.

Maybe you should "Dicus it with your Feinds" some more.

So Many people are Scared to Say 'Kung Fung is for FIghting!"
Well, I'd be scared to say that as written out loud as well!

[Mr Punch]

Self defence and philosophy. In my case these are quite near the same. Also for fun! I might be starting training for competition soon...

Braden: I also do it for its own sake. Not for self defence but to become good at my martial arts. This fits with the piano playing part of your analogy, but not with the second.

?

[Braden]

Mat - I'm not following you at all.

[ewallace]

For your fiends it must be pilosophy.

[Merryprankster]

Hello? Where's 'fun' listed...

Last I checked, most, not ALL, but most of us, don't live in a place, or hang out in situations, where our fighting skills are of utmost importance.

I do this to have a good time and have some fun. Being able to fight is a nice side benefit of all this.

All of this needs to be taken WAY less seriously, IMO, by most of us.

[Chris McKinley]

Brent,

I respect your drawing a distinction between "fighting" and "self-defense". However, I must call you to task RE: "Whenever I see the buzzphrase "reality fighting" or "streetfighting", I assume that the practitioner is looking for fights and/or accepting challenges unnecessarily - violence for the sake of violence.". You make an unnecessary and, at least in my case, completely erroneous assumption here. I neither look for fights nor accept challenges, yet I am known for promoting what would be called reality combat.

RE: "Others may have a significantly different view of what these terms imply, but in my experience, students drawn to those terms are generally violent or have other significant character weaknesses.". Categorize me as one of those with a different view. I am neither generally nor even frequently violent and my teaching/training is focused on what works "on the street" almost to the exclusion of much else. My students, each of whom I pre-interview, also do not exhibit such tendencies. In fact, it has been my experience that those who most strongly and loudly decry training for reality combat are those incapable of it themselves and who's abilities and priorities for training are, shall I say, less than adequate. Oh yeah, and many of them also have the character flaw of not training to be able to defend the innocent with real life-or-death skill.

Does this characterization fit you? Perhaps, perhaps not. The point is, you may be as limited by your perspective on reality combat as guys like me are with ours. You seem all to willing to villify and dismiss those who train so that their skills might be used to defend the innocent from real attacks.

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by Braden
People seem happy to accept someone who says they practice scales on the piano for the primary purpose of being a better piano player, even though they will never sit for a royal conservatory exam. But when someone says they practice martial arts for the primary purpose of self defense, even though they will never get in a fight, everyone gets riled up. Wierd.

I practise because I want to get better at my martial art. This does not mean my primary purpose is for self defence.

According to your analogy, poeple practise piano to become better at piano, and people who practise martial arts do so for the primary purpose of self defence! This automatically assumes that SD is the primary purpose, which is what this thread was asking!!!

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
Hello? Where's 'fun' listed...

Hello. My first post on this thread!

[TjD]

another reason i practice is that wing chun can allow me to find out the most efficient and perfect way to use my body :)

definately a nice thing! i find the knowledge i learn about my body in WC applies to all the other physical activities i enjoy

[Braden]

Mat, where practice = 'a behavior which improves performance'

"I practice to improve performance."

"I engage in behaviors which improve performance to improve performance."

The statement itself has no value - by which I mean, it conveys no information; it's a simple statement of equivalency; one could make the statement without having any insight into the topic.

Philosophers make a meal about this kind of thing, where they outline different kinds of causes, eg. proximal causes. So we could answer, quite validly to this question, that we practice martial arts because they are an element in our culture or because certain physiological impulses travel down nerves from our brain. These would be true, but inappropriate to our discussion because they deal with the wrong sort of 'why' which is being questioned.

I argue the same should be said of the response given above (I practice to improve performance) because, similarly, it deals with a wrong sort of 'why'; specifically, one which at worst is a statement of equivalency and at best is a statement of awareness of the subject.

So, the summary, minus all the jargon is - of course you're right, but I don't believe that what you say disputes what anyone else has said, because it's a different category of response (like if someone asks "What's an apple like?" and one person answers "Tart!" and another answers "Sweet!" and then someone goes "No, you're both wrong, they're red!"); and also that it conveys negligible -> no information, in the philosophical sense. Ok, well that failed miserable at being a jargon-free summary.

In other words, if I had answered "Because of neural impulses," you might have responded "Uh, yeah... but WHY!?" because you've got a different sense of why in mind. In the same sense, when you answer "To get better," one might respond "Yes, but WHY!?"

Dogsarnit, THAT should have been the summary. Or even the whole post.

[BrentCarey]

Originally posted by Dreadnaught
It's funny that "Street/reality" is number one in the poll right now... [but] is the most unlikely thing (in that list) that they will actually experience...

... or need.

Good point Dreadnaught.

[BrentCarey]

Originally posted by dnc101
I've read a few of your posts, but never got around to saying hi, neighbor. I went to school in Spokane, and as cities go it is a nice place.

Hi . . . it's good to hear from you.

[Mr Punch]

OK Braden, I'm definitely with you! It was a reasonable summary, but not quite up to your usual standard!!:p

Philosophically, or maybe more psychologically, one of the reasons I practise is because I like being really good at something. So that really is practice for the sake of it.

That statement may have no value itself, but it rubs off on things like: I like practising kungfu because I like being able to control my body so I can;

1) walk through a crowded store quickly without touching anybody;
2) stand on one leg to tie my shoes without falling over;
3) defend myself.
4) etc.

If you also take 'practise' as 'perform an activity habitually or regularly' it makes more sense and has more value to me nitpicking with your analogy!

'For the sake of it', 'for itself' etc is surely the last statement of real value before the kind of stage where you say 'because of neural impulses'... I think 'for fun' is about the same... before we get to the 'But WHY is it fun?'

I don't practise for SD, I practise because I like improving; it's part of the fun!

[Mr Punch]

In the OED (Concise) there's an archaic definition: 'to scheme or plot for an evil purpose'!!!:cool:

That's my kungfu!!!

[BrentCarey]

Originally posted by Chris McKinley
Brent,

I must call you to task RE: "Whenever I see the buzzphrase "reality fighting" or "streetfighting", I assume that the practitioner is looking for fights and/or accepting challenges unnecessarily - violence for the sake of violence.". You make an unnecessary and, at least in my case, completely erroneous assumption here. I neither look for fights nor accept challenges, yet I am known for promoting what would be called reality combat.


It seems I struck a nerve. Not sure why you're upset or compelled to question my abilities. Quite strange.

As you noted, I also pointed out that:

"Others may have a significantly different view of what these terms imply, but in my experience, students drawn to those terms are generally violent or have other significant character weaknesses."

I respect your right to describe your experiences, but I am afraid you are reading too much into this. Take my comments for face value.


In fact, it has been my experience that those who most strongly and loudly decry training for reality combat are those incapable of it themselves and who's abilities and priorities for training are, shall I say, less than adequate. Oh yeah, and many of them also have the character flaw of not training to be able to defend the innocent with real life-or-death skill. Does this characterization fit you?

Well, I'm not going to defend my character if that's what you are looking for. Anyone who knows me, knows the depth of my "reality" training. I have unfortunately had more than my share of "reality".

My point has nothing to do with the relevance or worth of any kind of training. My point has to do with the terms themselves. I find that students that come to me looking for "reality fighting", "streetfighting", etc. have generally seen too much WWF, Mortal Kombat, or whatever.

I am a great proponent of realistic self-defense. In fact, I am very specific with my students about which techniques work in "reality" and which do not (depending on the student's skill level).


The point is, you may be as limited by your perspective on reality combat as guys like me are with ours. You seem all to willing to villify and dismiss those who train so that their skills might be used to defend the innocent from real attacks.

Crazy.

I'm not limited in this way at all. In my original post, I identified my statements as a generalization based on my experiences. Of course there are exceptions. It's like someone saying they read Playboy for the articles - sure, some people probably do, but you can assume that most people don't really.

This is why you (and I) have to screen your students.

I have no idea where your reference to vilification comes from, so I won't respond specifically.


Peace,

Brent Carey

[Braden]

Mat - I think 'for fun' is a great answer.

When you say 'I like being really good at something,' one might ask 'but why is the something this?' and you might respond 'because this is what I enjoy being good at.' I'm too tired to think about it now, but it seems to be that if you cancelled out terms there, you'd find out that statement is equivalent to saying 'for fun.'

[Mr Punch]

Yep, sorry for my ambiguity: that's exactly what I was saying!

[Helicopter]

Along many of the reasons listed above (and I'd have to agree with Merryp' that for me fun is the #1 reason.) I would add:

'Expressing the human body' (to steal a phrase from Bruce) more macho than dancing, but learning to use my body dynamically and with power is both challenging and extremely rewarding. (sometimes I think 'sh*t! I'm not half bad at this stuff!')

and the other (which I'm less proud to admit) is the intellectual conceit of studing Chinese martial arts, CMA are particularly esoteric and I like knowing and understanding something that most people don't have a clue about.

jpcm

[Helicopter]

:confused: I don't think because you enjoy something it means you don't take it very seriously. I've been to a few MA school and quit because I didn't feel comfortable, I didn't enjoy the experience, I didn't have 'fun'.

It may be just a matter of somantics, I use the word 'fun' to describe a wealth of different pleasurable experiences, it's not party hats, balloons and jelly and ice cream.

I object to this notion that MA is hardcore and the training has to endured not enjoyed. I come back from training sessions battered and bruised, but to me thats part of the 'fun', part of the all-round experience. I take my kung fu extremely seriously, but I take alot of pleasure doing it.

'scuse the rant:)

jpcm

[HuangKaiVun]

NO topflight master I've ever met in ANY field ever got to where he did without having "fun".

"Fun" is the spirit of doing something with childlike (not childish) joy and creativity. That's exactly what a person needs to fight through all the difficulties of training and to add to the field with his own ability. When it comes down to it, the fun factor truly is the most important aspect of kung fu training (even more than innate talent).

In fact, MA training that is "hardcore" but not "fun" is basically SUFFERING. Why would anybody subject their minds and bodies to such suffering without the reward of "fun" to keep them going? For those that have no "fun", burnout is the eventual outcome. I've seen it happen too many times.

And the notion that combat effectiveness and fun cannot coexist is absolutely BOGUS. Whether we want to admit it or not, there is great fun in committing certain acts of violence and also in learning how to do them. This is why humans embrace competitive sports and KUNG FU MOVIES. Why else would violent video games and the whole notion of kung fu even exist otherwise?

When I open my martial arts school sometime this year, I shall make sure that my art is "fun" for many people. That's how I'll reel in the interest and the $. And because I'll make the training "fun", hopefully people will actually ENJOY coming to class and getting a workout. Most of my students will have no pressing need to learn kung fu and so if I don't make it "fun", they won't train in the first (or last) place.

Those folks who discourage others from having fun are contributing to kung fu's demise more than those who try to make the art fun for themselves and others. I wouldn't do kung fu if it weren't "fun". Most SANE people would not.

[Merryprankster]

Feeling particularly humorless today stumble?

Feel free to swing by DC sometime and visit my school. Fun doesn't mean sitting around and playing tiddly-winks.

I think those people that try and take fun off the list take themselves FAR too seriously.

[HuangKaiVun]

"enjoyment" = "fun" and "fun" = "enjoyment", stumblefist.

Thus, you are being OFFENSIVE TO YOURSELF.


Balloons and cookies ARE very good. They help temper the training, keep it from being overly violent and bring martial arts practitioners together.

Those who "dance" in martial arts - there's a place for them too. Jackie Chan "dances", but look at how much he's popularized the martial arts. Nor would any of us dare claim that Jackie Chan couldn't kick some serious butt in a real fight - and his "dancing" is a big part of that.

Besides, forms ARE dances and thus we in kung fu do that to a very large extent. You might as well throw away all your forms if that's how you feel about "dance".

MA's secrets should NOT be kept by insane people. Their twisted ways pervert and distort the FUN that can be had from practicing kung fu. What good comes from having mastered the most ultimate violent art if its deepest secrets are stashed away for nefarious usage by those who do not have the capacity to deal with society?

It's a moot point anyway because no insane person can grasp the deepest secret of kung fu: that the point of kung fu is to CREATE, not DESTROY.

[Merryprankster]

I cook because it's fun too.

You know, I'm willing to bet the laughing buddha is smiling because he's figured it all out, and realized that life is fun. Living, after all, is the point of being alive. Otherwise, why bother?

Fun offensive? What is this world COMING to? If I enjoy something it's fun to me.

It's FUN. *shrug* I'm not sure what's so offensive about that. The only way a person could possibly find it offensive is if you felt the concept of"fun" belittled what Martial Arts is all about, in which case I would argue that person needs to spend a great deal more time laughing at themselves.

You spend MA time suffering? MA is about suffering huh? The next time I'm feeling elated and happy and having FUN boxing or wrestling or Jiujitsu, I'll wipe the good mood out of my mind and remember that this is serious, hard, work and I'm not supposed to be enjoying it, or else I'm making a mockery of everything. Where do we get this awful, horrible idea that something can only be good for you, or is only being done right if it's NOT fun?

It's like the worst combination of the puritan work ethic and Buddhism. All of the misery and none of the reward. I'm going to go flog myself for all the fun I had at BJJ tonight.

We shouldn't feel guilty for having fun doing stuff we like, and we certainly shouldn't be MADE to feel guilty for it.

[Unstoppable]

MA Traning is F.U.N. or I wouldnt do it!! So ya i do it for fun (kind of) otherise it would SUCK! what the!!!

hey MerryPrankester, my Sifu says that Buddha says "WORDLY PLEASURES ARE DISTRACION"!!! so maybe ur wrong!!! Or maybe Buda just Had a Bad School so his trainig wasnt Any fun!! JUST KIDDING BUDDHA

[KC Elbows]

I can see your point Stumblefist, though I think there's room enough for those who do it for fun.

How do you feel about those who do it because they find it fulfilling?

[Helicopter]

The reason I practice CMA are many and none of those reasons are because it's fun.

However I would be a fool to myself if I did not realise that the main reason I continue to learn and be motivated is because I have fun doing it.

(as an aside there is nothing more beautiful than a precise, powerful technique that sends your opponent flying.)

jpcm

[BrentCarey]

Originally posted by Stumblefist
Yes, MA is about suffering.

Fun is not on the list of reasons to do it. If you want to search for fun you should get a different hobby.


I honestly can't tell if you are serious or not. I normally don't berate people for their opinions, but this is one of the most ridiculous statements I've seen in a long time - if you are serious. If you are being sarcastic, it is hilarious. Like I said, I can't tell which is the case.

Did you know that some languages don't even have a word for "fun"? To describe fun, you have to be more specific, using words that mean things like "interesting", "satisfying", "fulfilling", "amusing", "not suffering", etc. In the english language, we have this blanket word called "fun" that is used to describe activities that give us a wide range of desirable sensations.

You may derive some sort of satisfaction through suffering possibly as some expression of penitence or as a juvenile expression of dejection to generate sympathetic affection (fairly common). The latter is normally accompanied by self-deprecating remarks, or extensive carrying on about the nature of one's burdens.

It is easy to spot this condition and it is common in the martial arts community. That person you know that complains endlessly about all the hard work he has to put in and the pains he must suffer to be a "true" martial artist - well, he needs a hug.

So my despondent friend, you too are having fun. You are deriving satisfaction from an activity. Telling yourself and others that it is "about suffering" makes you feel special and adds to your satisfaction. You must be special to be able to endure all of that suffering. You don't like that suffering (as that would make it fun), but you must endure it because ... well, you don't really have a reason. You just like the "tortured artist" image.

Hey, that's fine though. I'm OK, you're OK. I won't pass judgement on your value system, and you won't pass judgement on mine, because I do this because it is serious fun.

(If you are kidding, then nice one. If not, seek therapy.)


Peace,

Brent Carey

[HuangKaiVun]

He's not kidding, Brent Carey.

In short, stumblefist is miserable when he practices martial arts and wants us to be also.

To one like him, MA is about death and destruction and brutality and all those terrible things that it's actually supposed to PREVENT. That's why the concept of doing MA for "fun" is so absolutely abhorent to him.

People like these are not dangerous physically, but mentally. They try their best to discourage people from practicing the art and propagate the image of kung fu as a violent criminal killing art. The message stumblefist is spreading is that if you aren't focused on killing and maiming, you're not a kung fu man. What rubbish!

I've met people like this before in real life, and I've wisely stayed away from them in order not to be influenced by their nefarious goals.

In that way, they hurt us martial artists more than they would with their fists.

[Helicopter]

Stumblefist,

I am not of Chinese descent, Kung Fu is not part of my cultural heritage.

I am not in daily need of MA skills. (or monthly, or even yearly.)

Nor am I paranoid about the few times in my life that may need to use my skills. (I never needed them before I started training.)

If you're going to use KF to defend your life, you have to a life worth defending in the first place.

I am not an top-flight MArtist, I spend too much time with my beautiful partner, my beautiful daughter and earning a living, but I still consider myself a dedicated martial artist.

Don't get me wrong SF I have begrudging respect for people like yourself, but that kind of commitment isn't very balanced to me.

jpcm

[BrentCarey]

OK, here is my final word on the subject as: a) I don't like getting into personal criticisms (especially in this format), and b) I don't believe Stumblefist is really serious. I believe he is just egging on.

First, English must not be your native language. This is not a criticism. I speak several foreign languages and can sympathize on this point. However, you are really difficult to understand. Your points are disjointed and made out of context in a way that makes them seem like rambling.

Second, it is quite possible we are arguing a semantic point, although it is difficult to tell exactly what your point is. If I may summarize your stance, I believe you are saying that the only way to gain a profound understanding of kung fu is through intense personal sacrifice and suffering. You concede that the activity can be "fufilling", but maintain that it shouldn't be "fun".

So, if the word "fun" is offensive to you, we can substitute with a term like "fulfilling", or "personally satisfying", but can't cross the line into "a source of enjoyment" or "entertainment". Is that correct?

OK, if we are just quibbling about the definition of a word, then let's move on. However, you seem to have a limited view that martial arts requires some sort of chastening process. Granted, some people's suffering has helped them achieve excellence. Adversity has the tendency to push a person's potential.

This is not the only path however. If you follow this line of thinking logically, you understand that the martial artist with adversities to overcome, by the nature of his position in life, has less potential than is privileged counterpart (all else being equal).

If two people must cross a thick forest, one of them over rocks and through thick brush, the other up a smooth road, clearly the latter will be capable of going ****her in less time (provided he doesn't take the scenic route).

The perception you assert as fact, has more to do with the attitude of the two travellers. The person taking the difficult path may feel that he needs to work harder since he has all of these obstacles slowing him down. The person on the road may become complacent about the journey since his path is all laid out clearly for him with no apparent obstacles in the way.

You must concede that the person on the road does not need to be complacent, and if he puts the same effort into the journey as the other person, he will go ****her, faster.

So, to say that suffering and adversity is the only way, is illogical and shows a lack of experience, or perhaps an unhealthy perspective. Perhaps one or more of the following is true:

- You have never met anyone with a high level of accomplishment that didn't struggle through adversity.
- You imagine that everyone you've met that has a high level of accomplishment, also struggled through adversity.
- You discount the achievements of people that have not struggled (I suspect this is the case).

The problem with your attitude about martial arts (and I have seen it before) is that frequently, when walking through the thick underbrush, one tends to put one's head down and fixate on the obstacles, thus losing site of the destination. That is, one fixates on the suffering, making that the goal, rather than staying focused on the destination.

I have met many great martial artists who have led a relatively comfortable life. The lack of adversity has not made them soft, it has allowed them to grow stronger. Many of my students follow my training faithfully, and become so caught up in having a great time (yes "fun") that before they know it, they look up and, what do you know, suddenly they are pretty good martial artists.

As everyone is aware, kung fu basically means hard work over time. As they say, time flies when you're having fun. Since time is one of the key ingredients to kung fu, if a practitioner can find his/her work fun, he/she is pretty well half way there.

Well, as I said, this is my final word on the subject. Stumblefist, this is not meant to be an antagonistic post. I am simply asserting a broader perspective based on my experience. It will be easy for you to dismiss my comments and similar comments as being from someone who is not "hardcore".

This is a common reaction when someone presents a viewpoint that is different from one's own. It is easy to say, well we "hardcore" martial artists think this way, everyone else just doesn't get it.

Well, ask around and do some checking up on me to see if I qualify as "hardcore". Frankly, I don't care. I'm too busy training, teaching, studying, and writing about martial arts - about 10-12 hours a day are dedicated in one way or another to this pursuit.

Does that make me well-balanced? Well no, probably not, but I can say with confidence that I do not suffer, and I would not do it if it wasn't fun.

Once again, if you are just putting us on (which must be the case), you got me. Good one.

Peace,

Brent Carey

[Gabriel]

Brent


"First, English must not be your native language. This is not a criticism. I speak several foreign languages and can sympathize on this point. However, you are really difficult to understand. Your points are disjointed and made out of context in a way that makes them seem like rambling."

This, is a ridiculous assumption to make. Stumble is just as coherent as anyone else; he just has a different point of view from you. Seems like criticism to me. You are trying to discredit the opposition, a classic ploy of debate.

Stumblefist, I see what you're saying, I really do.

IMHO, the word "fun" carries with it an inherent frivolous connotation. Quite simply, MA isn't always "fun". After all, when one crashes into his physical limits, it isn't exactly an enjoyable experience stretching said limits. No, it takes dedication, effort, and endurance through pain to accomplish any markable results. For example, if one were to hold a low horse for 7 minutes, he would have had to work himself up to that point, through hours and hours of dedication and hard work, and yes, pain. This is because he had to stretch his physical limits from 1 minute. The same can apply to running. In order for someone to go from running 1 mile to running 4 miles, he has to train dilligently, and work through the pain. This concept of training and having fun, and suddenly realizing ..." Like wow, Im a good MA'ist" is laughable. Every achievement is noted as it happens, because so much effort and sweat is put forth to reach said achievement. In my case, I realized the millisecond that it happened when i could run 4 miles, because it was excrutiating to do so, and I excercised an act of will to achieve it. It didn't just "occur" to me amidst the fun. Having said all that, through MA I have gained several valuable friends, and attained a sense of community, and also my confidence has skyrocketed, so aspects are fullfilling to say the least. But "fun"? I don't think so.

Gabriel