Strip it down to the essence!

[Chang Style Novice]

There's a lot of stuff in most styles. You've got techniques, vocabulary, training methods, history, equipment, lineage, possibly forms, possibly some with weapons maybe other stuff too.

But what is it that really defines a style? In other words, if you start removing stuff that maybe isn't so important, when it comes right down to it, what do you HAVE to leave in to still say you're doing what you do?

As an example - Boxing.

You could theoretically box without skipping rope or speedbag practice (and doing this doesn't make you a boxer.)

You could box without knowing anything about Jack Dempsey or Muhammed Ali or Roy Jones (and knowing them doesn't make you a boxer.)

You could even maybe box without jabs, crosses, hooks and uppercuts (using them doesn't make you a boxer.)

But if you never get in a ring and try to punch the other guy out, you ain't a boxer, and if you do get in the ring, you're a boxer.


another example, Taijiquan

You can do taijiquan without waving your arms around slowly (doing this doesn't mean you're doing taijiquan.)

You can do taijiquan without knowing sword or pole forms (and not everyone who does sword or pole forms is doing tjq.)

But if you don't try yield to and redirect attacks in pushing hands, and use dantien and leg power to increase your force with minimal motion and effort, then you aren't doing taijiquan. And if you push hands with those principals, regardless of what you call it, that's taijiquan.

In my humble and possibly ignorant opinion, of course.

[MasterKiller]

But if you never get in a ring and try to punch the other guy out, you ain't a boxer, and if you do get in the ring, you're a boxer. What if you get in the ring and try to kick him? Are you still a boxer? Style is a catalog of preferred techniques. Not using a preferred technique doesn't mean you are not using your style, but not using any of your preferred techniques does. i.e. A boxer who does not punch is not a boxer.

[Chang Style Novice]

I think that different styles have different essences. The essence of boxing is in its competitive format. The essence of taiji is in its structural principles. The essence of aikido may be in its non-competitive philosophy (although I know even less about aikido that I do about tjq, where I'm far from expert in the first place.)

[MasterKiller]

The essence of boxing is in its competitive format. Which differs from Judo or BJJ how?

[Chang Style Novice]

Well, the competitive formats are different, that's how. You ippon a guy in boxing, they're gonna look at you funny, to say the least.

[MasterKiller]

You ippon a guy in boxing, they're gonna look at you funny, to say the least. Which means preferred technique is the difference.

[yenhoi]

I think the essence of boxing should be the light footwork and KO via punching.

Although techniques do not exist, I agree with MK.

:p

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by MasterKiller
Which differs from Judo or BJJ how?

the essence of judo would be pacifism. Yeah, throws hurt, but kano was a pacifist and based his teachings around it.

[SevenStar]

coincidentally, I was thinking about this exact same topic last night and earlier today. I always say that good MA transcends style. Even still though, there are certain characteristics that certain arts have. Those characteristics make up the styles essence. Muay Thai's essence is it beauty through brutality. The essence of karate is power through linear motion. More specifically, the reverse punch. The essence of mantis is its footwork and plucking of the limbs. The essence of bjj is economy and efficiency.

sure, when you whittle the art down, it is kicks, punches, locks and throws. But the way that these arts go about applying them - that is the essence.

[David Jamieson]

what if you get in the ring, hit the ref, knock him out, then hit the other guy with a chair and step on his neck?

does that make you a boxer?

Or what if you get in a ring, box like crazy and then decide to try and bite your opponents ear off?

what then? i ask you! what then??? lol

things move, things don't move, things are dead, things are alive, that pretty much covers it.

cheers

[SevenStar]

if those things were characteristic of all boxers, then maybe.

That being said, is losing the essence of kung fu? :p :D

[rogue]

The essence of karate is power through linear motion. More specifically, the reverse punch. IMO most karate is about kime and control. At least that's the two constants that I've found common between most styles.

[No_Know]

The essence of a thing is not the techniques. The techniques come as an expression of concepts.

It is not what they have as much as it is what they do not have in perhaps at least some instances.

Boxing-does not have elbow leading overhead strikes nor kicks as strikes. Boxing is give and take, just give better than the other person. Boxing is go in there willing to be hit to achieve your goal. Boxing is sacrifice--suffering for others or to ease your conscience about your self worth.

Around whatever concepts a martial sport or martial art was formed, there might have been growth. Growth in expression of the concepts. The technique base or technique variations change or grow.

If you are going to fight it is presumed that you will be hit. Some arts or sports latch on to this and embrace it more than others perhaps. Perhaps they are the same merely highlighting qualities differently.

Kung-Fu has training to resist blows but it's like required extra curricular work. Whereas in Boxing it is a core course.

If you do not have a sense of history Dempsy... your ambition looses it's gague. You only aspire to the things you know. And if each generation does not regard the prior, they cannot advance a thing. They each make similar mistakes and have similar difficulties. Learn from passed success or failure yours And others. Many starting from the same base, can head in different directions. And they will discover things not found in your direction. Not that either is overall better but awareness of things you were not going to realize as suddenly might give you new direction. And new direction after you've been traveling might take you ****her than at least some.

Boxing is a thing. It is older than you. Kung-Fu is older than you. People associate themselves with things that are more than them. An attempt at long life. Being remembered after you are gone. People do not necessarily amount to much in the World. But association with something great(er) inspires us and relieves our insignificance (somewhat perhaps).

In sports you might have a team. They win but you are jumping for joy (besides the bet you won)...You did not play, but you were with them and there, a connection. As they won and plaied so did you. As they lost and suffered, you did in part. And you can state which team was your claim and you are treated as though you were the winner/loser... When I do boxing, I tie in to a heritage that extends not merely across geographic boundries, but time boundries. And as it's reputation,, is mine. How I might feel~ and how I might get treated.

This is why I might defed or be At someone downing that with which I (am) associate(d). I take it as an extension of me. It Is Personal, and Social...When I become stronger I can let more slide as I understand to.