looking like your style

[SevenStar]

a strike is a strike.

a victory is a victory.

a loss is a loss.

Why do people put so much stock in "looking like their style?" In the grand scheme of things, what does it matter? Is your victory any sweeter when you look like your style? Is your loss more honorable?

when I do a fireman's carry, it doesn't look like "shoot the bow" - not because I no longer train cma, but because I'm applying the technique as opposed to doing it in a form. We have counters to punches that involve stepping into a person, pulling them into you and kneeing them. I've seen a similar application in a mantis form that was taught at my old school - but I don't look like that. does it matter?

It would seem to me that as long as you are applying the principles of your style, the look is superfluous.

[shirkers1]

Holy crap we agree on something!!!!!!


Well sort of. :)

This is where it gets tricky with some people, they feel it has to look like you do it in the form or it's not traditional. I say other than “conditioning” why not do the form the way you would apply it? When you look at how different families do their forms they all differ and have their own flavor any ways. So then why not do the tactics in the forms like they are meant to be performed, which is actual application? This way when you use the tactics you would look like the style you practice. That’s the way our family practices our forms, it’s not all wushu and flowery. It’s direct and to the point.

By conditioning I mean for example when you punch in mantis we punch the palm of the other hand to condition that hand and the fist, or when we down chop we hit the inside of the forearm with the other palm to condition the forearm. Where as those hands would be doing a slap, block or re direct in actual application. Other than that the forms should be done in a practical manor, not for show.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

"when I do a fireman's carry, it doesn't look like "shoot the bow" - not because I no longer train cma, but because I'm applying the technique as opposed to doing it in a form."

I think there's a misconception of what form training is supposed to do. In an active drill / spar, because you're training with a skilled partner, there is less chance of completing the move as you would do in a form. You and you're partner would most likely be stopped half way and having to branch off into another move.

Just like in boxing, each player would like to do a perfect knock out with the first punch, but the opportunity doesn't arise that often - especially when both players are fresh off in the ring.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by shirkers1
Holy crap we agree on something!!!!!!

there must be a glitch in the matrix... ;)



When you look at how different families do their forms they all differ and have their own flavor any ways.

That was going to be my next point - you beat me to it.

So then why not do the tactics in the forms like they are meant to be performed, which is actual application? This way when you use the tactics you would look like the style you practice. That’s the way our family practices our forms, it’s not all wushu and flowery. It’s direct and to the point.

By conditioning I mean for example when you punch in mantis we punch the palm of the other hand to condition that hand and the fist, or when we down chop we hit the inside of the forearm with the other palm to condition the forearm. Where as those hands would be doing a slap, block or re direct in actual application. Other than that the forms should be done in a practical manor, not for show.

yeah, I agree.
























Did I say that??!??! :D

[SPJ]

Agreed that apps are more important than "looks".

However, each style entails different methods, principles and body mechanics and stresses different things. They are not just different in "looks" only.

A punch for example;

Ze Zi Quan in WC.

Xing Yi punches.

Circular Tang Do punches in Tai Ji.

Throwing palms in Tong Bei.

Zwei Zuei in Liu He Mantis, etc

They are all strikes. And they differ not just in "looks".

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

SPJ,

I would say the last 4 uses similar body mechanics.

[ShaolinTiger00]

Why do people put so much stock in "looking like their style?"

Because anytime a tma guy can actually show fighting competence he looks exactly like a kickboxer and not the style he practices ?:confused:

[David Jamieson]

Because anytime a tma guy can actually show fighting competence he looks exactly like a kickboxer and not the style he practices ?

Again, a misconception based on your experience alone.

Man, you musta had a bad experience or something to let that seed grow in your mind so strong st00.

It's too bad you don't have access, but I guess that can be said for a lot of folks. Don't be so narrow. There is no art that should be looked down upon. If you haven't tasted, then you don't know. It's ok to say "I do not know", in fact it is preferable in cases where you might find yourself hazarding a guess that is biased from limited experience.

[SPJ]

Maybe it is a cultural thing or availability as pointed out.

Growing up in Taiwan, everybody knows that there are differences in fighting style or schools. Tai Ji uses different approaches from Shaolin. Mantis is famous for its hooking hand. Eagle claws are deadly pinches, iron head, iron clothes for taking hits, karate palm breaking bricks, Thai kicking shin, Moslem Ba Ji close combat and throw, Mogolian Shuai Jiao, on and on.

Not everybody knows exactly how they differ. But common people would still say there are different methods or ways of fightings.

If the food is cooked, it is cooked.

Yes, they are steamed, boiled, baked, fried, grilled, bar-be-que or ---

There are sauted with spices, salt, pepper, sugar, vinegar or --.

Oh what spices? Malaysian Say tay, Indian curry (red, yellow--), Thai hot and spicy sauce, Korean Kim Ji style, Japanese terry yaki, on and on.

Granished with what--

Goes with what wine--

Serves with what--

They are all the same or not.

:D

[Hua Lin Laoshi]

It's not a matter of looking the style but rather using the style. When you fight you should be using the techniques and movements that make up your style. I mean why learn all those cool fancy moves if you don't (or can't) use them in a real fight?

And I agree, the forms should be more representative of actual fighting. I'm stuck in that mindset from my old Kenpo days.

[rogue]

Don't know if I look like my style but sometimes the people you train under leave their imprint on you. People that know me and know the people I've trained under can pick that up.

[FngSaiYuk]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
Again, a misconception based on your experience alone.

Man, you musta had a bad experience or something to let that seed grow in your mind so strong st00.

It's too bad you don't have access, but I guess that can be said for a lot of folks. Don't be so narrow. There is no art that should be looked down upon. If you haven't tasted, then you don't know. It's ok to say "I do not know", in fact it is preferable in cases where you might find yourself hazarding a guess that is biased from limited experience.

Y'know, I think where st00 is coming from is that for sport fighting, you want to get the best and most direct to the point training to win in competition. The more years you can put in to training with direct impact on your matches, the better.

There is a LOT of training in many styles of kungfu that take a VERY long time to get good at enough to be able to use it effectively in a fight, let alone in sport fighting. And in sport fighting, youth has an edge, so packing in as much experience as possible in a short amount of time garners a distinct advantage.

So I wouldn't say that TCMA training is 'useless' per se, just that there are MUCH better training methods for competitive sport fighting. There is a LOT more that TCMA has to offer outside of the ring that I feel is a LOT more valuable than straight sport competition training. But that's because I live in an area with little crime and VERY little violence.

[David Jamieson]

sportive fighting can be done in 3-6 months at a caliber one is ranked in regardless of what they train.

the very best of the best have spent many years training to be where they are.

Even in boxing this is true. and yes, competitive sport fighting is definitely the realm of teh under 40 crowd in many respects.

the 20 somethings is probably the optimum time.

However, in the great big pool of fighting fishes, still, only a few are any good really even though there are hundreds if not thousands if not hundreds of thousands swimming in that pond.

to make blanket statements such as has been made about tcma is only ignorant of tcma. But, we don't hear it much from groups other than those with an agenda of validating their own thought on the matter.

any art or practice is worthy of undertaking in the end.

[GunnedDownAtrocity]

i try to look like heihachi.

is that bad?

[GunnedDownAtrocity]

HEIHACHI!!! (http://www.futuregamez.net/ps2games/scalibur2/scalibur23.jpG)

smackin hos down b.

[MonkeySlap Too]

"Looking like your style" means two things to me: 1.) Your physical structure reflects your training. A BaJi guy uses what I call Slant Flying all day long, just like I do, but how it works is impacted by the particular body mechanics dictated by the style. 2.) The ai priori assumptions made by a training 'system' determines much of the 'look.' When my buddy Brian executes a throw - it looks like long fist. No question about it. There are different choices in set ups, how you stand, from where you move, how you move that give a style its 'flavor.' I know plenty of guys who can fight really well without 'looking' like kickboxing.

But - and here is why most TMA schools have lost thier right to use the term 'martial' - is that foorm MUST follow function. When people stop using thier skills, the meaning behind the flavor is lost, often leaving folks who swear upon moving a certain way, without ever realizng what they aren't understanding.

[FngSaiYuk]

Originally posted by GunnedDownAtrocity
i try to look like heihachi.

is that bad?

I'd LOVE to look like Heihachi when I'm like over 100... Including all the kewl chi/lightning effects!

[Serpent]

Trouble is, GDA, you actually look more like Taki's ugly sister.

[Becca]

Just because your teacher doesn't focus the majority of class time on showing one how to use the style's forms in a functional way don't meen he/she can't. Itmay just meen that he/she expects you to get off you bum and do it yourself... Then show them what you have learned. At this point they help you to fix it if you can't make it work right, or they show you something new to puzle over.

How to do this, you ask??? Easy eoungh: make a point of incorporating the individual sequences from the form into your sparring moves. And really make the effort to use them, even if it don't work the first 10 times. Once you getsomething obscure to work for you once, the next time you try something odd or obscure, you will get it faster. If you just can't use it- and you really have tried to learn how to- shoe your teacher what you have been doing and see if maybe they can help you "fix" it. This is what teachersare for. Helping one learn, not leading one along by the nose like a cow.

[SPJ]

Excellent post;

1) Once you do the forms right everytime.

2) The next step is to uncover the apps yourself. When I first learned Tai Ji Qi Shi and Jing Gong Dao Zuei, the teacher said there are more than 42 apps in them. I was shocked or puzzled. I then started to think or analyze the movement, steps relative to up, down, left, right, forward and backward in a circle.

Eventually, the answers were given. But after that, I still uncover more. If I think about the principles all the time, apps will show themself.

3) Free sparring and actually use the moves. If without a partner, I may practice the app solo with props for resistence or drill with imagination.

In the step 3, you see all the real "looks" in fight. And not the continuous or not so apparent moves in the form (Toulu).

Cheers.

:cool:

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Becca
Just because your teacher doesn't focus the majority of class time on showing one how to use the style's forms in a functional way don't meen he/she can't. Itmay just meen that he/she expects you to get off you bum and do it yourself... Then show them what you have learned. At this point they help you to fix it if you can't make it work right, or they show you something new to puzle over.

How to do this, you ask??? Easy eoungh: make a point of incorporating the individual sequences from the form into your sparring moves. And really make the effort to use them, even if it don't work the first 10 times. Once you getsomething obscure to work for you once, the next time you try something odd or obscure, you will get it faster. If you just can't use it- and you really have tried to learn how to- shoe your teacher what you have been doing and see if maybe they can help you "fix" it. This is what teachersare for. Helping one learn, not leading one along by the nose like a cow.

but what's the point there? it hinders progress. Sticking with my shoot the bow example, we spent literally years thinking it was a punch. That made sense to us because our longfist was mainly striking influence. After I started grappling, I was doing a fireman's carry and thought "hey, this is shoot the bow!" and when I brought it up on the forum, others agreed. Now, had I just been told that when I first started working on it, I woulda had it down a long time ago. Wouldn't have been hard, as I love the fireman's carry.

Then, what of the people that don't experiment or question? they get black belts, sashes, etc. and open schools, teaching what they think they know, but they may actually be wrong. He is training people with incorrect knowledge, which is never a good thing.

[Oso]

LOL, SPJ, I've used the food analogy before.

It's in the flavor of what you are looking at. The problem w/ tcma is that it doesn't compete enough, or at all, against other styles. Or they don't compete at all. Therefore the tcma person doesn't have a clue about how his 'technique' is going to stand up to something besides his/her kung fu brother/sister.

Seven, I hear ya, but is this really a different topic than "CMA doesn't train/compete realistically"?

I for one and still very much waiting to hear more from Coach Ross as he crosses back into tcma.

Right now, in sparring with my students, I'm only letting them utilize the most basic of mantis techniques, gou lou cai. I'm firing basic straight and hook punches at them and working with them on using gou lou cai to intercept/block/deflect the attack and counter attack with straights/hooks. They are using somewhat higher versions of the stances they train and so far are looking pretty good and, I think, still looking like mantids.

[SevenStar]

I actually wasn't thinking about that debate when I made this thread. I think what sparked it was a thread on the WC forum where someone mentioned looking like their style.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Seven, what you experienced is a by product if the secretiveness inherent in much of CMa culture - which does result in there being an awful lot of CMA teachers who don't know thier system teaching it. I've encountered this too, but a good CMA teacher often has 'poems' or 'words' that supply the theory and unlock the secrets of the system.

However, it is still better to have a teacher who can explain clearly and understands how to coach you for fighting.

[EarthDragon]

Hurray!!! Monkey slap, couldnt have said it better. The sonnents or songs unlocks the secrets in the applications.
For those who dont know what the songs or sonents of thier system are, perhaps you should delve into that subject to help you comprehend what the originators of your style were trying to express.

The problem with most of the students in this day and age is that they dont spend enough time/years training or their training is incomplete due to either the lack of knowledge of their teachers, the impatientness of thier expectance, or the selfishness of thier teachers.

Either way one must realize that after they learn some things for a couple of years and pratice it a couple hundred times doesnt mean you can use it in combat effectivley.

The only technique you can use effectively in combat is the one you have mastered!
Now ask yourself how many techniques have I actually mastered??????

[Oso]

Seven, ok, but doesn't the basic argument run that tcma peeps aren't any good with their techniques because they don't train them realistically enough?

or, that the have too many different things to train that even if they are training many hours a week they can't possibley train them all to the level needed to utilize them when the lizard brain takes over.

so, they revert to basic type attacks that are 'styleless' as in not having the particular flavor their style is supposed to cultivate.

[SimonM]

For a long while my fighting tended to revert to basic kickboxing whenever I fought. Now I only have that problem when I have to wear boxing gloves. You see, about three months ago I hit a breakthrough and bits of taiji and the animal forms with which I am most familiar (tiger, snake, dragon to a lesser extent) started slipping into my bare-hand free sparring. Now I can strike with a spearhand with greater accuracy than I ever could with a fist and about the same power. I find that rather than defaulting to a boxing-style guard, I tend to hold my hands further from my body and am more successful at diverting enemy attacks. My fighting began to look more and more like the forms I was taught and I was getting better. :D

[Becca]

Originally posted by SevenStar
but what's the point there? it hinders progress. Sticking with my shoot the bow example, we spent literally years thinking it was a punch. That made sense to us because our longfist was mainly striking influence. After I started grappling, I was doing a fireman's carry and thought "hey, this is shoot the bow!" and when I brought it up on the forum, others agreed. Now, had I just been told that when I first started working on it, I woulda had it down a long time ago. Wouldn't have been hard, as I love the fireman's carry.

Do you remember that nice bit of advice you gave me several months ago about how to use shadow boxing to cultivate power and energy in my technique? The answer to this question also lies in that direction, at least as far as how to look like you style while sparring.

The shadow boxing recomendation did two things for me. One, it helped me cultivate the power and energy my kung fu lacked. Two, I noticed, as I improved, that I had two distinctly different sparring styles. I had never noticed while actually sparring, but Stepping back and watching myself made it very clear. Sometimes I looked very much like my sifus' sparring style, other times I looked more like a MMA peep.

Why? I'd scrapped everything I had learned in 8 years of ninjitsu because "it wasn't a stand-up art" and Pai Lum is. So what worked for one wouldn't work for the other, right?

Wrong. Any common japanese-style setup for an armbar/throw, in and of itself, looks nothing like any chinese crane technique, but guess what? Look at the hand positioning, the need for gental flow then sudden yet smooth execution and solid rooting. One is grappling, the other is not. They don'tevenlookmuch alike. But the skills needed for either are exactly the same.

So to sum it up, your shooting bow was a punch. but it was not only a punch. You might have progressed faster had someone pointed this out to you. But the point of a teacher is to help you learn, to guid you down the path. Not to open your head and pour the knowledge in like soup.;)

Another point to ponder: If it was a punch in long fist and part of a fireman's carry in another, which is wrong? Or are both right, just different?

[EarthDragon]

You know, cheesy or not the karate kid movie taught the most common lesson learned by a student. It was miyagi who knew to keep it simple as not to confuse his student with info that he at the time did not need to know. It is one of the most overlooked lessons in martial arts. Be patient it will come.

[red5angel]

ultimately I don't think it matters in a life or death situation, but the point is that you choose a style because you like it's approach right? If you can't watch a person fight, and determine what he's doing, he probably isn't doing it "right". Does this matter much? It depends on what your ideals are. If no matter what he lookes like, he can win his fight, it certainly doesn't matter form that perspective.

"Looking" like your style is sort of s implification of the ideal that your trying to transfer the techniques of your style to the real world. If your doing them "properly" then your style wil show through.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Oso
Seven, ok, but doesn't the basic argument run that tcma peeps aren't any good with their techniques because they don't train them realistically enough?

or, that the have too many different things to train that even if they are training many hours a week they can't possibley train them all to the level needed to utilize them when the lizard brain takes over.

yeah, generally.

so, they revert to basic type attacks that are 'styleless' as in not having the particular flavor their style is supposed to cultivate.

I see what you're saying, but that's not where I'm going. You train mantis. Now, let's say I start training with you. I use your styles principles, but I apply them with my thai boxing techniques. Would it matter? If so, why?

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Becca
Do you remember that nice bit of advice you gave me several months ago about how to use shadow boxing to cultivate power and energy in my technique? The answer to this question also lies in that direction, at least as far as how to look like you style while sparring.

The shadow boxing recomendation did two things for me. One, it helped me cultivate the power and energy my kung fu lacked. Two, I noticed, as I improved, that I had two distinctly different sparring styles. I had never noticed while actually sparring, but Stepping back and watching myself made it very clear. Sometimes I looked very much like my sifus' sparring style, other times I looked more like a MMA peep.

Why? I'd scrapped everything I had learned in 8 years of ninjitsu because "it wasn't a stand-up art" and Pai Lum is. So what worked for one wouldn't work for the other, right?

Wrong. Any common japanese-style setup for an armbar/throw, in and of itself, looks nothing like any chinese crane technique, but guess what? Look at the hand positioning, the need for gental flow then sudden yet smooth execution and solid rooting. One is grappling, the other is not. They don'tevenlookmuch alike. But the skills needed for either are exactly the same.

So to sum it up, your shooting bow was a punch. but it was not only a punch. You might have progressed faster had someone pointed this out to you. But the point of a teacher is to help you learn, to guid you down the path. Not to open your head and pour the knowledge in like soup.;)

Another point to ponder: If it was a punch in long fist and part of a fireman's carry in another, which is wrong? Or are both right, just different?

thanks!

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
[BBut - and here is why most TMA schools have lost thier right to use the term 'martial' - is that foorm MUST follow function. When people stop using thier skills, the meaning behind the flavor is lost, often leaving folks who swear upon moving a certain way, without ever realizng what they aren't understanding. [/B]


wt!!???

I 've got to stop you right there. to say such thing is to not understand tma nor what's on offer comparatively and nitty gritty from both . I think you missed something........ large! where are your tma refs comming from anyway???

[SevenStar]

BL, quit while you're ahead and let ego post...

His "cma refs" come from a host of sources, one of whom was a direct student of chang tung sheng....

[FatherDog]

lol at blooming lotus questioning MST's TMA credentials.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

redefine function and stop calling me that

[EarthDragon]

If ego is indeed blooming lotus why did you change your name?

LOL you remind me of that other troller..... rogue I think his name was But I might be wrong, if so I aplogize.
You couldnt make a statment or say anything without this guy shooting it down, arguing or making a complete ass of himself even when he was totally wrong...... anyways

I have read many posts you have made ego and while a some spoke of knowledge, sense and wisdom most did not. I have also read many of monkey slap's posts all of which are filled with knowledge, sense and wisdom.

I once had someone out of ignorance and jealousy tell me I must have had a crappy know nothing teacher........... then I told him yea your right his name is Shyun kwan long the (jewel of china) and his tune changed immediatly. so never assume who is who on this board.

[FngSaiYuk]

Originally posted by EarthDragon
If ego is indeed blooming lotus why did you change your name?


Blooming Lotus is just using Ego's account to post on. You can somewhat tell which person is posting by the difference in grammar, sometimes content, and by checking the time of the post. Clusters of posts in a similiar time period that have similiar grammatical 'flair' shall we say identify each personality.

[EarthDragon]

fngsai,
OK am I missing something? Is blooming hiding his idenity for a reason?
I know no one liked the guy but to log on as a different user? wow that's pathetic.

[Enforcer-]

yes it matters. why would you train in a style you dont use in a fight?

[SimonM]

EarthDragon:

Blooming Lotus got banned about 1-1.5 weeks back. It would appear that she almost immediately started using Ego Extrordinare's account (assumedly with his permission) to continue posting.

[FngSaiYuk]

Originally posted by EarthDragon
fngsai,
OK am I missing something? Is blooming hiding his idenity for a reason?
I know no one liked the guy but to log on as a different user? wow that's pathetic.

Yah, well... at least it's easier to identify who to ignore, eh?

[MonkeySlap Too]

BL,
Perhaps I was not clear - my point was that there are many CMA schools that work overtime to instill a specific flavor in thier movement, but because the teacher does not understand the function from which that body english was derived, the meaning is lost. Form comes from function. If you do not understand the function, the form is meaningless.

Coach Ross is right when he points out the failures of most TMA training methods. Although I think there are exceptions, which I won't name here as i don't want to upset anybody. Of course, I consider Muay Thai a TMA, just not a CMA.

Seven, of course you can observe tactics from other systems and apply them using your skill set. But some of them won't apply, as they become specific to the ai priori assumptions of the other style. From those assumptions everything else evolves. I think it's chauvenistic to have a problem with learning and adapting. Where that practice gets into trouble is when people start 'claiming' all the systems they borrow from. Or when a person picks a specific skill without understanding the context. It becomes like all those Karate guys who were trying to do leg picks and getting thier arms broken in flying arm bars because the really didn't understand the move.

Of course I just expect you to 'own' the player, not the style. That said, I think some skill sets don't cross over because they become contradictory.

Thanks for the kind words guys.

[rogue]

LOL you remind me of that other troller..... rogue I think his name was But I might be wrong, if so I aplogize.

I'm only a part time troll.

Back to the subject at hand, as great Sigung Bruce Lee pointed out the classical mess is alive and well here. If only you all had thrown away your belts, sashes and gotten your masters feet off of their pedestals and onto the ground we wouldn't even be having this conversation. It's all about self-expression. Does your style look like you?

signed,
The Real Original Lucky Louie (It's all JKD).

[rogue]

Form comes from function. If you do not understand the function, the form is meaningless.

As a traditional karateka I agree with you are 100%. I see lots of guys trying to fit their form into something functional. I did it too and it doesn't work. After seeing guys from various styles that really used their skills I noticed that they all did things in a similar way. Guys who worked on form over function tend to go for a more artistic, more dramatic look to their style. The more that happens the further away from the original intent and funtion of the techniques.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Rogue,

What you said may be a generalization. Forms cover the full range of movement. Application wise you might use anywere from 1.0% to 100.0% of that movement.

Forms are just one aspect of training, so it's surprising that people compare the value between form and application.

EE

Ps: that guy ( BL) was a chick and if you check posts from seven, serpent and so on from as recently as directly prior banning to as far as a yr + back , I don't think being liked was the issue. But dead horse burried and moving on.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Rogue,
True, but what you site is an example of the purpose being lost, and an aesthetic response replacing it. Another example would be Shuai Chiao (I might as well), where the 'shape' of the movements is directly related to application, and if you apply it right, you 'look' like a Shuai Chiao guy. Form and function go together. This is true of every fighting art regardless of origin.

You can take Judo that has some similar moves, but the styles look different due to how they are going about applying it. Which is all based upon each styles initial assumptions from which thier strategy evolves.

I've met Karate guys who could really fight. Thier upper body art was as relaxed as a good boxer, they just used more committed techniques, and tried to block, and thier lower body art was more substantial and thier balance was much deeper than a boxers. But they were decent fighters (if limited in my opinion) and had usable skill. And looked NOTHING like 99.9999% of the Karate I see in the U.S.

[rogue]

I think we're on the same page. In my experience what started the losing of the intent was to make the moves more pleasing to the eye and to make them "look" more powerful. Once this was started as the focus the martial intent was all but forgotten.

Most if not all of the karate people that I've met whose kata reflect their fighting moves do what others would consider "ugly" kata. But their movement reflects a taniotoshi, a udewa or a sakatsuchi (aka "judo throw", double leg, and picking a guy up and dropping him on his head, respectively) in their kata and basics.

Could you expand on what was limited about how the karate guys fought. I'm always interested in critiques by someone with a trained eye. If there's a hole, of which karate has many, I always like to know about it.:)

[MonkeySlap Too]

Rogue,
Every system has holes. PM me your e-mail, as it'll probably be a long answer, and I'm not sure I want to post it to the world. It may take me awhile to write it out tho, as I'm heading out to spend the weekend training.

[Serpent]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
Rogue,
Every system has holes. PM me your e-mail, as it'll probably be a long answer, and I'm not sure I want to post it to the world. It may take me awhile to write it out tho, as I'm heading out to spend the weekend training.
Chicken!

:eek:

;)

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

shyte stirrer!!




:eek:

;)

:rolleyes:

[EarthDragon]

Rouge , I apologize sincerly, it was ralek that I was thinking about, sorry to confuse the two of you.

And before I forget, ego that was blooming lotus is a CHICK! WHAT? and to think when she trolled me a couple of times I let it get under my skin...................LOL

[MonkeySlap Too]

Serpent:

Chicken = competitor

i may fight again some day, why tell everyone my strategies?

[SPJ]

Some large movements may be apparent on "look" and "see".

A lot of fine details, you have to "sense" to know.

Especially, all the Nei Jia and Qi related stuff or Nei Gung. It is inner, therefore not evident on the outward "looks".

However, the steps, postures and limbs moves are available for "looks".

MST;

Agreed that people always like to talk about the principles. The specifics are not easily describable and also "secrets", too.

:D

[MonkeySlap Too]

SPJ

Principle is one thing. Understanding is another.

"Knowledge without skill, you are helpless. Skill without knowledge you are useless."

Different systems often have different understandings. Specifics are hard to describe when there is no language/understanding to describe... which is where jargon falls into play. Also - it get easier if you understand some science, and can translate skills into something that isn't so obscure. Many of the 'secrets' are 'everyday' if you have the eyes to see them. (This is not to say that refinement isn't important, just that the underlying skill is often right THERE, waiting to be seen.)

[rogue]

EarthDragon, no worries. Usually if I do troll I leave some kind of troll code in the message.

MSToo, You've got a pm. Thanks.

[Water Dragon]

If you train something right, it's just going to come out. Although I'm doing strictly MMA these days, I still "look" very CMA to most people.

Why?

Simple. MonkeySlap taught my body to be very explosive in very close corners. I use my body to "Pop" or "explode" my techniques. It doesn't matter that I'm using it to pull Plumb or swim for underhooks, it's still there. It's just what comes out.

I'm also very slippery from the TaiChi I did with William CC Chen's school. It's hard to get a good grip on me.

So I look Muay Thai because of the Plumb, I look slippery because of the Tui Shou, and I look explosive because of the Shuai Chiao.

Who cares how I look. I look the way "I" fight based on everything I picked up along the way. My son looks like "Me" right now when he fights, but when I start sending him to other people, he'll look a lot more like "Him".

My only 'aesthetic' is to be the guy who's NOT lying down on the ground broken.

[omarthefish]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
[B]...there are many CMA schools that work overtime to instill a specific flavor in thier movement, but because the teacher does not understand the function from which that body english was derived, the meaning is lost. Form comes from function. If you do not understand the function, the form is meaningless.


Interesting post.

My Baji training is actually pretty heavily centered around the form and a very large part of my teachers criticism is centered around grasping the "flavor" of Bajiquan. Recently as I am finnaly starting to relax enough through to make it through 10+ reps in a wingle workout he has started to pick on me for chagning the flavor at certain points. But in the case of Baji, at least, it's that distinctive Baji jin that is the primary goal of training. You could get the techniques incidentally and accidentally but it's the jin that makes them work.

A focus on certain aspects of the aesthetics does not necessarily mean that you are doing performance art instead of martial art. Great fighters all have their own very distinctive styles. I especially like this phrase:

...the function from which that body english was derived...

A lot of "stylisitc" flairs were ORIGINALLY not for artistic flourish but have specific technical reasons. "body english".

[LeeCasebolt]

My only 'aesthetic' is to be the guy who's NOT lying down on the ground broken.

Sigged.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Omar - dead on as far as the point I was making. Ba Ji taught well, is a GREAT example of the 'form' being derived from 'function.' It's on my top five list of styles I would have loved to study, but never had time/access. (well, I had both, but the teacher moved 3 months into it)...

[David Jamieson]

Now ask yourself how many techniques have I actually mastered??????


6














































































no wait... it's 3








































































4
































































no wait...

:D

[SPJ]

KL;

Stop counting.

You only have to master one and the rest are just accessory to the ONE.

So I count one.

:D