Recent Observations

[MonkeySlap Too]

5 recent observations

1.) Step and punch, perhaps the easiest stopped question of all, works best against highly trained martial artists. Particularly when you use Beng Quan.

2.) Gao style BaGua is some slippery sh!t.

3.) Everybody talks about 'structure', but very few have any.

4.) There are different kinds of structure based upon different assumptions. But the results in regards to acheiving a base are the same, even if everything else is different.

5.) Everybody you meet seems to have 12 years of experience in some 'deadly' martial art. Yet mysteriously exhibit no traces of any skill from this arduos training.

6.) Good fighting starts to look all the same, no matter what they are doing. Unless they are just strong and fast goombahs.

7.) I love to watch people try to apply overly complex moves in free fighting. Funny stuff.

8.) Martial artists can act like a bunch of old woman.

9.) Martial artists are also among the coolest people you meet.

10.) Every school is subject to MonkeySlap's Law: No matter how tough, how cool, how effective the art, eventually it will produce poseurs and pu$$ies.

[norther practitioner]

5 huh...

[Broken Wing]

10.) Every school is subject to MonkeySlap's Law: No matter how tough, how cool, how effective the art, eventually it will produce poseurs and pu$$ies. [/B][/QUOTE]




Not all turn out that way but the rest of you "observations" are pretty much on target. :cool:
PS (I must admit don't kow much 'bout that first one but ai may know it as something else)

[CaptinPickAxe]

Nice, MS2, I dig your MonkeySlap2's Law. Its very true.

[EarthDragon]

11. People who dont spend enough time in thier training of kung fu, quit and take up some easier MMA and then come back on the kung fu forum and say how crappy and uneffective kung fu is.

[SevenStar]

12. some people train any style, become elitist with it and obsessed with the country of their style's origin. These people then spout nonsense that eveything originates from said country and invariably end up the butt of various jokes, such as the "dude, where's my keys?" thread...


This thread has potential, ED - any further nonsense you put here will be deleted...

[SevenStar]

my recent observations

1. capoeira players are slippery.

2. capoeira involves alot ore takedowns than I originally thought.

3. Like MSToo said, All of these arts are pretty much the same. On the outside they look different, but the same principles are in play.

[EarthDragon]

Now I'm not allowed to post my observations of kung fu on a kung fu board?

With all the people on here that are way off the subject at hand,
and my post is going to have the thread deleted?

Wow dont you think that a littel harsh for stating my observations?

the dude wheres my keys thread was from a person that originally thought our training stances where fighting stances and if you ask me extremly childish, who ever you seem to let threads lijke that stay.

So whats up seven star?

[Water Dragon]

ED, if you don't like what we talk about here, just go find another board. It's not that ****ing difficult genious.

[SevenStar]

MSToo posted a thread about recent observations. HIS observations based upon recent experiences training with other styles. you jump on the thread talking about mma bashers... what kind of MA observation is that? Now, if you post something pertinent to a recent awakening you've had, by all means, post it.

I didn't say I'd delete the thread, only your nonpertinent posts.

[Judge Pen]

MS2's Law. Very true.

[Meat Shake]

"2.) Gao style BaGua is some slippery sh!t."

Recently played with a bagua guy eh? Interesting. Ive been interested to feel some real bagua... All Ive ever really seen was SD "pakua".

[red5angel]

1. Capoeira makes me hurt, but in a good way

2. A good fighter, no matter what he trains will look similar to other good fighters when he fights.

[Suntzu]

LOL @ MMA being "easier"

[MonkeySlap Too]

MMA is easier = MMA is more systematically trained, so you have to guess less, and get on with training.

That would be my guess... A blanket statement not true of all TMA, but true of the great majority from what I've seen.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Meat Shake, I've played with Ba Gua guys before - good ones are very good fighters, although like any system it has it's blind spots too. I know CTS was famous for not liking Ba Gua (or so I'm told), but all the mainland San Da/Shuai Chiao guys I've met told me to learn some as it would improve my Shuai Chiao skills.

Gao style is built on Shuai Chiao, so for me it's like looking at the 'matrix' cousin of what I do.

[David Jamieson]

Uh, I agree with ED's original observation about people dumping on kungfu after dropping out and going to do something more informal.

In most Kungfu schools they teach etiquette. After all, it's "kungfu" not just fighting.

kungfu = way of life

mma fighting, I am not so certain one can continue this practice for the duration of their life, so, it's not a full lifestyle in that sense. It has an expiry date, whereas Kungfu, does not.

MS2 I wonder how it is that you have tasted the majority of Traditional Martial arts? What we read in magazines, see in pictures or websites or films is not exactly what goes on in traditional martial arts training and these things are certainly not the core of traditional martial arts, just the entertaining trappings for the most part.

anyway, one can only enjoy ring fight training for a short period of time, one can enjoy practice of Kungfu for their whole life.

[Meat Shake]

"anyway, one can only enjoy ring fight training for a short period of time, one can enjoy practice of Kungfu for their whole life."

And the only thing keeping one from doing both is fear and excuses.
...
And then eventually age.

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
MS2 I wonder how it is that you have tasted the majority of Traditional Martial arts? What we read in magazines, see in pictures or websites or films is not exactly what goes on in traditional martial arts training and these things are certainly not the core of traditional martial arts, just the entertaining trappings for the most part.


It's the circles he runs in, and the fact that people respect true skill when they see it. If they have skill as well, they respect it even more.

When I was training in MS2's school, I was constantly amazed at the people he would bring around and the stuff they brought with them. I was introduced to Southern Mantis, Long Fist, Baji, Xing Yi, Kun Tao, Sambo, and Lord knows what else through that guy. I picked up good useable tricks from most of them as well.

Then he shows up to my current school, throws on an ad hoc Shuai Chiao seminar, and ends up talking trade with my current coach who is a Muay Thai/BJJ guy.

That's how he does it. He puts his money where his mouth is.

[David Jamieson]

That's great, but it is still not the majority.

[David Jamieson]

And then eventually age.

I have seen more films than I can count on all fingers and toes that showed octogenerians and up practicing their kungfu.

every morning, I see the 70 something dude running through his tai chi in the park by my place.

I have yet to see a ring fighter of any genre much more than 40, maybe a little more. Definitely not on the main circuits of real accredited and recognized championship fighting.

[Judge Pen]

Originally posted by Meat Shake
"anyway, one can only enjoy ring fight training for a short period of time, one can enjoy practice of Kungfu for their whole life."

And the only thing keeping one from doing both is fear and excuses.
...
And then eventually age.

Yeah that age thing's a b i t c h. Look at a pro athalete in any sport. The older ones are still good, and some go into their early 40s but eventually it stops them too. The thing is when they stop because of age they are still in better shape than most guys half their age. It's the perspective and intent of what you want to do. That's why MMA has a shorter shelf-life than TCMA. Your aging body can only take so much of that training and punishment.

[SevenStar]

WD, MSToo and I know a guy who competed full contact for his 50th bday.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Judge Pen
That's why MMA has a shorter shelf-life than TCMA. Your aging body can only take so much of that training and punishment.

I dunno... you certainly can't compete that long, but nor could a cma. does that mean that they can't train though? One of the bjj coaches at my school is 38 and still wins competitions nationally. I have a 75 judo coach who still grapples. he will throw us as well, but we dont throw him for obvious reasons.

[Judge Pen]

Certainly there are exceptions, but even in the case you mention, there are concessions in his training. Sadly it happens to everyone.

[MonkeySlap Too]

There are still competitive drills people do well into thier sixties - push hands , grappling, et al. I know guys who sparred in class right into thier sixties - you just need moderation and don't expect to be Bruce Lee.

To KL's defense, yeah, the health aspects of CMA are a huge benefit - and why I beleive in them. I know some famous MA types who practically crippled in thier old age because thier training lacked balance.

But on the flip side, I'll send someone to a MMA gym if there is no useful CMA around. I'd hate for people to train only to be helpless, and there are still many CMA frauds out there knowing or unknowing.

As far as my generalization - it's a cultural thing. I've played CMA that had really detailed instruction - but until fairly recently you were either in the door, or you didn't get the details, or the teacher didn't really know them. MMA schools start on explaining the progression on day one. This is a flaw in CMA training culture, along with the cultural baggage of do, but don't explain. Watch, but don't ask questions - all of which hold back the transmission of skill.

Plus there are many CMA schools that have gone through generations of poor transmission, and therefore have significant departures from reality, as well as good schools that no longer test thier skills, and have developed significant flaws or variance from useful skills.

There are also a lot of kick ass CMA out there. But if haven't at least sparred with people outside your club, in a largely no rules environment, you are living in a fantasy world. Sure there are skills that do not translate to free sparring. Sure there are other methods of training that come into play... but you need a skilled opponent to teach you where your gaps are, and how to REALLY apply that cool move you have.

Look, I'm staring down the age that my teacher told me I should stop fighting at in less than a few weeks. I'm planning on getting into better shape so I can play more... but not over do it. I think I can because of the health benefits of CMA. I'll never knock that. But the CMA world needs to look at modern sports training and how that applies to building better kung fu.

[David Jamieson]

well, here's my personal view.

mma training has value for what it's objectives are.

I think immediate results are apparent in mma not so much because of methodology, but because early on the student gets the exposure to their own innate abilities and it is clear where ability is and where incompetence or ignorance (not the negative versions but the factual versions of the words) is as well.

In traditional Chinese martial arts, the process and method is "slow and steady" progress is made, but it is gradual and often it is not beginning in the sportive combative aspects. Strength is built first, breathing, posture, all these little things are fixed through practice. All the bad habits of body structure are worked on first, then tuning the machine happens.

Many people don't get passed the part where the restoration takes places.

And yes, there are exceptions to the rule on the age thing, but even teh training methods of mma are not really acceptable to someone of advanced years, where as qigongs and kungfu sets can be done by anyone of any age.

I don't know if you guys have seen the old guy performing Tan tui flickering on someones home video screen, but that dude is getting long in the tooth and his kungfu energy is better than some 1/3 his age never mind half. Comparitivly and not in a negative sense, but his students performance in the same series shows that age is what he is lacking. :p

[MonkeySlap Too]

KL - There are other arts that keep you healthy as well - not just CMA.

The idea of slow and steady is a myth built by the propogation of commercial schools during the Ching dynasty. Advanced skill takes a long time - but you can take someone with 1 year of a good system, and they should be able to fight as good as a 1 year MMA player. Period. If not, you don't know how to teach.

The exception of course, is if your students are lacking in physical attributes, or don't train.

The more advanced skills take time to develop, but does not mean there isn't skill development in the short term. If your school isn't doing this, they are holding back, don't know, or you s@ck.

CMA is not deficient. But occasionally the training methods need review. Now go drink the Kool-Aid.

[David Jamieson]

The exception of course, is if your students are lacking in physical attributes, or don't train.

First off, the better part of the majority of any student in any martial art school has never trained, lacks in many physical attributes and everyone progresses at different levels and along a different timeline dependent on a few factors such as physiccal detriment/attributes, age, etc etc.

Second, I am well aware that there are myriad ways to bring yourself health and vitality. I chose Kungfu and Qigong, because of personal interest.

I agree that the ability to wage combat is #1 in any study that calls itself "martial" art.

I don't agree that people with one or two years in any study or practice are any measure at all of the greater body of study and practice. They are newbs either either way. Advanced ability takes time no matter what you choose to do. In kungfu the body of knowledge is greater than that of sport specific competitive mma.

[MonkeySlap Too]

I agree with your last paragraph KL. I'm just saying a 1 year CMA player should be equal in pugging skill to a 1 year MMA player. All other things being equal..

Sure thier still puppies, but now they can bite.

[red5angel]

mma fighting, I am not so certain one can continue this practice for the duration of their life, so, it's not a full lifestyle in that sense. It has an expiry date, whereas Kungfu, does not.


I don't get it, so ALL kungfu is ok to do all your life but MMA is not?

[Water Dragon]

You also need to realize that the MMA tends to draw fighters while the CMA draws dreamers.

My SC has improved by leaps and bounds since I have stopped training Shuai Chiao and started training MMA. The reason why is very simple (although it took me a while to figure it out)

When I was training SC, what we did was too hard core for everyone who came through the door. People would train once or twice, and then never show up again. It got to the point where it was funny in a sad way.

Now, I get to try out all the stuff MS2 taught me against a variety of fighters and grapplers on a consistent basis. They play as hard as we do, and like to mix it up and don't get salty if you accidentally throw them too hard. It's a part of the game.

Add that element to the CMA and a lot of people might be surprised at the results.

[David Jamieson]

I'm just saying a 1 year CMA player should be equal in pugging skill to a 1 year MMA player.

ok, now we can get to meat and potatoes.

With this I don't think it is true for the most part and I think it has to do exactly with training methodologies.

For instance, in MMA, you are generally full contact sparring within 3 months. At least, this is my experience. You definitely get the feel of the inside of the ring almost immediately, probably on your first day.

In traditional martial arts training of the schools I have knowledge of curriculum and system, you are not going to find yourself in full contact sparring on the inside part of the year, never mind 3 months.

That is a difference that can be to the benefit or the detriment of the student. Many mma students are lost because of injury early on. Many are disheartened and give up.

The training of full contact fighting is also not appealing to many people who are interested in learning martial art but are unwilling to risk a broken nose or a black eye for a variety of good reasons (work, family commitment, etc etc). And so they will seek other ways to learn because they are still interested. However, those with innate fighting abilities gravitate quickly to sportive combat training.

In kungfu training, it is said you will develop more quickly as a fighter in a full class environment than you will in private instruction. This is pretty much because of the opportunity to spar and test what you have learned. But even then, early in the students training, sparring is not the focus.

[MonkeySlap Too]

It's what we had in Dr.Wu's class, too bad you weren't there in those days.

But it is hard to attract people with strong hearts to CMA because of the silk pajama image.

[lkfmdc]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
It's what we had in Dr.Wu's class, too bad you weren't there in those days.

But it is hard to attract people with strong hearts to CMA because of the silk pajama image.

MSToo has extracted the most pure form of the correct....

I've actually said the same thing many times before

The arts have been hijacked by so much BS that the people who want to learn real usable skills won't go anywhere near "kung fu" any more.

It then becomes a cycle of degeneration because the arts are left more and more in the hands of those who are clueless...

[MonkeySlap Too]

Just to clarify, I was responding to WD.

[Meat Shake]

"When I was training SC, what we did was too hard core for everyone who came through the door. People would train once or twice, and then never show up again."

Yup. :(

[bamboo_ leaf]

(You also need to realize that the MMA tends to draw fighters while the CMA draws dreamers.)

try using the words competitors and people who are not.

It might make a little more sense.

[lkfmdc]

no, try using the words

"people who live in reality and want functional skills"

and

"people who have watched too many Shaw Brothers movies and believe in death touches"

[David Jamieson]

Originally posted by lkfmdc
no, try using the words

"people who live in reality and want functional skills"

and

"people who have watched too many Shaw Brothers movies and believe in death touches"

dude, you are drawing on two extremes. Both of which are not completely true.

[bamboo_ leaf]

right, some one should let David Chin know he's not real.
or maybe in 75 he was real then but not now.

[omarthefish]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
That's great, but it is still not the majority.

It's a pretty decent representative sampling though.

And I assume he gets to compare notes with other people who have done their own representative samplings. All in all about as good an estimate as your likely to get. His comments tend to square with my experiences as well. I was surprised to hear he did shuai jiao or was so well liked by certain MMA types just because he seems to know the CMA world so well. For whatever reasons, I rarely see these 2 traits in one person, though god knows there's no reason why not.....

[rogue]

MST and David, is it your opinion that the only way for functional skills is through sports?


The idea of slow and steady is a myth built by the propogation of commercial schools during the Ching dynasty.
That's something I've been wondering about and looking into for the past year. I was wondering why functional skills at my old school were so long in developing among the students. I did an experiment with some of the beginners and taught them the most practical parts of what little that I know. I taught them some of how to read an opponent and how to move off line and counter attack. When sparring they looked more like people who did karate then those with more rank who just jumped around. The result to me was that since they weren't as worried about getting hit by going toe to toe they could use what skills they had and land some kicks and strikes. I was eventually reprimanded by several black belts who said these things were for them to teach when the student got to brown or black belt. Why brown or black instead of from day one?

[joedoe]

IMO, the functional skills in any art should be attainable in a short time period. 6 months to a year should be plenty of time to learn the basic fighting skills. It may take decades to attain mastery, but the functional skills are not that hard to learn.

[Buddy]

Fortunately I do Gao style Bagua.

[Becca]

Originally posted by Water Dragon
... They play as hard as we do, and like to mix it up and don't get salty if you accidentally throw them too hard. It's a part of the game...

13. I have a problem with those who make you tap out 5 or 6 times before letting up then getting pizzed when you return the favor.

[David Jamieson]

It's a pretty decent representative sampling though.

no , it's a limited sampling of a small and ecclectic group. Who knows what skill level any of these peopel are at. Are they advanced? Are tehy intermediate? Are they masters?

I train with guys from a good variety of backgrounds. It is different than training under a master. Not that it isn't useful because it is and it adds realism and a liveness to ones training.

But, it is still not like I've tasted from teh majority of martial arts and can make any assessment about the whole based on my personal experience.

I really think that disclaimer should be added. And I also think that going a bopping a day or two here and there with people who practice other styles is certainly no measure of those arts and no way is it gaining a foundational and true knowledge of those arts.

showing and sharing is not the same as teaching and internalizing.

[red5angel]

When I was training SC, what we did was too hard core for everyone who came through the door. People would train once or twice, and then never show up again. It got to the point where it was funny in a sad way.


sadly, that seems to be the case no matter how hard your class does or does not train.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Buddy said:
"Fortunately I do Gao style Bagua."
Response: Then your a slippery b@stard Buddy...

Rogue:
Here's my opinion, FWIW: You will not understand martial arts unless you engage in a variety of free sparring environments, and purposely pit yourself against rule sets that work against your strengths. You don't have to be a superman, and win all the time. Ironically, the healthiest egos I've met were from competitors, while the biggest egomaniacs I've met are people who didn't ever test thier 'secrets.' It does not have to be your be-all/end all. For the past eight years, I've only played when I felt like it, and I only prepared as much as you would to get lunch.

Are there techniques that can't be used in free fighting? Sure. And there are ways to practice them. But without the 'drill' of sparring, you will have a hard time finding your gaps.

Competition is not a cure-all. But it is the number one, best drill for learning timing and application against a resisting opponent. The Judo boys proved this against the 'deadly' jujitsu guys at the turn of the century.

Learning some 'skills' that are out of context, is just like (gakh, I can't beleive I'm quoting this guy) Bruce Lee said: swimming on dry land.

I always suggest that you find ways to spar that you think are safe, and as close to real as possible. It is only 1 part in the puzzle, but is one that is ignored a great deal of the time, to the detriment of MA.

You said:
"I taught them some of how to read an opponent and how to move off line and counter attack. When sparring they looked more like people who did karate then those with more rank who just jumped around. The result to me was that since they weren't as worried about getting hit by going toe to toe they could use what skills they had and land some kicks and strikes. I was eventually reprimanded by several black belts who said these things were for them to teach when the student got to brown or black belt. Why brown or black instead of from day one?"

Um, this IS day one stuff in every fighting art I've seen, CMA, IMA, FMA, heck even Judo... I would question your teacher on this. There's a book on Sabaki karate out there. I don't know a great deal about Karate other than my observations, but the Sabaki guys seem very concerned about taking the angle from day one, and they do Karate. Olympic TKD actually has good footwork drill for this, even though I don't care for thier apps. So... I hate to sound negative, but I'd take a hard look at what you are taught.

[MonkeySlap Too]

REPLIES TO KUNG LEK:


"ok, now we can get to meat and potatoes.

With this I don't think it is true for the most part and I think it has to do exactly with training methodologies."

REPLY: Yes. Many CMA teachers do not really understand thier art at a level that they can really explain what they are doing. Heck, I was like this until about seven years ago.


"For instance, in MMA, you are generally full contact sparring within 3 months. At least, this is my experience. You definitely get the feel of the inside of the ring almost immediately, probably on your first day.

In traditional martial arts training of the schools I have knowledge of curriculum and system, you are not going to find yourself in full contact sparring on the inside part of the year, never mind 3 months."

REPLY: This is a gross generalization. Stand-up skills do take longer before free fighting can be introduced, versus MMA where you can roll on the ground early on. BUT - In SC you can fight within a year if you have regular instruction. True, one year students at almost any school I've trained at could fight, and fight as well as a boxer or wrestler.

CMA does offer a lot of skill refinement, but it's BS to think that isn't true of MMA as well. Just focused on different skills. Unfortunately, many CMA players justify thier failure to perform because they have not trained LONG enough. Hello? I didn't see a bunch of octogenarians fighting on the flood plains of the Yellow River.


"That is a difference that can be to the benefit or the detriment of the student. Many mma students are lost because of injury early on. Many are disheartened and give up. "

REPLY: Nah. Most people quit because they cannot face thier fears, or get over themselves. If injuries are the problem, the teacher is the problem.

"The training of full contact fighting is also not appealing to many people who are interested in learning martial art but are unwilling to risk a broken nose or a black eye for a variety of good reasons (work, family commitment, etc etc). And so they will seek other ways to learn because they are still interested. However, those with innate fighting abilities gravitate quickly to sportive combat training."

REPLY: Of course you need to accomodate your life. You don't need to be a sparaholic, or even do it to the physical detriment of your self. But if you don't do it, you are fooling yourself. For those you absoloutly can't (ie folks who can't risk ay, a broken hand, then yeah, something is better than nothing.)

"In kungfu training, it is said you will develop more quickly as a fighter in a full class environment than you will in private instruction."

REPLY: This is complete bullsh!t. Go read some texts on teaching and sports science.

"This is pretty much because of the opportunity to spar and test what you have learned. But even then, early in the students training, sparring is not the focus."

REPLY: Direct teaching first. This is how you learn fast. Then groups for sparring. You don't see boxers training in big groups do you? No. The Trainer TRAINS them. Then they spar... my ghod man the evidence is overwhelming on this point...

[lkfmdc]

Funny that David Chin was brought up. He is of course a BIG NAME in Tibetan Martial Arts....

He brought a bunch of students to fight San Shou in Baltimore about 5 years ago. I was shocked to see him there, being how "closed" our traditions are....

Anyhoo.... I watched his students fight. They were clearly trying to use the system. Now, before everyone gets their underwear in a wad. ....

I respected them for fighting. I respected them for trying to use their system as it was taught to them. But the fact remains that they all lost. In fact, they did rather poorly.

I feel no alarm at saying this, both because it is true and because I am a high level person in their method and know what I am looking at.

To my shock, David Chin came over, introduced himself and asked me if he could ask me a few questions... On a variety of different levels I was taken back

He said that he watched our guys and saw that we were able to use the strategies and techniques while his guys seemed lost

I spent a few minutes asking him some questions, I also talked to his senior student who had fought...

1. My first obesrvation was obvious; they were all out of shape. A minute into the first round they were breathing heavy. he told me they did Chi Kung/Pai Da for conditioning. They didn't run, work bags or hit pads.

2. They said all their drills had the attacker using the Tibetan side stance and that they worked against the fully extended Tibetan style punches. They had trouble with the orthodox left side forward boxing stance and said they had trouble with the punches because they weren't left hanging in the air/posed

3. They were sparring but without gloves so they were going "light"

4. They had been taught that the continuous punching, side stance and long arm would keep them from having to wrestle

Based upon what I saw, and what they said, I gave them my honest opinion. I have respect for David Chin, but the proof was in the pudding, he had not adequately prepared his students.

[lkfmdc]

On other stuff

1. Traditional guys like to talk about how they aren't into competition, have "regular lives", don't want to get injured, blah blah

REALITY CHECK! What you guys think of as "sport schools" or "MMA types" have plenty of regular people who don't compete in them. I sure know I do.

You don't have to compete to learn a martial art effectively (but it sure does help to test it out from time to time)

They ALL have "regular lives"; undefeated IKF San Da champion Josh Beauregard is a math teacher, San Da world champin Rich Acosta is a fine art photographer!

Injury in our school is astoundingly LOW ... The most common thing you see in our school is bruises on the shin. The guys who like to go full out occassionally have bollody noses. I can count on the fingers of ONE HAND anything more than "minor" that has happened in a regular class

Excuses are like .... uh, they are like noses, everyone has one and they all blow

If you don't want to compete, don't want to work too hard, don't want to work with contact, FINE, but DO NOT say you are doing a fighting art and throw out excuses like "I just need more time to train"

You can wack off against a brick wall three times a day, seven days a week, for 12 months.... it isn't going to make you a power lifter

Raquet ball is a fine hobby, but no one thinks it makes them a deadly fighter

[bamboo_ leaf]

(Based upon what I saw, and what they said, I gave them my honest opinion. I have respect for David Chin, but the proof was in the pudding, he had not adequately prepared his students.)

thank you for a direct and honest answer. I asked this because back in the 70s we had one of our instructors (another of Davids students) prepare for what was then a full contact match. They modified the style

The style used by the instructor lost much of the flavor of the long arm. They approached the event very practically modifying the style to bring it more in line with the rules of that time. we always ran, and used 3 mint rounds and so forth using traditional lama hands and foot work for our regular training. The training for the event was much more intense useing boxing gloves and head gear.

The things you voice now where voiced then although it was more in relationship to the other Chinese styles. The guys who lost to the thai boxers in the late 70s i belive where a good examples of people who didnt understand training or what they where getting into.

I hear the word traditional I really don’t quite know what is meant by this, effective training, training that works is very demanding no matter what it is or where it comes from, more so if your intention is to use it in a ring.

To think not is a mistake( that you can just jump into a ring) made my many people not only Chinese stylist. In my own travels I have met people whom I felt where very effective with what they did and did not really care for the ring stuff. The motivation for their training is different.

Those such as your self, BT and some others are helping CMA to grow, even the ones who don’t understand and belittle the art they too are helping the art to grow and examine itself.
This helps people to be really clear in their training

[David Jamieson]

ms2-

Boxing western style is not the same as kungfu training. and boxers do train in groups at club levels. Yes, we have a coach and trainer, but many of us work together and spar together.

at the level of money fighter, then you have already done all this stuff and train privately.

the idea that learning with peers increases ability and hones innate ability is true. perhaps you might wanna crack that manual you're telling me to? :p

I am tralking about my own direct experience. Which of course may differ to yours, but then, everyones training method is different, results are different and ring fight champs come and go like popcorn these days. It's still evolving.

I would say that Kungfu training methods have been around for some time and yes there are instructor of both mma and cma and jma and what not who are not good instructors. THere are just as many bogus charlatan "self defense", mma, grappling schools available. There are good ones as well, just like TMA.

I would say that where I am, it's pretty much an even divide. Good fighter does not = good instructor and good instructor doesn't equate to good fighter.

Just this morning I was watching an mma instructor on the "balance" show He was showing Dr. Marla some self defense stuff that was totally unrealistic and complete ****e, but I'm sure the soccer moms were all like, "yeah, i'm gonna go to that class on tuesday nights and I'll be a bad @ss in a month!".

Not unlike a great deal of people who take up MA.

In short, I would say many mma teachers do not fully understand their stuff either, so that's a moot point.

I hear a lot of stuff like what is being said about TMA sucks etc etc, and yet, you train in a tcma do you not? Don't you too Ross? So you guys take this stuff live and you forget where you started? I don't understand. Did you guys forget the effort you put in for the many or few years before it occured to you that mma was also a viable learning method? I don't get it. Maybe you're just mad that wu shu gets better press and more face time than boring old hitting each other for real :p lol

[lkfmdc]

For everyone who thinks I am blunt, rude and offensive; thank lord you don't speak Cantonese and talked to Chan Tai San

He was highly critical of what I am highly critical of, people who live in their own little box and expect everyone they fight to fight like so pre-arranged drill they do in class

He always said you need to put up your hands and be prepared for anything. He quite honestly said, that when Western boxing was introduced into China, they F'ed up a lot of so called "masters"

My sifu believed that even if you want to use the "swing punches" you'd better study straight punches, hooks and uppercuts because if you DO NOT SEE THE ANGLES, the swing punches will never work

I have a pile of respect for Chang Dung Sheng also, for exactly the same reasons. Here is a man who fought, fought however his opponent's wanted (fought with a judo gi, under judo rules against top Judoka), and didn't mince words.

His Taiwan newspaper interview was the best...

paraphrased = "yeah, I keep hearing about this dim mak stuff, never seen it, and, for you to use it, you got to get close to me, you get close to me, I'm gonna hurt you"

Funny how all the dim mak guys didn't want to step up and show him their stuff....

[red5angel]

you got to get close to me, you get close to me, I'm gonna hurt you"

I use almost that exact line on Masterkillers mom and girl all the time! I gotta say something to keep them from trying to get in my pants!

[Shaolinlueb]

what im getting from this thread from lkfmdc is that

1.) traditional systems are useless for fighting cause they dont train right for fighting.
2.) training right for fighting is either san da, san chou, MT, or MMA
3.) you hate traditional systems it seems cause their techniques are flawed or highly impracticle.
4.) you hate 90% of the way people train out there cause none of it is "realistic" enough.
???
please clear it up for me if im wrong. I read through some of it and it would be easier for you to jsut lay out whats on your mind instead of all thsi discussion.

[David Jamieson]

Esoteric training, augmentation training, or even many other forms of old fashioned style pugilistic training do not disregard that the fight spirit exists and that the will and intent is a driving force behind a decent fighter, even if he loses.

The gentlemanly aspect of dueling is what has been removed. It is animistic in a lot of senses, but that is not alien to martial artists. Well, ok, the animism required to actually succeed in fighting does escape some of the wanna be cool posers who stand with an open hand a la neo and then get the old ground and pound laid on em. That would throw em for a loop.

But I think that people who train in such a way as to not understand the need for will, intent and fighting spirit are the same people who think the brain is not the largest sexual organ we all have. :p

In truth, the amount of fighters to martial artists ratio is low. NOt many people are in martial arts to competitively fight, or some are even in teh been there done that, got the t-shirt state of mind regarding that and train anyway because its a good thing to do.

You can't belittle someone for not fighting, but you guys are painting with a broad brush, you are not naming what is specifically bad about traditional training. IE, no one has pointed out that stance training is bad and here is reasons x through y of how come it's bad.

And then, what new training are you comparing it to that focuses on teh same aspects and how is the new method better.

You will have a difficult time arguing that your method is better over another time honoured method simply because "you think" it is this or that, or you shared a view with someone you respected as a fighter, whether or not you have actually seen them fight is also another thing entirely.

How many people out there training in boxing would say their coach was great in his prime. And yet, many have never seen them actually fight and instead have seen a trophy or something from a time gone by.

The same is true with Kungfu people. You don't know how many times I have heard "my sifu is powerful and a terrific fighter". Yet when queried about having seen their sensei or sifu fight, they become mute....because they have not.

Yes, this happens, each and every day.

I think any sort of learning and the training methodology associated with must be driven by the objectives of the practice.

What is the objective of learning and practicing Kungfu?

What is the objective of learning and practicing mma?

There are probably more answers for the first than the second, because Kungfu transcends only fighting and yet is still a martial art.

mma cannot transcend the fighting aspect. That is what it is for. sportive and competitive combat. That is the objective of the practice.

Kungfu on the other hand... well, lol. I don't have the time to type out the objectives. But fighting is one of them. I imagine the whole lei tai things that were happening back in the day were merely a way of leveling the playing fields for the entrants. They certainly weren't your standardized boxing matches though. NOr were they much like your ufcs of today.

Besides, there is plenty of material available on the chinese style martial arts attention to things along the lines of competitive sportive fighting. I mean, what the heck is san shou? Or san da if ya wanna call it that too.

YOu can't have function without form. shape first, then application. no matter what you do.

[lkfmdc]

a huge YAWN for Shaolinlueb, because you post is so "cut and paste" stereotypical "see what you want to see" and ignore the facts.....

Can you grasp this very simple concept, that in order for things to IMPROVE they must move forward.... things that do not move forward are destined to become pointless, obsolete, ineffective, etc

Do you think medicine is done today as it was done 100 years ago?

Do you think exercise is done today as it was done 100 yers ago?

Do you think trains are built, cities are run, etc as they were 100 years ago?

Do you think we are fighting in Iraq today like we fought in Vietnam in the 1970's? With the same equipment? Do you think Vietnam was fought with the weapons of World War II? Was WW II fought with the flintlock muskets we fought the revolutionary war with?

Traditional systems are still clinging to ideas and training methods based upon what people were doing in China 100 years ago

The obvious SHOULD BE
1. We aren't in China
2. This is 2004, soon to be 2005

For lord's sake, Judo already proved the correctness of alive training methods MORE THAN 100 YEARS AGO

I don't hate anything, what I do is PITY people who live in fantasy lands, thinking they are training to fight when in reality they are engaged in nothing short of mental masturbation

If you don't understand what I'm saying after hundreds of posts laying out the topic, man, you're a hopless case

Master Killer has gotten it, Abel has gotten it, pretty much EVERYONE has gotten it except you
:rolleyes:

Let's tackle the myth of "not good for some sport but good for self defense"

So, what you are saying is

1. Against a well conditioned person who has actually trained in martial arts, I am not going to be able to apply what I do

BUT!

2. in a bar, against an out of shape drunk with no training taking a poorly executed wild swing at me, my system is going to work!

:rolleyes:

Is that really the standard you want to strive to achieve?

[Shaolinlueb]

lol i understand that you have to "adapt" as the years go by, differnet methods new people new ways.

but a punch is a punch, always has been always will be.

so how do we have to adapt?


Originally posted by lkfmdc

Let's tackle the myth of "not good for some sport but good for self defense"

So, what you are saying is

1. Against a well conditioned person who has actually trained in martial arts, I am not going to be able to apply what I do

BUT!

2. in a bar, against an out of shape drunk with no training taking a poorly executed wild swing at me, my system is going to work!

:rolleyes:

Is that really the standard you want to strive to achieve?

Im sorry if thats the way you were trained for self defense, and the way anybody is, but the training i have done with my teacher never ever consisted of that (number 2). to learn the technique at first, yes done slow, but after a while it should be able to apply like number 1, but apply it. maybe cause i never trained to be able to do it on people who have no training.

[SaekSan]

What he has a problem with is not the style but the people who teach it.

He seems to be sick and tired of people who teach TCMA and claim that their method is the "right way" or the "old way" and therefore is correct.

He also seems to be sick and tired of people hiding behind the "mystical teachings" and "secret deadly methods" to cover the fact that they can't fight or produce fighters.

Mr. Ross comes from a tradition of "put-up or shut-up" and I don't think many people realize this but it is the way many teachers were in the "old days" (mine included) especially in the last century. There are teachers who are practical and scientific in their approach and others that are not, some of these other teachers may be good, others bad and some just charlatans.

Fighting isn't everything but it is part of what we study and if you can't fight effectively you have to ask yourself and your teacher why. If the reason why you study is because you want to fight or be capable in self-defense you must train for that and can't kid yourself in beleiving that practicing your form a million times will make you a fighter...

I have more on this but I'm being pulled into a meeting.

[Reggie1]

I agree w/ what SaekSan said.

I can't speak for lkfmdc, but it just sounds to me like he's sick of what makes up your classic McDojo. "I know the super-deadly art of so-and-so, but I won't try it out on you because it's too deadly."

I train in a TCMA, but I don't think we fit a lot of what lkfmdc is saying. Sure, we do a fair amount of form work. We don't start off sparring from the beginning (~4-6 months into training we start kickboxing). I actually like the fact that I don't have to start sparring right off the bat, because I need to get into fighting shape before I fight. But my sifu is a real hard azz, and he is constantly explaining the applications behind everything we do. He goes out and trains w/ players from all other styles, and good ones, too. Then he brings what he learns back to the kwoon. He's not scared of us going to mess around with players from other styles, because he feels that he trains us pretty well.

[lkfmdc]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
But I think that people who train in such a way as to not understand the need for will, intent and fighting spirit are the same people who think the brain is not the largest sexual organ we all have. :p

[/B]

People always run back the "rational man" argument, ie that people realize that they are just doing a "hobby", or doing it for other reasons, that they don't think they are fighters.

But people doing these watered down so called "martial arts" DO believe they are learning to fight. And often with truly tradgic results

This is a good example, though not a TCMA one, but it fits the bill perfectly. There was this woman, she was petite, very small, I think around 5'. She was a "3rd degree black belt" in Taekwondo. She was also a "fighting champion" in point sparring.

She used to go out late at nights, she used to argue with men in bars, here friends all said they were frightened that some day she'd get in trouble. She told them that she was a black belt and a fighting champion and that "no man could hurt her"

They found her one morning, naked, dead, in a ditch

That's a true story



Originally posted by Kung Lek
In truth, the amount of fighters to martial artists ratio is low. NOt many people are in martial arts to competitively fight, or some are even in teh been there done that, got the t-shirt state of mind regarding that and train anyway because its a good thing to do.
[/B]

We've already been over this, you don't have to compete (it sure helps) but you have to train hard and realisiticly if you expect to have some real skills...

I've highlighted how what you guys call "sport" or even "MMA" schools have normal people training and actually getting benefit.



Originally posted by Kung Lek
You can't belittle someone for not fighting, but you guys are painting with a broad brush, you are not naming what is specifically bad about traditional training. IE, no one has pointed out that stance training is bad and here is reasons x through y of how come it's bad.

[/B]

YOu sure can belittle someone who trains like they live in fantasy land for talking about fighting

You sure can belittle someone who has never fought for openning their mouth with remarks about "that's just sport fighting"

And I HAVE pointed out things wrong with traditional

1. Forms
2. line basics
3. unrealistic drills
4. STANCE TRAINING
5. Eniter strategies and theories based upon what people used to do 100 years ago in China



Originally posted by Kung Lek

You will have a difficult time arguing that your method is better over another time honoured method simply because "you think" it is this or that, or you shared a view with someone you respected as a fighter, whether or not you have actually seen them fight is also another thing entirely.

[/B]

Horse hockey, we can certainly prove our methods are better, and HAVE. Who produces people who can fight? People who train "modern", ie "alive", with "randori" whatever term you want to use it have been kicking butt and taking names

Judo did it over 100 years ago

San Da is the first Chinese martial art to consistently beat Muay Thai

Lord, my gym puts people in kickboxing, boxing, San Da, Muay Thai, submisison grappling and MMA. All different formats and we win at all of them....



Originally posted by Kung Lek

How many people out there training in boxing would say their coach was great in his prime. And yet, many have never seen them actually fight and instead have seen a trophy or something from a time gone by.

The same is true with Kungfu people. You don't know how many times I have heard "my sifu is powerful and a terrific fighter". Yet when queried about having seen their sensei or sifu fight, they become mute....because they have not.
[/B]

A boxing gym only survives if it can put athletes in the ring. Whether it is golden gloves (amateur) or the professional circuit

Boxing coaches don't talk about how great their boxing program is while sitting in the 3rd row and never putting anyone in the actual ring

Kung Fu? Well, been there, done that



Originally posted by Kung Lek

I mean, what the heck is san shou? Or san da if ya wanna call it that too.

[/B]

What is it? It is the modern way to train to fight with Chinese martial art technique

nuff said (for now)

[Shaolinlueb]

Originally posted by lkfmdc

What is it? It is the modern way to train to fight with Chinese martial art technique

nuff said (for now)

i agree with you on a lot fo stuff. a lot of schools do the drills where they come a foot away form hitting the person, they dont put any power in their punches and hold them out loosly so the person can do the technique. that isnt teaching them anything. its teaching them a false confidence that when they do get into a real situation and they fall back on their unrealistic training, they will get thier ass beat. that taekwando lady is a good example.
so i guess we do see the same thing. and i agree that the only way to gain real skill si to train hard and fight, cause really its the best experience.

there is nothing wrong with tradition though. if people want to stay in it then let them. if they want to get that false sense, then let them. i know very few sifu's and masters these days that could step in a ring and go at it. i have even see some grandmaster have a person throw a punch 3 times so she could could get technique right. thats not a grandmaster.

edit*
my sifu was always a firm believer of doing the punch hard, solid and gradually faster and faster to real life speed, always from a fighting stance, to more free fighting stances. if you dont do the technique right and get hit, its your own fault. maybe thats why i wasnt understanding this thread too much. believe me i have gotten hit many times because i have missed things. and none of the techniques were those big ones where you ahev to step and step and apply and step then punch.

[SifuAbel]

"And I HAVE pointed out things wrong with traditional

1. Forms
2. line basics
3. unrealistic drills
4. STANCE TRAINING
5. Eniter strategies and theories based upon what people used to do 100 years ago in China"

Only Number 3 and number 5 are bad. I'm sure your students could use some stance work, get those skinny legs to bend a bit.

[bamboo_ leaf]

Maybe off topic.

Realistic training, buy a gun and learn how to use it. get a permit to carry it. A week or so ago a guy lost a fight, the other guy shot him after losing. Some young teens where supposed to fight again the other was shot.

And this week a pizza guy was shot.

a yr or so back a local thaiboxing couch was shot after he ran down a car and tried to get the guy to step out.

21st century MA, buy a gun.
This is west coast maybe things are different back east.

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by bamboo_ leaf
Maybe off topic.

Realistic training, buy a gun and learn how to use it. get a permit to carry it. A week or so ago a guy lost a fight, the other guy shot him after losing. Some young teens where supposed to fight again the other was shot.


realistic training.

1. Learn to fight. Learn to really fight. Then you fight in the gym where it is safe and the other guy will back off if he rocks you. He wont back off in the street.

2. Learn a physically intensive martial art. You will be stronger, faster, have more endurance. You will gain more confidence and carry yourself better. The messaage you will send is CONFIDENCE. You will not look like a target.

3. Learn some manners. Be polite, lose your ego. Learn to apologize if someone starts $hit with you, even if it's not your fault. If they don't accept your apology, make it apparent that you will not let them punk you out, but still be polite.

4. Practice awareness. No what is going around you at all times. learn to pick up on unusual behavior from people. Don't be caught slipping.

5. Learn what you want to learn from someone who exhibits those traits. I wanted to learn how to fight, so I sought out fighters and learned what they taught me. They already are good fighters, so THEY know hoe to make me a fighter better than I do. Go to someone who talks a good game and you will learn how to talk a good game.

[MasterKiller]

In Oklahoma is you lose they just stomp your teeth out while you're on the ground...

[SifuAbel]

"This is west coast maybe things are different back east."


mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, No.

[David Jamieson]

well, all mano y mano aside (that's "hand to hand" for you non-espanol parleyers) then I agree, true modern fighting is done with guns and bombs.

All guns render all empty hand sports or arts useless as far as the whole street reality thing goes. But again, that's an extreme.

agree with abel on the 3 and 5 assessment and wouldn't say that 3 and 5 are truisms in ma schools in general. That's what i was talking about in my reference to the tv show i watched this morning.

and what is a realistic drill anyway? is it something that falls within the fairplay of a sanctioned fight? Or is it you walking into a dark alleyway and getting jumped then seeing how you do with some techniques you have learned?

Who determines what is realisitic and what is not and based on what? No one can ascertain the outcome of a conflict based on realistic or unrealistic drills. Drills by nature are not realistic no matter what they are being derived from.

What people used to do 100 years ago in China...well I don't know about that as I wasn't in China 100 years ago and who here was anyway? And who can honsetly say they train like that? Sure, some forms are old, but those are picked apart to get to the techs. Techs are then drilled. How is training ping choy on a heavy bag different than training any punch on a heavy bag? Maybe I'm just not getting you here.

[SifuAbel]

"all mano y mano aside (that's "hand to hand" for you non-espanol parleyers)"

Oh Lord!!! Its mano A mano.

[SifuAbel]

To me, an unrealistic drill is one that relies too much on a supposition that the opponent "will" react in a particular way. Opponents will react in many different ways.

Or, if the entire technique set relies solely on the first move being effective. If it isn't the rest won't work.

Techniques should be able to build off one another, but not solely depend on the sequence.

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by SifuAbel
"all mano y mano aside (that's "hand to hand" for you non-espanol parleyers)"

Oh Lord!!! Its mano A mano.

No, no. It's pie en el culo.

[lkfmdc]

could have been worse, he could have said "mano a culo" :D

I may be beating a dead horse, but there is more to it than "a punch is a punch"

At the obsurd extremes we have

1. TKD guys who practices punch defenses against a guy who step backward to low block then step forward with a stiff arm that he leaves hanging in the air for as long as the TKD wants to kick at him :rolleyes:

2. The Aikido guy whose "punch" is running toward you with a straight arm and open hand held over his head (an imitation of a shark perhaps) who will chop down at you and then fly through the air as soon as you touch him

Somewhere in the middle, granted, is the typical CMA defense, where the punch is not thrown will full power; but perhaps worse, WHAT punch is being thrown

A lot of TCMA has a million defenses against Gwa Choih. Made sense in china, where every fighter used that skill. But I doubt the biker you ****ed off at the diner on route 9 will use it

Abel,
When I want to teach my students to move I teach them foot work , not static postures

If I want to make them stronger, we prefer plyometrics

[lkfmdc]

bad dragon, stealing my "culo" joke first....

[MasterKiller]

Originally posted by Water Dragon
No, no. It's pie en el culo. As a red-headed white boy, why do you try to be spanish?

[lkfmdc]

Originally posted by MasterKiller
As a red-headed white boy, why do you try to be spanish?

you are what you eat maybe :D

I thought this post was here, but it was in another thread, so I am copying it over to here as it is relevant

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=33372&perpage=15&pagenumber=2

I see aspects of traditional that either can be updated or dropped.

I've been in martial arts for close to 27 years now. I'm not going to say you learn nothing from doing forms, but I am going to say you can learn the same things without learning forms. I think it is a matter of context.

If I was a teacher, and I had only a few students, and they showed up at different times, certainly easier to have you do forms work...

Line basics, I don't see much point in doing techniques in isolation, in the air, with no resistance. I prefer to do techniques on equipment for power and focus, and in partner drills for application, distance, timing and context

My "deadly technique" answer is structural. Rather than throw the baby out with the bath water.... Drill live what you can drill live, if you have the structure, you can "plug back in" the deadly stuff a lot easier than never working "live" but thinking that if you had to, you "dim mak his butt"

Elbows are a classic example. We drill them on equipment, but we don't live drill them or spar with them. But if you spar, live drill with a safer replacement, you have a better than of pulling off the elbow if you have to in a real fight....

Live drilling kills a lot of the myths, nonsense and BS, but I see all too little of it

I see a lot of very pre-set application drills, and many falling into another trap, pre-suppositions that aren't necessarily true in today's modern world

If you teach a guy an application based upon a lot of bridging, I'm sorry to say, he's extremely unlikely to ever be attacked that way in the US in 2004/05

You need to update your curriculum to reflect more modern attack forms

For example, today you need to teach a woman a situation that most TCMA teachers probably never considered, the "snatch" with a van....

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by MasterKiller
As a red-headed white boy, why do you try to be spanish?

Please explain yourself. Do you have a point or are you just failing at being witty again?

[red5angel]

failing at being witty again?


I'm going to go with that, that seems to be MK's MO.

[David Jamieson]

well, yes, i must admit i have seen those absurd extremes you allude too.

I apologize for my lack of spanish knowledge. :rolleyes: "hand and hand" would sound weird though. I stand corrected....anyway...:p

I would be interested to know what do you mean by footwork?

If it's stepping patterns whether short or long, it is still form that precedes function that needs to get grounded in order to make the footwork stable and effective when actually used.

So this is achieved how? Repitition either shadow dancing or practical application it is still repitition to gain refinement.

Plyometrics are suspiciously similar to some traditional methods of leg strength training. I guess because they are called plyometrics they are deemed different, more modern or better, but it's still compress and blast, whichever way, to be simplistic about it.

Even wind sprints can do a lot for a fighter but the training in and of itself is non tactical in nature.

One of the things I was thinking about was how there is this return to old style traditional training. Things like kettle bells for instance that have exercises that mimic hard farm work. Wicked workout! Way different than traditional weight pressing as everyone has been doing for so long. Not that kettlebells themselves are old, but devices like them are.

For instance, the stone locks thing is coming back into vogue too apparently and a whole slew of other traditional strengthening methods out there are still used to some success where diligent practice is going on.

If people are diligent about their practice and have clear objectives and a method to attain those objectives, they will succeed at what they are doing. Be it wu shu, kungfu, karate, mma, whatever. All things being different, they just aren't the same. :p

[rogue]

Thanks for the reply MonkeySlap Too. You would think that reading an opponent would be basic, but it wasn't. The school did teach to move offline but the method was to move offline as if the opponent wouldn't attack again. When I got my reprimand I was told that martial arts were meant for self improvement not fighting. That was the last time I went there. The thing is we did spar at every class, but we never trained to finish. Go figure. I really like Ninomiya's book and it's close to what I'm currently doing. I think karateka like him are bringing their karate to where it should be.

David, what is a Gwa Choih?

[Ai Lek Ou Seun]

Originally posted by lkfmdc
[If you teach a guy an application based upon a lot of bridging, I'm sorry to say, he's extremely unlikely to ever be attacked that way in the US in 2004/05

[/B]

Could you explain what you mean by "bridging"?

Your use of this term seems to be leaving people confused.

BTW, I think you were cutting on Gwa Chui earlier, just so you know there's a famous CLF saying:

"If you know Gwa, Sau ,Chaap then you don't need anything else."

Peace.




;) :p

[Ai Lek Ou Seun]

Originally posted by rogue


David, what is a Gwa Choih? [/B]

Gwa Chui means "hanging strike". It is a large swinging circular back fist. Usually in a downward motion.

It is used as an attack, a block and is very useful for smashing thru your opponents guard.

What most people don't realize is that it works the best when you step off the line of attack.

Ciao. :D

[lkfmdc]

If you claim to be doing a TCMA, particularly a southern one, and don't know what bridging means, darn, you ARE lost :rolleyes:

Sayings are cute, I have quite a few, but how about

"if you can't block my hook or my shoot, your gwa won't mean a toot"

[Ai Lek Ou Seun]

You are the one using the term, so define it so that we know what the f you are talking about.

Or, for all I care, continue to talk to yourself in your own language. :rolleyes:

[lkfmdc]

how about I write it out in crayon SLOWLY for you?

I forget, what is your lineage again?

[Ai Lek Ou Seun]

Alright then.... continue to babble. Hope you are having a good dialogue with yourself.

[omarthefish]

Wierd...a good bridge arm is one of the most usefull things I got out of my Hung Gar training. I haven't found it out of place dealing with a boxing style offense of in my MT class at all. In fact, when someone has a real tight guard and keeps their hands up well I find it's the key to opening them up.

You just don't have to leave your bridge way the hell out there in front of you. I sometimes fall back on a boxing type of cover-up-and-weather-the-storm kind of defense but I find I tend to have a lot more options open with a more upright southern style defense.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Actually Omar, I'm with you on this one. But the question is "How" is the bridge applied... If people think the old arms hanging out in front thing is going to happen -- no that doesn't really happen in most fights. But there are still applications for a bridge -- if we are all talking about what I think we are.

Lots to get caiught up on, out all day...

[Shaolinlueb]

**** it. TCMA > MCMA. period. oooh modern cma is better cause san da beats this and that. give me a break,. find yioursewlf a real cma teache5r and stop whining about how much you hate cma cause your san da is so much betyter. please excuse me cause ive had too much to drink.

[Becca]

Originally posted by Shaolinlueb
what im getting from this thread from lkfmdc is that

1.) traditional systems are useless for fighting cause they dont train right for fighting.
2.) training right for fighting is either san da, san chou, MT, or MMA
3.) you hate traditional systems it seems cause their techniques are flawed or highly impracticle.
4.) you hate 90% of the way people train out there cause none of it is "realistic" enough.
???
please clear it up for me if im wrong. I read through some of it and it would be easier for you to jsut lay out whats on your mind instead of all thsi discussion.
What I'm getting from this thread is that many peeps have little respect for those of us who train as "realisticly" as we can, but know dam well we can't go at the level most of the hard-core peeps prefer, and there for don't even try, because doing so will get us hurt...:rolleyes: I grew out of the need to get injured for the sake of fitting in many years ago.

After 10 years of training almost constantly, I know for a fact I can fight my way out of most rear holds, most chokes and any takle. But I also know that my body just can't take training all-out for these situations every class for more than a few weeks without seriously getting hurt.

I have learned that forms are very usefull for teaching body memory of the techniques.

I have learned that Lite contact sparring is a great way to learn how to use these techniques in a fight.

I have also learned that by doing the previos two things, I can get by with only going "all out" once every few months, or as my body can take it. But I also feel it is vital to occasionally go all out because it does feel different than lite sparring and Joe Shmo out on the streat is not likely going to go 60% so I can keep up...

[omarthefish]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
Actually Omar, I'm with you on this one. But the question is "How" is the bridge applied... If people think the old arms hanging out in front thing is going to happen -- no that doesn't really happen in most fights. But there are still applications for a bridge -- if we are all talking about what I think we are.

Lots to get caiught up on, out all day...

I suspect we're on the same page. Maybe my understanding of certain ideas is more modern than I realize and I just take certain things for granted. In my world a bridge is anywhere your arm touches my arm. And I don't care if my opponent wants to stick or not. I will stick to HIM. When your in close it's not that hard. And quite frankly, it doesn't even have to be maintained for more than a moment to be extremely useful. When someone throws a 1-2 combo at me I used to find myself rollling back and forth between tan and bong sau quite a bit especially off of a good right cross. My hand comes up to make contact with the incoming forearm and then rolls over into bong as the punch comes in the rest of the way.

A hook to the head that is blocked forms a bridge with the blocking arm. The followthrough/recoil off the hook can be a fuk sau leading into another hook. I use WC terminology but my background is Hung Gar. We always has a tighter more circular, more "boxeresque" style anyways. But even though I have since switched styles, the idea of a bridge arm is still a big part of my game...especially when I am just playing....:p

[MonkeySlap Too]

Becca,
You aren't any different in principle from what coach Ross and I are saying. There are really two thoughts:

1.) modern equipment makes sparring possible. S you should spar and learn from it.

2.) Once you understand the goal of your training, you should look for the most efficient training method.

I don't fight everyday anymore. Haven't in a long time. But I try not to turn down an opportunnity to try something new. The primary criticism is on those that NEVER spar, and never train realistically for a fight. - noting that this is just one element to training, and if used intelligently, it positively impacts all others.

All this 'hate' language is just fear of reality. Because no one here 'hates' TCMA. It's my bread and butter in terms of MA, and is respected by everyone, even those 'meanie' MMA types. But there is TCMA and there is TCMA. And then there are ways to look at training goals and leverage new training opportunities to make them better.

[lkfmdc]

LMFAO....

I guess you have no idea who Chan Tai San is.....

Reality is, people who live in castles built on clouds get real nervous when the light of reality threatens to shine....

[MonkeySlap Too]

You know, Coach Ross is doing a favor by pointing these things out.

Your other option is to discover them while watching the beautiful fractal designs your blood makes on the sidewalk...

[Ai Lek Ou Seun]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
But there is TCMA and there is TCMA. And then there are ways to look at training goals and leverage new training opportunities to make them better. [/B]

And you could say the same of MMA....there is MMA and there is "MMA."

I think what cheeses people off is when there art is pigeon-hole into either/or.

lkfmdc seeks to divide martial arts into competitive sports and everyone else.

The truth is there are many shades of gray in between.

Some people focus mainly on realistic self-defense and don't spar much.

Some people free spar a lot and don't focus so much on realistic self-defense.

Some people are in it more for health and so spend little time on free sparring and self-defense application

But provided that the teacher is competent everyone is going to walk away with MORE fighting ability than the walked in with.

Even if it only means more efficiently using their body in an encounter.

For example, in my school the emphasis is a lot on forms. However, we do free spar and we do work applications. We also do a lot of body conditioning, some bag work, etc.

Are we "specialists" in a certain format like San Da or MMA? Are we "forms specialists" like Wushu people? Are we obsessed with disarming people on the street? Are we all "beacons" of health?

No to all of those....

But the people that apply themselves in our school are in good shape, many have more than successfully held their own on the street (myself included), have won at forms competitions AND have won sparring competitions.

If anything we are generalists. And we like to keep it that way so that we can be flexible enough to adapt to what is needed.

I think this is how most kung fu schools are.

So I disagree with lkfmdc's conclusion that there are two camps and you are either in one or in the other.

There's not San Da/MMA/Muy Thai and then people that shoot Chi blasts out there palms.

There's a lot of stuff in between.

It reminds me of the narrow minded thinking of our current president and his "us vs. them" mentality.

:rolleyes:

[lkfmdc]

Originally posted by Ai Lek Ou Seun


lkfmdc seeks to divide martial arts into competitive sports and everyone else.


This proves that you simply can not read and comprehend. Despite perhaps a HUNDRED POSTS on the subject, you still miss the most basic point

It's really sad :rolleyes:

[Ai Lek Ou Seun]

Originally posted by lkfmdc
This proves that you simply can not read and comprehend. Despite perhaps a HUNDRED POSTS on the subject, you still miss the most basic point

It's really sad :rolleyes:

Well, IMHO what's really sad is that you are all over the place.

Despite claiming academic credentials for yourself, you can't seem to make any kind of cogent argument.

You make some valid points but your conclusions aren't supported by your points.

I challenge you to condense your argument into a single paragraph, 4 sentences.

I really doubt you can do that because it's easier to argue all over the place and change the subject when it suits you.

If you can get it into 4 sentences then we'd have ourselves a horse race.

;)

[lkfmdc]

Dude, you can blah blah blah all the time

Funny how so many other people can grasp it

IF someone is deaf, talking slowly isn't going to make them hear. Talking to you is a waste of time, because you demonstrate a complete inability to grasp even the most basic concept

4 sentence paragraph, blah :rolleyes: How about in 10 words or less explain the causes of World War I

What a maroon :rolleyes:

[Ai Lek Ou Seun]

I've got bad news for you Ross....

I just saved a bunch of money on my life insurance by switching to TCMA.

:D ;) :p

[MonkeySlap Too]

Gentlemen, this is my 'thread'. ALOS... if you are fighting - good. Sounds like the schools I came out of. I don't think coach Ross is as either/or as you think. It is the simple question - do you practice fighting? If so, good. Can you stand up against other fighting schools? Yes/no? Then good. Can you acheive your goals faster? Have you adapted to what is out there in todays world?

Not a big deal. Frankly I'm disgusted by what I see when I walk into most kwoons - a bunch of dreamers who can't fight. But when you find a really good kwoon, there's nothing like it. I LOVE CMA. There is a breadth of sneakiness that is just plain fun. But if we are so cool, why does the rest of the fighting world look down on us? (well, not all of us)

[lkfmdc]

Monkey Slap.... Ai Lek is one of those guys who gets indignant when his precious fantasy world is challenged and in similar geek fashion has to go on a crusade :rolleyes:

Frankly, he's like an annoying 5 year old on a long plane ride, after a while you just filter him out and he's impossible to take at all seriously

I raised this question elsewhere, Shuai Jiao has a lot of features of a "modern" martial art or even a MMA. And Grandmster Chang was very cricitcal of the bogus mysticism crap in TCMA. So is Shuai Jiao "traditonal?"

Maybe San Da is "traditional", it's just that some can't grasp it's concept and don't understand it

Just like Abel mentioned, guys who call all kicking "foreign" when it is in most TCMA

[Becca]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
Becca,
You aren't any different in principle from what coach Ross and I are saying. There are really two thoughts:

1.) modern equipment makes sparring possible. S you should spar and learn from it.

2.) Once you understand the goal of your training, you should look for the most efficient training method.

I don't fight everyday anymore. Haven't in a long time. But I try not to turn down an opportunnity to try something new. The primary criticism is on those that NEVER spar, and never train realistically for a fight. - noting that this is just one element to training, and if used intelligently, it positively impacts all others.

All this 'hate' language is just fear of reality. Because no one here 'hates' TCMA. It's my bread and butter in terms of MA, and is respected by everyone, even those 'meanie' MMA types. But there is TCMA and there is TCMA. And then there are ways to look at training goals and leverage new training opportunities to make them better.
Yes and no. I think you guys are right in most areas and dead wrong about putting others down for not being like you, or at least like your ideals. Both you and Coach ross have done this repeatedly in this thread and in most others. It's insulting to the intelligence of those who have valid reasons for not going Gung Ho !00% of the time. And "walking into a kwoon" and not seeing what you want to see don't meen it ain't there. One, two, even ten, visits are not enough to make that kind of flipant observation.

You guys have some very good ideals and some very unfortunate biases.

[ntc]

You go, Becca..... get them straight !! ;-)

[Becca]

Hey! I thought you'd dropped off the edge of the earth! How your studies going?

[ntc]

Becca --> I am doing well.... been pretty busy and tied up... have not had too much time to come to the forum, which is why I seemed to have dropped off the face of the earth. Also, I've started teaching again and so that has been very enjoyable.

What about you... how have things been? I'll pm you later.... ta ta.

[MonkeySlap Too]

"Yes and no. I think you guys are right in most areas and dead wrong about putting others down for not being like you, or at least like your ideals. Both you and Coach ross have done this repeatedly in this thread and in most others. It's insulting to the intelligence of those who have valid reasons for not going Gung Ho !00% of the time. And "walking into a kwoon" and not seeing what you want to see don't meen it ain't there. One, two, even ten, visits are not enough to make that kind of flipant observation.

You guys have some very good ideals and some very unfortunate biases."

No one ever advocated 100% gung ho all the time. Simply that reality be addressed within the construct of training. Everybody has a bias, just because you happen to disagree does not make it an unfortunate one. What is unfortunate is that I don't think you really understand what we are getting at.

I think a skilled player can walk into almost any kwoon and quickly surmise within a realatively short period of time if the coach has any clue - regardless of style. I've known some really good 'internal' fighters - and you can tell when you see thier gym. There are a lot of good schools out there, but there are way more schools living in a fantasy.

Perhaps you could explain how long you think it takes to evaluate a school, and why it takes so long.

[rogue]

One, two, even ten, visits are not enough to make that kind of flipant observation. Why not? What is being held back that 10 visits isn't adequate?:confused:

[EarthDragon]

When living with my shrfu, in SanFrancisco he would always mention spies.......... we would laugh and think he was nuts.
But truth is many other techers in the bay area were jealous of him and would often send thier advanced students into to take a free class and pretend to know nothing.

My shrfu would say class dis a a new student and he would teach them horse stance and that would be it!
They would ask to see a fighting application, or a certain technique but shrfu would never show them.

In the chinese community there is much envy and jealousy between different styles and mantis teachers. So my point is if you walked into a chinese school to evalauate how they fight you would not be shown anything in the first, second or even the forth week. My teacher would refuse new students all the time, of course that was easy in the mecca of kung fu in america SF. He could pick and choose who he was wiling to teach and for his won reasons. Hell he turned me down for 5 years before allowing me to live with him.......So I think becca has a valid point in her post...........

[FuXnDajenariht]

To discuss what is reasonable in combat science and its important connection with life, and to pay attention to seeking the true spirit of the martial way, although combat is just a trifling skill, without it the results cannot be proved, therefore I am also ready to have friendly comparisons of skills in combat. - Wang Xiangzhai

[ntc]

I have to agree with EarthDragon on what he (or she?) said. I am Chinese, born, raised and trained in China, and can definiitely validate what was said.

[Mutant]

what earthdragon said and becca eluded to can be true in these very traditional schools. i have seen this before too.

i think that in these cases the sifus may or may not have some good material. it doesnt automatically indicate that their technique is truely superior, part of it is just traditional culture, mindset and 'way' which has gotten passed down. but these cultural habits often do not serve a practical purpose and just stroke the sifus ego while wasting the students time, introducing bad habits and ineffiecient training methods. maybe at one time it served a purpose in certain cases, but now it just stifles the cma. and it all too often functions only as a smoke-screen that obscures bad technique and instills paranoia and mysticsism that cultivates a cult-like mind-set.
it is not only the genuine old-world masters who play these games...but also the frauds &/or 'masters' who knowing or unknowingly didnt get the 'real' cma.

so the effect becomes training in a house of mirrors - are you certain that what you are training is the real deal and effective??? how do you know??? no, how do you REALLY KNOW?
there are ways to assess this, some are concrete and scientific and some are not. these ways do not have to mutually exclude one another.

someone with a skillful base of cma (or other ma, although there are some parculiarities to cma that might be confusing to the uninitialted) knowlege should be able to quickly distiguish between a kwoon/training program of quality or garbage. holding back techniques only serves to stifle the students and keep them from devevoping competent or competitive programs.

[ntc]

Originally posted by MutantWarrior
i think that in these cases the sifus may or may not have some good material. it doesnt automatically indicate that their technique is truely superior, part of it is just traditional culture, mindset and 'way' which has gotten passed down. but these cultural habits often do not serve a practical purpose and just stroke the sifus ego while wasting the students time, introducing bad habits and ineffiecient training methods. maybe at one time it served a purpose in certain cases, but now it just stifles the cma. and it all too often functions only as a smoke-screen that obscures bad technique and instills paranoia and mysticsism that cultivates a cult-like mind-set.

Just remember that teaching kung fu takes on a very different perspective in China than it does here. Kung fu is seen very, very differently here in the US. Classes, especially in non-public, at home (especially live-in) ones are typically where you would find the aforementioned situations. In fact, most students are not even taught anything of substance until they have shown that they are really there to learn and merits the teacher's time to teach them. Not really a matter of ego at all.

[Becca]

Originally posted by EarthDragon
When living with my shrfu, in SanFrancisco he would always mention spies.......... we would laugh and think he was nuts.
But truth is many other techers in the bay area were jealous of him and would often send thier advanced students into to take a free class and pretend to know nothing.

My shrfu would say class dis a a new student and he would teach them horse stance and that would be it!
They would ask to see a fighting application, or a certain technique but shrfu would never show them.

In the chinese community there is much envy and jealousy between different styles and mantis teachers. So my point is if you walked into a chinese school to evalauate how they fight you would not be shown anything in the first, second or even the forth week. My teacher would refuse new students all the time, of course that was easy in the mecca of kung fu in america SF. He could pick and choose who he was wiling to teach and for his won reasons. Hell he turned me down for 5 years before allowing me to live with him.......So I think becca has a valid point in her post...........

That was definantly a big part of it. The other part would be something anyone is likely to do.

... that is to color what you see with what you already know. I would feel comfy making a snap desision about another Pai LUm school or a ninjitsu school, but I have some training in those two arts. I would have something to put what I'm seeing into context.

It actually took me about two months of watching my son study Kung Fu, before I realized there was a strong thread of similarity in what I was seeing and what I already knew. It was this unlikely similarity that drew me to start studying Pai Lum myself.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Three things:

1.) I disagree. If you have any clue on how to train fighting skills outside of the realm of meta-physics, you'll recognize good training methodology even IF the ai priori assumptions and the structure of the style is different. You may not agree with the initial assumptions, but the results they are seeking should be apparent.
2.) Look at the students
3.) Look at how training is done.
4.) There is nothing so special that basic information should be held back, and practical training skills applied. If there is a cult-like atnosphere... you could be wasting your time, so why even start based on the 'possibility.' There are plenty of good systems being taught openly.

As CMA players we need to dicard the cultural baggage and nonsense wrapped around a lot of CMA. Most Chinese players I meet fall ultimately into two categories; 1.) Willing to play and prove themselves 2.) Ego-bound and desperate to hint at something 'special' they have, but they just can't show it yet.

Very rarely does no.2 actually 'have' anything. This does not automatically mean no. 1 is completely free with info, but it is a huge gap between the two.

[ntc]

Disagreements are definitely all part of the forum, as they represent each individual's perspective. My earlier point was merely trying to remind that things are done very differently in China (and other countries, Europe, for instance), where the cultural values, thought processes, etc., because of their differences, will result in different approaches to things. If one took the Chinese way of doing things and implemented it here in the US, it may not necessary work. Conversely, if one took the American way of doing things and tried to reinforce that in China, that will likely not work either. So, that was what I was trying to expose.

The kung fu school where I trained in back in China produced many top fighters that competed in full contact tournaments all over Asia and China. So, the historical success of the school implies that whatever/however they are doing things, works. Over the three-plus decades that I have been involved with Chinese martial arts, I too have both seen and developed successful martial artists, with approaches very similar to what we used in China. That approach, is a bit more difficult to adopt in public schools because of the commercialistic responsibilities involved with running a commercial school, but you are likely to find that approach adopted in many privately run schools or at some of the more traditional schools.

Main point is, this approach will work for some, and not for others, just the same as all other approaches, cultural-based or not. The individual, as a martial art student, will need to find the environment that will best suit his/her training needs. That way, he/she will be able to really grow and develop according to their individual needs, wants, personalities, limitations, goals, and desires. We need to remember that what may be construed as "cultural baggage and nonsense" to some may constitute the heart of life values to others. After all, all countries have different cultures, lifestyles, values, religions, and beliefs, though the depth of difference may differ between countries.

[MonkeySlap Too]

" We need to remember that what may be construed as "cultural baggage and nonsense" to some may constitute the heart of life values to others. After all, all countries have different cultures, lifestyles, values, religions, and beliefs, though the depth of difference may differ between countries."

I couldn't agree more. I could have been more specific and talked about how ALL cultures have excess baggage/nonsense, but i assumed that as a given, and was seeking to be specific.

I've played all the CMA games, and got very good at playing the 'kung fu lo' - but frankly I don't have time anymore for cult-like behavior, and a great deal of CMA is steeped in it. I'm not ragging on manners, or even morals. I'm talking about the 'man behind the curtain', 'ooh, I'm so special' stuff.' I'm too old, and been in this too long to tolerate that cr@p anymore. Especially when there are plenty of skilled teachers that aren't afflicted by that disease.

For the rest of your statement ntc, I agree with you. Everything is ultimately in context. I'm not arguing that. All I'm saying is your really a player, and not an ego-bound MA goof, you can make a pretty accurate call after a short visit. Will you iknow for sure? No. But you'll get a good picture of things.

[ntc]

Monkey.... I definitely concur. The best way for a person to find out is with one's own eyes. I think the average person would readily be able to sense egotism and false humility after spending some time with an individual. I think the honest martial arts student will seek those teachers who really have something to offer, and egos, etc. would be major turn-offs. On the other hand, there will be students wil big egos and fantasy-like, almight espectations as well, and for these, they will likely be drawn towards to big ego, cult-like, and game-oriented atmosphere for it is there that they will like thrive.

[ntc]

Another thing I want to point out...... kung fu in the Chinese culture is more than just about fighting..... it is a way of life. There is the martial aspect of kung fu, the philosophical aspect of kung fu, the healing (of injuries, internal and external), and the physical aspect of kung fu. When one starts kung fu training in China, one has to go through all this, and yes, this does include a lot of forms, stance training, drills, poems and proverbs that provide the essence of the style (known as "kuen kuit"), etc. Sparring is only one aspect of it, but not the only or main aspect of it. If you come out of a good school in China, one will see the impact the kung fu had on that individual, especially personality wise and reflected in the openess/humility/philosophical-Zen/health/confidence aspect of the individual's personality. Yes, sparring is likely needed to become a good fighter. However, a lot of sparring does not necessarily make one a good fighter, nor does lack of sparring make one a bad fighter either. It all boils back down to the individual, the traininig, the teacher, etc. etc. etc.

[MonkeySlap Too]

ntc, I am all in favor of those other aspects, however you ARE aware that most of the philosophical musings is a recent phenomena aren't you? Most of it being cobbled together in the past two hundred years. Prior to that, Kung Fu was all about usage. Sure you had your Qi-Gong cults, but martial gong was all about the fighting.

In a rich society we tend to layrer on a great deal of stuff, and I'm not saying there aren't elements of what you speak, but as Chang Tung Sheng put it: "I've traveled all over China from North to South, and never met a 'chi-master' in relation to fighting arts, yet now they are everywhere. Where did they come from?"

Again, I am trying to parse from what you are saying... I concur, but think there is a distinction that needs to be made. No one advocated 100% fighting, just as I AM advocating against NEVER fighting.

Martial arts are about usage. Otherwise they are just mental masturbation combined with dancing.

Sure you can balance that with health issues, etc. But for it to be Martial arts, you can't ignore this fact.

This is a seperate discussion from what constitutes the best ways to develop real skill.

[ntc]

Monkey... you have valid points in your post.

Regarding the philosophical aspects, I have only been in the US for about 20 years, and yes, I have seen more of the philosophy portion surface in recent years than in the past. However, philosophy has always been an integral part of our upbringing right when we were old enough to go to school, both in regular kindergarten/grade/high school as well as martial arts school. A lot of Chinese culture is built around Confuscius, Buddhism, and Zen, and martial arts being an integral part of the culture was the same. And this goes back not hundreds of years but thousands of years. So, while you are correct that the philosophical aspect really became prominent only recently, and especially in the West, that is not the case in China.

For instance, recall the currently generally accepted origin of Shaolin kung fu... that it attributes to an Indian monk named Da Mo. The story goes that he found the temple monks to be very weak and so he put in a series of training exercises that helped to develop both internal and external strength to get the monks stronger. And while this is more of a physical exercise, however if you look deeper into them as explained in the classics, they are all centered around Buddhist beliefs of life and its principles. Its roots were much more philosophical than physical. And that has pretty much been kept throughout all these years, especially when it comes to kung fu training.

I think in general, we are saying very similar things about martial arts and their training in general. I think that we also need to understand that, as Becca implied earlier on, there are people whose primary focus in learning martial arts is not necessarily to go in and do 100% sparring or all-out physical training, and that does not mean that they are any less than the martial artist who does nothing but fight all day. It simply goes back down to the individual, especially when you look at it from the perspective that I have been pointing out.... that martial arts is more than just about fighting... that it is a way of life as well.

[ntc]

Oh yes... I forgot to address the Qi Gong aspect. I honestly don't know about your background in my culture and the language, and so if what I have said ever sounded condescending or offensive, it was done so without such intent, and you have my apologies.

My perspective of this is as follows..... you probably know that "kung fu" really means a special skill ("kung") attained through hard work ("fu") over a period of time. It is a very general term used to denote someone with an expertise...... eg, a chef's kung fu would be "cooking", a doctor's kung fu would be "healing", a painter's kung fu would be "painting", etc... Along the same lines, the expert would often be address to as "sifu", ie, an expert in a kung fu... hence we oftentime would address, for example, Chef Chan as Sifu Chan. Kung fu is also frequently used in martial arts, primarily because it takes up much more dedication, time, blood, sweat and tears than others. And, of course, here in the West, the TV series "Kung Fu" just put an exclamation point to that interpretation.

So, where am I headed with this? The fact that Qi Gong is but a skill, and really not a fighting art in itself, so that you will likely NOT find a Qi Gong fighter in China. Qi Gong is a special form of training that allows for one to be able to manipulate one's internal energy for power and other purposes, and for this purpose is part of pretty much every kung fu style you see out there. Five animals has its Qi Gong aspect, so does Wing Chun, Hung Gar, etc..... However, like you said, there seems to be a lot of "Qi Gong fighting masters" popping up these days.... from where??? who knows!? but I can say that you will find Qi Gong, in addition to being an integral part of the different styles of kung fu, is also very important in health, Chinese Medicine, meditation, and especially in Taoist and Buddhist philosophy. Personally, I feel that Qi Gong is frequently misunderstood, especially here in the US and oftentimes misrepresented. Again, this is just my opinion, and I have no intent of insulting anyone here. But it also points out to info discussed in this thread previously.... that there are simply too many instructors out there who are really questionably qualified to teach the skill.... and the damage goes on and on down the line....

My two cents.

[EarthDragon]

NTC, NTC, NTC where have you been?????????
I have been trying to explain this for months to this board! On the northern mantis board this is common knowledge but on here it seems people are so hung up on fighting that they think it is the only apect of kung fu that means anything............ I said in one of my posts that a lot of people take up kung fu to learn how not to fight, and was laughed at by obviously ignorant people that only look in one direction with very narrow eyes.

I just love it when you said ..................(Another thing I want to point out...... kung fu in the Chinese culture is more than just about fighting..... it is a way of life. There is the martial aspect of kung fu, the philosophical aspect of kung fu, the healing (of injuries, internal and external), and the physical aspect of kung fu. When one starts kung fu training in China, one has to go through all this, and yes, this does include a lot of forms, stance training, drills, poems and proverbs that provide the essence of the style (known as "kuen kuit"), etc. Sparring is only one aspect of it, but not the only or main aspect of it. If you come out of a good school in China, one will see the impact the kung fu had on that individual, especially personality wise and reflected in the openess/humility/philosophical-Zen/health/confidence aspect of the individual's personality. Yes, sparring is likely needed to become a good fighter. However, a lot of sparring does not necessarily make one a good fighter, nor does lack of sparring make one a bad fighter either. It all boils back down to the individual, the traininig, the teacher, etc. etc. etc.)

I have been taught by chinese teachers shyun kwan long from taiwan and qigong master Yen Shu Fang beijingand this is what they have taught me in my 26 years but people with 1/8 of the amount of time I have spent seem to think I know nothing of what I speak of......... but again only on the main board wonder why that is...................???LOL

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by EarthDragon
Whatever, I am done posting on this board.

[red5angel]

Whatever, I am done posting on this board.

[ntc]

EarthDragon:

Just take it with a grain of salt... I think there are folks from every possible corner of the earth at this forum, with different backgrounds and exposure to kung fu. If an individual sought out kung fu to learn how to fight, it is likely that the individual will be primarily focused on sparring and fighting, and lesser on the other aspects. Likewise, conversely, if an individual sought out kung fu as a holistic way of life that includes learning how to fight, the approach would be totally different.

Looking at it from the Yin/Yang aspect, fighting would represent the Yang aspect of the art and internal elements (healing, philosophy, etc.) would represent the Yin aspect of the art. At the same time, vocalization would also represent Yang energy, wheras listening would represent Yin energy. Based on this, therefore, it is also reasonable to aspect that the fighting-oriented folks would likelier be more vocal than the internal folks because of the Yang nature. Which is what I think one would tend to see in a lot of forums that supposed discusses the arts, but really has a focus on fighting.

Then there are people like yourself, myself, and from a lot of angles, MonkeySlap, who wish to share our perspectives, but oftentimes encounter (at times hostile) responses because of the non-combative viewpoint on what is percieved by some to be a 100% combat-focused topic. And there are folks like Becca who devote a lot of her energy in the arts not just to learn how to fight, but also for the beauty of the art itself as well as everything that it has to offer. In these cases, just take it with a grain of salt, and know that for those like use, we have been fortunate to have been exposed to the internal and deeper aspects of the arts that go beyond just fighting, and we can definitely appreciate that. The best you can do is try to share, but you can't force someone else to accept what you are trying to share.

In any case, I am glad to read your post and am happy to know that there are others on this forum who share similar viewpoints.

[red5angel]

Just take it with a grain of salt...


that's right ED, take it with a grain of salt that no one takes your spineless azz with any seriousness on this board cause your too busy acting immature and throwing out challenges and facts you have no intention of backing up.
When you start spouting off crap like:


However, a lot of sparring does not necessarily make one a good fighter, nor does lack of sparring make one a bad fighter either. It all boils back down to the individual, the traininig, the teacher, etc. etc. etc.)

Who's going to take you seriously? If you're not putting your skills to the test how exactly are you supposed to become a good fighter? Sitting around contemplating your navel isn't going to do it. Knowing how to say "I'm comming to that ghetto NYC you call home after the holidays and knocking you the fcuk out right in front of your students" in chinese isn't going to make you a good fighter. Wearing silk pajamas and being a regular patron of the local chinese resteraunt is going to make you a good fighter.

[ntc]

Red:

I presume you were addressing me by calling me "Ed"? In any case, that is not my name, which is not important here. But if you were not addressing me, then ignore this post for it is then irrelevant.

Regarding being taken seriously, respect is earned in many ways, in addition to just fighting. And good students will always be able to recognize good teachers, and for that matter.... we all have the ability to show respect towards something or someone based on our individual standards or what we deem as important to us. And believe me, when I have taught my classes over the years, whether they were in China or here in the US, I am constantly being challenged, both physically and via questions, by my students who are trying to learn. And yes, oftentimes, it is when those questions are being answered accordingly, whether physically or in question, that you earn their respect.

In any case, like I said previously, we all come from different backgrounds especially martial arts training in particular, and I don't really think there is a need for strong language or insults or anything like that. After all, we are ultimately students of the martial arts, all trying to be the best at our respective styles, based on our respective beliefs. This is a forum, which means a sharing of ideas. If one has ideas that another wishes to listen to, great... if not, then turn a deaf ear... no one is forcing any one to believe or buy into... we are all supposed to be sharing.

And as far as fighting is concerned, I have had my fair share of fighting and full-contact tournaments, etc...... with much success. But that is not important here either... my posts were just to share a different point of view of martial arts, one that may be shared by some and bulked at by others. Which is fine with me.

[ntc]

EarthDragon,

By me saying "Take it with a grain of salt", I hope you do not feel I was insulting you or anything like that. English is still only a second language to me, and I may have used that verse incorrectly. What I meant was that if you try to share something with someone else out of the goodness of your heart and it gets thrown back in your face with mud on it, don't take it personally. It just means that the person throwing it back does or not really appreciate what you have to share, or are not willing or ready to share with you. That's all.... thanks for the feedback though.

[red5angel]

ntc, no, I meant ED, earth dragon.



And good students will always be able to recognize good teachers, and for that matter....

this is not true, atleast not right away. Plenty of scam artists suck good intentioned and honest people into their ego driven world. That's ideological. Quite a few good people have no idea what they are getting into when they find these instructors. Since they hae no basis for comparison, they get sucked into believing they are getting some real skill when it turns out they're just joining a cult of personality.

[ntc]

Red:

You make a good point there.... I forget how deceptively convincing some people can be. And definitely, newbies are the most prone because their eagerness to get involved plus the associated adrenaline rush just makes them that much more prone to being deceived. Which is such a shame, cause there is a good chance that these good students could have become some incredible martial artists but may not get that opportunity via the distaste in their mouths that they get from coming across these kinds of instructors. Shame, really.

Thanks for clarifying.

[FngSaiYuk]

ntc, ED = EarthDragon


Originally posted by EarthDragon
NTC, NTC, NTC where have you been?????????
I have been trying to explain this for months to this board! On the northern mantis board this is common knowledge but on here it seems people are so hung up on fighting that they think it is the only apect of kung fu that means anything............ I said in one of my posts that a lot of people take up kung fu to learn how not to fight, and was laughed at by obviously ignorant people that only look in one direction with very narrow eyes.

And as an observer, ED, let me address your statement on you're attempts at communicating to this board pretty much what ntc has stated. ntc's statement is a fairly well structured piece, in that points are communicated without tangential barbs aimed at others.

Your part in the recent squabblings in this forum is a direct result from statements that were either unclear, tangential, disguised or outright attacks against others or completely unrelated. Furthermore, your reactions to the replies containing attacks on your posts led to attacks directed at you - and again, your subsequent reactions to such during an already tense period (considering the impact that the US presidential elections had on the psyche of the american populace and many worldwide).

Now my intent in posting this is not to berate you or anything of the sort. Rather, it's an observation regarding the recent tumultous threads that you've been involved, and the apparent miscomprehension of the posts on these threads that you appear to exhibit with the statement I'm addressing.

[ntc]

Fng:

Thanks for the clarification. Red posted as well to clear my misunderstanding.

Since I have not previously read EarthDragon's past remarks, I can't really add to the comments. But thank you for your feedback as well.

[MonkeySlap Too]

ntc - I've been busy and need to print out your posts for later reading. For someone who English is a second language, I must say you write and structure your language much better than many native speakers. Very impressive.

[ntc]

Monkey:

Thank you for the kind words... much appreciated. I am learning everyday, and much much more still to learn. But this is a good confidence booster, so again..... thanks.

[Becca]

Originally posted by ntc
That approach, is a bit more difficult to adopt in public schools because of the commercialistic responsibilities involved with running a commercial school, but you are likely to find that approach adopted in many privately run schools or at some of the more traditional schools.

Another form of this I have found is "curriculam" material. That is the stuff anyone gets to learn. The meat and potatos, so to speak. But the true essence of the style is in the non-curriculam stuff, and that is very much the sifu's discression as to who gets to learn it. Nor do they make a point of telling you it isn't part of the normal rutine, they tend to slip it to newer students a bit at a time. If you retain it well and show yourself to be practicing it, you may get the next set or a different version of it.

I guess I shouldn't say this, but I kind of look forward to the fall and early winter months, because, for some strange reason, the less serious students tend to skip class more. When this happens alot, my sifu stops training the meat and potatos so he doesn't leave anyone behind, and start slipping as the "good stuff". Just two days ago I was taught a very intence knife defence. By the end of the class we were graduated up to attacking and defending using the real thing, not just wood or rubber training tools. Until that class, I would have never dreamed we would be allowed to use live weapons in a training sequence untill much further along in our training.

This is the type of thing I was trying to get at. If this type of training isn't offered to all, or even most students, then what makes you think it will be in eveidence with a nonfamily person present? We have had non-members come and study with us before. Some have even stuck around for several weeks. But durring those weeks, class structure was very different from the norm. I'd guess about 60% of my in-class sparring was done that week and we did alot of basic drills and generic combos, but none of the stuff I've come to connect with being "Pai Lum".

Originally posted by EarthDragon
I said in one of my posts that a lot of people take up kung fu to learn how not to fight, and was laughed at by obviously ignorant people that only look in one direction with very narrow eyes.

This is the one most important thing I want to hear a sifu say when checking out a new school.

[Becca]

Originally posted by ntc
Fng:

Thanks for the clarification. Red posted as well to clear my misunderstanding.

Since I have not previously read EarthDragon's past remarks, I can't really add to the comments. But thank you for your feedback as well.
Earth Dragon made the cadrinal sin of letting the trolls on this board get to him. His message got lost in the mess that resulted. Those of us who tend to lerk on other boards and forums have seen this many times...:(

[EarthDragon]

Thank you to all who have posted with reguards to help or to help me see more clearly. I have been posting on these boards for a long time, and am always full of insight, help and guidence to those who truly seek it.

I have only ran across 2 or 3 people that constantly enrage me with their remarks. I am at fault for letting them get to me I know and I will work on that, thank you NTC.
I was brought up in a very tough neighborhood......... the lower west side of Buffalo and people didnt spout off at the mouth like they do on here without confrontation so it get's the best of me at times.
People like red5angel who is just a kid can get away with saying anything he wants without having to face any consequences. Thats why he is on so many peoples ignore list and made fun of all the time by others. hell I dont think he has taken the time to learn anything longer than 9 months. he jumps from art to art every year and then says its not good and TCMA doesnt work, but yet tells other people with more training than his age they are no good either. So yes people like this bother and frustrate me. I will try to ignore such trolls in the future and respond only to those who are sincere in thier posts.Thank you for your comments and postitve feedback.

[sandasatan]

When I think of tough places to live, man, places like Detroit, Compton, south bronx.... they all pale in comparison to

the lower west side of Buffalo

:o

[EarthDragon]

postin under a new identity are we now lk?

[ntc]

EarthDragon,

Good thoughts, and good approach as well. I come on this board time to time and read much, much more than I post. I find that there's a lot more testosterone and ego-related comments thrown out than genuine sincere sharing of skills that are to be found. And that is what forums are all about... a sharing of ideas and what-else-you-might-have. There are also a lot of really good posts as well, with a lot of valuable information being shared. Best thing is the fact that the sharing is really worldwide, and not just from the US. And you have people from all walks of life with different backgrounds, which makes it even more interesting.

Forums could definitely become beneficial to one in their training, or can also get to the individual if they let it do so.

Happy posting....

[EarthDragon]

NTC,
I invite you to join our conversations on the northern praying mantis board. Thier are a bunch of very well read and educated martial artisits on that board. we share skills, insight opionons, and advice. It is taken much more serious and moderated to the fullest.
Although it is slower than the main board which is why a lot of people post here, but you have to look at the main board as entertainment and not to be taken seriously. not as many people on here are as devoted to thier studies though you do have some really good threads started here but mostly they get diluted and taken off topic which is a shame when a good topic has been brought up.

[ntc]

EarthDragon:

Thanks for the invite.... I am not on this forum that often.... when I do come on, I will stop by.