What makes a style complete?

[PaiLumDreamer]

On the way home from tonights class, I was content.

Ive thought about this before, and have come to the same conclusion before...but when I learn new things, it happens all over again.

I feel like the most lucky person alive to have found this school/style.

Mainly since the reason I had found out about it was just by chance...I knew next to 0 when I walked into the doors, and basically joined up without having any idea what to expect. Just imagine if I had walked into some low-grade-mc-dojo... :eek:

Anyway, onto the the question: What makes a style complete? What must a style have to make it a complete system of MA?

What are the basics it must have?

What are the extras?

How many forms? (No forms?)

Philosophy?

etc

Basically...why are you sticking with what you have? I know that "no style is the best", but what keeps you loving the particular style you've chosen?

[Mikkyou]

To me this is what makes a style compelete
1.striking
2.jointlocking
3.groundwork
4.blocking and evading
5.weapons both classical and modern as well as disarming
6.throws and breakfalling
7.dealing with realistic application and scenerio
8.being able to use enviroment
9.using misc. ways of selfdefense(spitting,hair pulling,using a crunch,etc)
10.chokes and escape
11.dealing with psychology(itimation factors,verbal conflicts,dealing with crisis)
12.knowing how to apply first aid or healing factors

[truewrestler]

I pretty much agree with Mikkyou but would remove "classical weapons" from the list and add "chi-blast".

[David Jamieson]

no such thing as a "complete" style when thought of in the context of the widest arrangement of possible scenarios. imo.

You can have robust styles that cover a lot of material, but the more material there is, the less likely you are to really grasp it all in it's entirety.

Better to do the best you can with what you have. That is more of a sense of complete in context to the self.

[ZIM]

I've actually gotta agree with KL/DJ here. I think the actual key is how robust the style is.

Xing yi doesn't strike one as 'complete', especially in the five fists stage. But it does such thorough and adaptable training that it is.

OTOH, I've met stylists from arts that have upwards of 30 forms and 1000's of techniques that suck muchly.

Which is weird. The 'big art' stylists know an awful lot more intellectually, but the 'small art' stylists have their arts so ingrained into their body structure that it just plain works. Different definitions of 'complete', maybe.

[red5angel]

I go back and forth on this. You can make a ton of lists laying out what you think makes a complete martial art, but tha's never really satisfied me. Ultimately I think you can offer some pretty well rounded training and creat a fairly effective fighter. Of ocurse "Effective" is subjective.

Part of the problem I have with a lot of the so called reality schools is that they tend to try to realize the dream of a complete style, by mish mashing tons of crap into their training. Unfortunately I think it usually lacks some cohesiveness, something I think is important, and generally they are trying to cram so much into you that you get what kung lek pointed out, too much information and not enough time to really effectively soak it up.

[red5angel]

I feel similar to pailum dream about my art as he does. I feel pretty lucky to have found capoeira and be able to attend a class in my area. I don't think it's "complete" but it touches on alot more then most of the other arts I"ve studied.

[ZIM]

I feel similar to pailum dream about my art as he does. I feel pretty lucky to have found capoeira and be able to attend a class in my area. I don't think it's "complete" but it touches on alot more then most of the other arts I"ve studied.
Maybe it never was a question of how complete the art was at all, but really how complete you beleive you are as a fighter...? Eh. Maybe not...

[red5angel]

Maybe it never was a question of how complete the art was at all, but really how complete you beleive you are as a fighter...? Eh. Maybe not...


personally it was just finding the right sort of challenge, but you throw out a good question. How do you define a complete art as it compares to the artist that practices it? What if he/she is a natural talent and tough as nails? Is "completeness" subjective?

[SPJ]

Agreed. The answer is you.

You make your style complete.

In the old time, there is a quest for a complete or single move to defeat all. So not a style but a move.

If you are a boxer with a good left uppercut, everything else is entry or foreplay before you may use your strong left uppercut.

Some examples from the old time;

Guo Yun Shen half step Beng Quan in Xing Yi.

Single exchange palm in Ba Gua Zhang.

Yang Lu Chan or Yang Wu Di "Ban Lan Zui" in Tai Chi.

Tactics and strategy count for 99% of the time. 1% is your Kung Fu.

You may have few moves but they solve most of your fighting problems. And that may be enough. The rest is mastering them skillwise and commanding your tactic and strategy for them.

In all styles, the answers are usually in the beginner sets of forms.

Such as Little idea in Wing Chun.

Xiao Hong Quan in Shaolin.

Beng Bu in 7 star Mantis.

5 fists in Xing Yi.

5 palms in Tong Bei.

on and on.

:D

[ZIM]

Good post, SPJ

[Merryprankster]

A complete art includes:

Fighting standing up

Fighting on the ground

This would include both grappling and striking.

That's about it.


Whether or not the art addresses them WELL, is a separate issue :D

Judo technically has striking - but do you really want to learn punches and kicks from anybody who spends most of their time learning how to throw?

[johnv]

I think there are two different things here: 1) what makes a complete style and 2) what things/styles make you feel complete.

For #1, a style can be complete all on its own, independent of any person. But that doesn't mean it will feel "complete" to you, as that is based on your needs and desires. By the definition of "complete", I would say that for a style to be complete, it has to not be missing anything - i.e., any martial art concept, training method, theory, etc. that exists in another style is represented in that one somewhere. Maybe not to the same extent or depth, but it is there somewhere. I'm not referring to every individual technique or strike here, but at one level higher. I'm not including all *possibilities* here, just what actually exists in other styles. So if another kung fu style has a concept that yours doesn't, then I would say that your style is not complete (not that that's bad). Does this mean then that NO style is complete? Well, I don't know.

For #2, complete would mean that your style has everything that you want out of it, even if the style itself is not "complete" according to #1.

That's my take on it, anyway. To check #1, I think we'd have to make a list off all concepts, training methods, etc. that are in everyone's styles and see if any style has all of them or not.

[ZIM]

A complete art includes:

Fighting standing up

Fighting on the ground

This would include both grappling and striking.

That's about it.

Shee-ya, right... you don't even have fighting underground or fighting underwater...frickin' troll... :rolleyes: :)

[Dark Knight]

What works for one person may not work for another.

Whats your definition of complete, should guns be added to be complete?

[Reggie1]

My opinion on this is similar to MP's.

It should address the following.

Striking, both hands and feet, with strategies for the different ranges (from outside kicking range to clinch range).
Stand-up grappling, including takedowns and throws and defending against them.
Groundfighting.

I don't think any one art can be completely proficient at all of these. I think each art 'specializes' in one of the above, maybe even two. But IMO it's not complete if it doesn't at least address all of these.

To me it can still be complete even if it is lacking in one area because a fighter in a certain art should be trying to force somebody else to do battle in their preferred range. For example, I'm a 7* mantis guy. We work predominantly on striking and standing throws. But we also do some work on the standing clinch, and have recently incorporated some groundwork into the mix.

Am I going to be an excellent groundfighter? No, but if I fight a BJJ stylist my goal is going to be to stuff his takedowns as much as possible, and when taken down search for an opening to get back on my feet.

[PaiLumDreamer]

Good replies from both viewpoints (technique/skill wise and more user-oriented.)

Its true that you have to enjoy and like what your style teaches for it to be complete, but how about this?

What about the trinity of body/spirit/mind?

How significant of a role is that in todays MA practice?

[PaiLumDreamer]

For me a martial art must have all three. Just working the body (and mind, since it taxes my brain just as much) will still leave me lacking a more spiritual side to life.

I personally believe we must have all three to be truly "healthy". Spirituality comes in a lot of different forms, since I will try to keep it nondemoninational.

A martial art is a way of life, right? It sure is a big part of all of ours, or why else would we spend time on an internet forum talking about this :D ?

So as a way of life (personally) I need all three, and my style has that.

One of my instructors recently said after class (we like to stay and talk sometimes) that once you start doing Kung Fu, its almost unavoidable to become more spiritual. You start looking deeper into things, etc.

Having these three makes my style complete, not to mention the fact it has a plethora of martial information. :D.


P.S.
I know that my idea of this wont fit for everyone, so when I say something needs something or that something is something, im just basing it off of personal experience.

[johnv]

I find it interesting that a lot of people's replies seem to make the assumption that "complete" refers only to concepts of fighting. I think all of those are valid, but for a martial art to be complete, I think it needs to address both the fighting and healing aspects. They are yin and yang to one another, and each is incomplete without the other. Not useless, but incomplete. Maybe this goes along with idea of mind/body/spirit...

[Merryprankster]

What about the trinity of body/spirit/mind?

It is impossible to attain the highest level of abilities in any art without this trinity, whether western or eastern.

The problem is that so many people turn this trinity into esoteric bull****.

[David Jamieson]

One could also question whether or not "spirit" even exists.

[PangQuan]

I compliment the style that I study. My style compliments me.

This is what makes my style "complete", to others this style will not be so. Such as for me other styles will not have the same feel.

[Face2Fist]

a complete style consist of :

striking, wrestling, grappling, conditioning, strengthing and reaction

[Yum Cha]

SPJ -
well said.

Completeness - get out your checklist and start checking it off? Reminds me of so many "single" 45 year old princesses I've known... keep chasing those ticks for the rest of your life, always looking for the better, more "complete" list and be ready for disappointment and unfulfilled expectations.

Strategy trumps technique. Strength/Fitness trumps technique. Intent trumps technique. Should this discussion of completeness focus on technique?

The completion comes from within. From the knowledge and use of what you have learned, not from the lessons themselves. And you could even add that any illusion of completion is by definition the lack thereof if you believe it is the journey, not the destination.

The story of the one single perfect technique is the best illustration yet. Perfection for one moment in space and time. Or perhaps simplified to, depth as opposed to breadth?

[Piercing Light]

Thanks for the re-direction and yes it was on almost the same topic.
But the questions that I have are still left unanswered.
I guess I am being a little more specific in asking are there CMA with grappling in it... (as I am ignorant of all the CMA out there).
Your last post about the 45yo Princess was funny but distracting from the point by casting a shadow and shows that we should stick with what we know and seek no further. For example advancements in science etc. would stand still.
I see Kung Fu more like a science, art and practice rather than the 45 yo princess analogy.
Agree in spirit with everything else you said though. But again you'd end up with only one technique and depending on the situation your trump card metaphor might not work.

On a personal level, I went through several martial arts before I found something that suited me and with the kinds of things which resonant with me. How about you?
If this is true for you then seeking answers is human nature and of a higher philosophical level that underlies the force of the human condition.

Thanks for the welcome Yum Cha, much appreciated.


http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36512

Any anwers to the original post would still be greatly appreciated.

Piercing Light

[SPJ]

Looking for a complete or perfect fighting system that would defeat all.

This same question has been asked for thousands of years. It is not new at all.

There are some fundamental considerations.

1. It does not exist. There is a famous story. In the old time, there was a merchant that sells the best spear and shield. He said that his spear will penetrate everything and his shield will shield against everything. The customer then asked that how about using your all penetrating spear against your impenetrable shield. This is called Mao Dun 矛盾. Similarly, if you say that your move is the best, but what if the opponent uses your move against you. So for every poison designed, there is antidote cooked up, too. In the old time, if you design a move, you also design a countermove in pairs. That is why.

2. The simple one will defeat the complex one. This is inherent in machine and any warmachine. If you have few mechanical parts, there will be few breakdowns. If you want to build an airplane that can fly fast such as a fighter, and you also want to build a bomber that would carry a lot of bombs as a bomber, you know that you have to compromise the speed vs the weight or load. If you build something in the middle, it will be a slower fighter and a light bomber. The same ideas; if a technique is simple and more focused, it may be more effective in fight. A complex one may need more requirements to work. It will be easier to counter, too. You only have to remove one of many requirements. The complex technique will not work.

3. There is more than one countermove to any move. In Nature, there is always one thing to subdue the other. The bugs eat grass. The frogs eat bugs. The snakes eat frogs. The owls eat snakes. on and on. The fire burns the metal. The metal axes the wood. The water puts out the fire. The earth may bury the water. etc.

4. The rule of changes. From 26 alphabets, we derive more than 10,000 words. From 0 and 1, we have many digital files of texts, images and audio files. Even if you have only a few MA moves, you may change with them into so many sequences and combos.

There are more.

So when you are looking for a system that would defeat everything, remember at least the 4 factors above.

:D

[Yum Cha]

People often try one art than another as they become martial artists, looking for the "the one" that really floats their boat. And, the final choice is different for everyone.

Perhaps completeness is simply that, what completes your experience with MA and enables you to commit your energies to a thorough study? The missing pieces for our individual puzzles.

I don't think Traditional arts are commodities. A half bag, a full bag, a bag and a half or whatever, I think they are much more sophisticated than that. People have mentioned mind, body, spirit; medicine; meditations; strategy; and likewise, technique sets, like groundfighting, striking, submission, or even kicking, punching, pressure point strikes, chi gung blasting, lightness, iron crotch (goes with Iron Palm for you wankers), etc...

As the story goes, the old boys at the shaolin temple had to break it up into "styles" because no one monk could learn it all in a lifetime. Has much changed? Oh yea, we don't nearly have as much time for training as those old pros did....

[Vasquez]

A complete style has lots of forms, traditions, conditioning, life teachings and other secrets and takes many years to master. Dim mak would be the prize at mastery level which would only be taught to the inheretors of the style.

[Mikkyou]

What I posted is a complete list of what every martial art should know.
Its great a person thinks there art is complete because they can kick,punch,and grapple.What makes an art complete is it's ability to cover all areas of defese from slipping and going into a breakfall,or someone throwing you onto a car. A martial artist should know how to roll to avoid and deal with situations where your opponent pushes you down a flight of stairs.A martial artist should be able to use anything as a weapon be it a modern,improvised,or classical.A martial artist should be able to bite,spit,pull hair tear the ear lobe and use any body part to defend.A martial artist should have some sort of groundgame wither it be just to throw him off the mount and get back up or to go for a submission this is important when dealing with the crazed out crack head who does not know what resistance or tapping means.I think all martial arts should be familar applying their joinlocks and throws against a partner who resist,counters with strikes,and counters the lock or throw thru other means.I think a martial art should have some idea of scenerio training with uses of verbal assult,thrown against a wall in restraint and so on.I know you can not cover every scenerio however having a basic fundamental of how ugly one can be it gives the student the reality of the art and it applications.So what really makes an art compelete is how you train in it applying what would really work if someone resisted or striked,and finding the holes in your art.

[Vasquez]

what about tradition, way of life and calmness within self?

[Mikkyou]

what about tradition, way of life and calmness within self? If you want to go into an confrontation he throws a punch and you quote"my art is over 4ooyrs old"great.I think of tradition as something not necessary for a complete style of self defense and fighting.Tradition learning is something you do as a hobby or interest.If you want something to calm yourself down try mediation
or some other form of biofeed back this again has to do with your interest and self development where having a style be able to protect you regardless of the sitution.Based on my experience in fighting(which is not to much)I never had the chance to close my eyes and relax myself Usually everything I did was without thinking meaning he threw a punch I blocked he threw another one I moved kicked his knee striked his jaw applied a jointlock till helped arrived.

[Vasquez]

I might have lost you in a level of proficiency that most ppl don't get to. TCMA teaches you to evade and yield so that your opponent falls into empty space. You then wait for the precise moment to strike.

A little philosophy of ying and yang will help. Soft counters hard. If they are all tense up you relax and meditate.

[Mr Punch]

In terms of combat effectiveness there are no complete arts.

In terms of giving you what you need to complement your life, goals and lifestyle, anything you do earnestly can help you with that completeness. I don't see that as esoteric bull****, in fact a very practical way of acting (being or doing if you prefer).

In terms of Dark Knight's suggestion of including the gun, you chump, you're completely ignoring Zim's post before... if you include guns, you gotta include harpoons and poisonous sea-urchins.

[Merryprankster]

I might have lost you in a level of proficiency that most ppl don't get to.


*******WARNING********

Snotty, TCMA, megacondescending obnoxiousness alert!

[Gangsterfist]

Before you think this is dogmatic in any way, please read the whole post.

"Complete systems" (should say complete practitioners) cover these things:

1. Space and energy
2. Motion
3. All ranges of combat
4. weapons (weapons infact improve your open hand, you gain attributes from them)
5. Effeciency, direct to the point combat


So basically, I am saying that you need to occupy the space you are best at, whatever your style says. If you are a long range fighter you need to learn to keep your space. If you are a grappler you must learn to close the gap and not get knocked out in the process. You must also study how to control motions and apply energy of whatever it is you study. Learn all the different ranges of combat, and how they work. I don't train in any ground fighting style, but I took a weekend long seminar last week on total ground fighting. I learned a lot, and it definately took my ground game to the next level. Now we have incorporated ground fighting drills in our normal training. Weapons training gives you attributes in several ways. It gives you distance closing and timing attributes, and it also improves your open hand techniques, and in some cases foot work. In fighting fitness is the number one factor. In the MA world you have things like technique, but if you cannot last that long in a fight then your window of opportunity to win is very short. I have done continous sparring where one person in class gets up, then every other person in class (including the instructor) fights you one at a time for one minute each. You don't get any breaks or anything. Right when they say next, the next person is jumping in on you while the person you were fighting leaves. I can tell you right now this is very tiring. Train how to execute what you know effeciently with bigger pay off with less effort. This can be done with lots of different styles. Kind of follows the time/space/energy theory. I have seen guys that when doing this sparring drill go all muscle out, and can barely last past the 3rd person.

Also, I think there should be progression of all this stuff from begining to advanced. Training should be progressive and the practitioner should gain in skill as they train more and more. You will obviously platoue at one point, but the progression should still be there.

These are things that IMO, can be found in numerous systems.

[Vasquez]

Modern arts which focus on kicking, punching and grappling will platue to a point but traditional arts will give you a life time of learning.

[Merryprankster]

Modern arts which focus on kicking, punching and grappling will platue to a point but traditional arts will give you a life time of learning.


*******WARNING********

Snotty, TCMA, megacondescending obnoxiousness alert!

[Vasquez]

LOL at that.

[Christopher M]

The plebeians can never understand. They dirty their hands with brute wrestling and sully their minds with physical labor. They sweat and struggle with one another like pigs. It is best not to even deign them with our wisdom. Truly: pearls before swine.

I'm sorry but it's true.

[red5angel]

In terms of combat effectiveness there are no complete arts.

In terms of giving you what you need to complement your life, goals and lifestyle, anything you do earnestly can help you with that completeness. I don't see that as esoteric bull****, in fact a very practical way of acting (being or doing if you prefer).

In terms of Dark Knight's suggestion of including the gun, you chump, you're completely ignoring Zim's post before... if you include guns, you gotta include harpoons and poisonous sea-urchins.




right........

[red5angel]

Modern arts which focus on kicking, punching and grappling will platue to a point but traditional arts will give you a life time of learning.


Ah someone else who is new to the martial arts.....

[SevenStar]

I haven't read this thread yet, so this may have been said, but completeness is in the eye of the beholder. IMO:

in depth stand up work
in depth ground work
possibly some stick and knife training

That's it.

I don't care about classical weapons anymore. I don't care about forms. Knowing how to wield a broadsword is great, but does not make me any more complete of a fighter, nor does knowing 97139720841 forms. Notice that I stated in depth knowledge. In my definition, this is key. A style that "has grappling in its forms" but you really do know in depth grappling training is deficient, IMO. a style that has grappling but lacks in sttiking is also deficient.

philosophy and spirituality, IMO should not be part of MA training either - I have books and church for those things. My martial training should be just that.

[SevenStar]

Modern arts which focus on kicking, punching and grappling will platue to a point but traditional arts will give you a life time of learning.


you're kidding....right?

[MasterKiller]

philosophy and spirituality, IMO should not be part of MA training either - I have books and church for those things. My martial training should be just that.
Books and church are good for learning, but application of principle requires physical action, especially in a ch'an/zen model. It doesn't have to be martial, but it can be if that's the path you choose.

[SevenStar]

I might have lost you in a level of proficiency that most ppl don't get to. TCMA teaches you to evade and yield so that your opponent falls into empty space. You then wait for the precise moment to strike.

A little philosophy of ying and yang will help. Soft counters hard. If they are all tense up you relax and meditate.


that's funny, muay thai, bjj and judo teach the exact same thing...

[SevenStar]

Books and church are good for learning, but application of principle requires physical action, especially in a ch'an/zen model. It doesn't have to be martial, but it can be if that's the path you choose.


I can't disagree with that. it's not a necessity for martial traning, however.

[ZIM]

Books and church are good for learning, but application of principle requires physical action, especially in a ch'an/zen model. It doesn't have to be martial, but it can be if that's the path you choose.YEAH--- Convert or die!!!
:D

[SevenStar]

what about tradition, way of life and calmness within self?


I'm about to sound the chi hippy alarm.

[SevenStar]

What I posted is a complete list of what every martial art should know.
Its great a person thinks there art is complete because they can kick,punch,and grapple.What makes an art complete is it's ability to cover all areas of defese from slipping and going into a breakfall,or someone throwing you onto a car. A martial artist should know how to roll to avoid and deal with situations where your opponent pushes you down a flight of stairs.A martial artist should be able to use anything as a weapon be it a modern,improvised,or classical.A martial artist should be able to bite,spit,pull hair tear the ear lobe and use any body part to defend.A martial artist should have some sort of groundgame wither it be just to throw him off the mount and get back up or to go for a submission this is important when dealing with the crazed out crack head who does not know what resistance or tapping means.I think all martial arts should be familar applying their joinlocks and throws against a partner who resist,counters with strikes,and counters the lock or throw thru other means.I think a martial art should have some idea of scenerio training with uses of verbal assult,thrown against a wall in restraint and so on.I know you can not cover every scenerio however having a basic fundamental of how ugly one can be it gives the student the reality of the art and it applications.So what really makes an art compelete is how you train in it applying what would really work if someone resisted or striked,and finding the holes in your art.

I dunno.... this is where theoretical applications are introduced. Sticking with the example above, you may be training with an instructor who has never been thrown in front of a car. If this is true, how can he teach you how to safely get out of the way? How can he relay the experience of being thrown in front of one? The same goes for striking and grappling. If I want to fight in the ring, I would not train under someone who has never stepped foot in one. Why? because he's not as equipped to teach me the complexities and nuances of being in a ring, as he's never been in one. His teacher may have been, or he may have studied many fighters, so ThEORETICALLY, he knows, but IMO, that's not good enough.

[Vasquez]

Fighters in the ring tend to be good atheletes but they lack spiritual content. I've even been to Thailand to learn the Ram Muay. The biggest difference is fighting with gloves and you can't do DM from TCMA. Ring fights tend to be tough man con test rather than skill.

[BibitClerus]

i disagree
how can you say they lack spiritual content?
you dont even know them dude

and while youre at it, explain to us what is this you call "spiritual content"

[BibitClerus]

good lyrics for you specially Vasquez:

once upon a time at the foot of a great mountain,
there was a town where the people known as happy folk lived.
their very existance a mystery to the rest of the world.
obscured, as it was, by great clouds.
here they played out their peaceful lives,
innocent of the litany of excessive violence that was growing in the world below.
to live in harmony with the spirit of the mountain called monkey was enough.
then one day, strange folk arrived in the town.
they came in camoflauge, hidden behind dark glasses, but no one noticed them.
they only saw shadows. you see, without the trick to the eyes
the happy folk were blind...

falling out of airplanes and hiding out in holes
waiting for the sunset to come, people going home
jump out from behind them and shoot them in the head
now everybody dancing, the dance of the dead
the dance of the dead. teh dance of the dead...

in time, the strange folk found their way into the higher reaches of the mountain,
and it was there that they found the caves of unimaginable sincerity and beauty.
by chance, they stumbled upon the place where all good souls come to rest.
the strange folk, they coveted the jewels in these caves above all things,
and soon they began to mine the mountain,
it's rich singing fueling the chaos of their own world.

meanwhile, down in in the town, the happy folk slept restlessly.
their dreams invaded by shadowy figures digging away at their souls.
every day, people would wake and stare at the mountain.
why was it bringing darkness into their lives?

and as the strange folk mined deeper and deeper into the mountain,
holes began to appear,
bringing with them a cold and bitter wind that chilled the very soul of the monkey.
for the first time, the happy folk felt fearful,
for they knew that soon the monkey would stir from it's deep sleep.
then there came a sound, distant first, that grew into gastrophryne so immense
that it could be heard far away in space
there were no screams, there was no time. the mountain called monkey had spoken.
there was only fire, and then,
nothing...

oh little town of USA, the time has come to see
there's nothing you believe you want
but where were you when it all came down on me?
did you call me out?

[Vasquez]

i disagree
how can you say they lack spiritual content?
you dont even know them dude

and while youre at it, explain to us what is this you call "spiritual content"

They don't have a broader philosphy to what they do, like the ying yang and the book of changes. all they try to do is try to punch harder and faster. pleasssse you make me laugh.

[Mikkyou]

you may be training with an instructor who has never been thrown in front of a car. If this is true, how can he teach you how to safely get out of the way?Doesn't matter if you been thrown in front of a car or down a flight a stairs Ukemi(rolling,leaping,leap rolling,break faling,flips)is Ukemi no matter what
happens if you have correct Ukemi,Timing,Distancing,Taisabaki(body movement)than your body automatically adapts to it.Example given I never practiced diving over a 4ft hedge onto concrete before but since I have good enough Ukemi
I was able to.I once slipped backwards on a wet floor I don't practice slipping on wet floors however since I have good Ukemi I went with it and rolled safely.The same goes with Muto dori(taking away weapons)I never have taken an Ax from someone but the same ideas behind Mutodori would apply as if taking a Sword or Spear or Knife and so on.
If I want to fight in the ring, I would not train under someone who has never stepped foot in one. Why? because he's not as equipped to teach me the complexities and nuances of being in a ring, as he's never been in one. His teacher may have been, or he may have studied many fighters, so ThEORETICALLY, he knows, but IMO, that's not good enough. When YOUR RING decides to allow people to use weapons,spiting,hair pulling,biting eye gouges and so on then perhaps we can discuss your style being compelete but if You are not training with someone using a weapon on you at full force than how you be sure you can defend against it.One day I decided to be sneaky with my training partner I hid a wooden knife in my back pocket He went in for the shoot I reached in my back pocket pulled out the knife let him take me down into the mount and as soon as he did i stuck the knife into his chest do you train like this in YOUR RING?

[Merryprankster]

Fighters in the ring tend to be good atheletes but they lack spiritual content. I've even been to Thailand to learn the Ram Muay. The biggest difference is fighting with gloves and you can't do DM from TCMA. Ring fights tend to be tough man con test rather than skill.

*******WARNING********

Snotty, TCMA, megacondescending obnoxiousness alert!


When YOUR RING decides to allow people to use weapons,spiting,hair pulling,biting eye gouges and so on then perhaps we can discuss your style being compelete but if You are not training with someone using a weapon on you at full force than how you be sure you can defend against it.One day I decided to be sneaky with my training partner I hid a wooden knife in my back pocket He went in for the shoot I reached in my back pocket pulled out the knife let him take me down into the mount and as soon as he did i stuck the knife into his chest do you train like this in YOUR RING?

Ah. Well when YOUR SCHOOL allows sharpened, live blades, trains on asphalt or in a crowded bar, and executes all of these things FULL FORCE, with NO REGARD for personal safety, then perhaps we can discuss what you do as being complete, real training.

Until then, you're just playing a game. See how easy that was?

WE ALL HAVE RULES people!!!! By its nature all training for physical combat is a simulation.

[Mikkyou]

I have seen schools use real blades in actual Mutodori situation(sometimes they get cut trying to disarm)I see no point using an actual live blade to train with
since a wooden one gives the same realistic applications(you can get the idea of getting cut and stabbed but live to train)We train on Asphalt sometimes again we like to try diffrerent types of floors unlike some people who roll on a nice comfortable mat(do you practice your break falls and groundwork on concrete?)
As for the bar kinda of difficult to train there however we can use the same close quarters that a bar provides.Now does your class offer grappling on concrete,
does it allow you to even work with weapons? does it allow you to work with throwing things at each other? What if I push you down a flight of stairs can you roll correctly to avoid injury?If I push you over broken glass can you leap roll over it?It's great you have experience in a controled ring enviroment with none of these varibles and tons of rules with a referee but you know what your playing in a sport period.

[David Jamieson]

um, to blanket out mma-ists as being non-spiritual is slightly myopic.

what are you studying? religion or martial arts? yin and yang are principles/concepts that apply to everyone whether we call it that or not, some people say positive/negative, weight/no-weight and so on.

I train both traditional martial arts including Ch'an, qigong, forms and augmentation as well as mma which is definitive application of the martial skills and the honing of them to fit into the actual practice of combat both sportive and pseudo-realistically.

in short, spirituality is not found in a martial art practice, it is within you if that is what you want to pursue. It is not something that will come to you because you practice one martial practice over another.

I used to go to martial arts classes for years and years to learn the martial art. If I want to learn philosphy then I'll learn philosophy. It is for the most part, NOT part and parcel to training in a traditional martial art and in my opinion it is a mistake to think so.

Yes, there is guiding principles that can map over to everyday life, but that can be said of anything.

anyway...my two cents fwiw

[ZIM]

As for the bar kinda of difficult to train there however we can use the same close quarters that a bar provides..
That's actually kinda interesting. Didn't Count Dante do this? IIRC, he had bars set up in his dojo, the students drinking & smoking, then all hell would break out....

...as far as the 'spirituality of MAs' goes, the funniest thing about that angle is how many MAs get it wrong anyway. ;)

[Reggie1]

since a wooden one gives the same realistic applications(you can get the idea of getting cut and stabbed but live to train)

IMO a wooden weapon isn't balanced or weighted at all like a live steel one. Plus, in order to be TRULY realistic, instead of 'getting the idea' of being stabbed, in order to be completely realistic you should actually get stabbed and try and fight through the pain.

Of course, nobody wants to do that.

I think you missed MP's point. EVERYBODY trains w/ certain rules. MMA guys train only hand-to-hand. Some arts train w/ wooden weapons or padded weapons instead of live blades.

IMO an art doesn't need weapons to be complete. 99.9% of people in this day and age do not have the time available to them to become proficent at both weapons and hand-to-hand. People 400 years ago did.

[Mikkyou]

IMO a wooden weapon isn't balanced or weighted at all like a live steel one. Plus, in order to be TRULY realistic, instead of 'getting the idea' of being stabbed, in order to be completely realistic you should actually get stabbed and try and fight through the pain. I picked up a knife and a wooden knife
same balance same weight same shape.I would say this a knife is a knife the same defense you use against a wooden one a plastic one a butter knife or a blade with an edge is the same(we are training principles,concepts)If we actually
stabbed each other bled then its not training is it?!Then it becomes attempted murder.
EVERYBODY trains w/ certain rules. MMA guys train only hand-to-hand. Some arts train w/ wooden weapons or padded weapons instead of live blades. Ok but the rules of no eye gouging,no hair pulling,no biting,no using small joint manipluation,no elbows to the head no spitting,no pulling the ears leaving so many varibles out this is not hand to hand this is sporting with rules to win same as soccer.see your confusing rules with realstic training.
RULES=An agreement between 2 or more parties on what each party can and can not do.REALSTIC TRAINING=An enviroment set to simulate actual combat where anything is allowed in place but certain things are substitued to mimic similar effects.FIGHTING=A confortantion betwen 2 or more parties where anything is allowed and there are no subsitutions of any sort.Now MMA uses Rules
I used the defination of Realstic training.Those who engage in street fights are fighting see the difference?
IMO an art doesn't need weapons to be complete. 99.9% of people in this day and age do not have the time available to them to become proficent at both weapons and hand-to-hand. A person should have a basic understanding oh how to use a stick to defend himself and a person should have a basic understanding on how to deal with someone with a beer bottle about to be broken over his head these are weapons and if you only train hand to hand well guess what the person who knows how to use the weapon is going to have the upper hand nuff said.

[KC Elbows]

Here's a helpful list that may clear up what makes a style complete for its practitioner:

1) If your training goal is to feel pleasant on a semi permanent basis, using your pleasantness as a weapon against those who don't conform to universal bliss, then the path you should take would require pot, pajamas, lots of soft touching, and Enya in order to be seen as complete. This path would also require weapons be used in a non-dangerous manner.

2) If your training goal is to come dangerously close to training in a way that might involve you getting hit by somebody, you have two options:

a) Join a school that does more push ups than other schools. Combined with their weekly forms, your feeling of smug superiority will be unbeatable!

b) Join a school that uses rash guards. Remember, if a school uses rash guards, it's owner is by default good! But don't think that rash guards are all you need. What pot, belly dancer pants, and 60's pop culture are to the tai chi hippy, a shaven head, the right brand pads, and a rash guard are to you. And don't be caught citing last years winner, because even your "Pain" tatoo won't impress anyone if you're screaming "armbar" in the year of the stomp.

Either of these options could be deemed complete.

Finally,

3) If your goal is to learn how to honestly use this stuff,

-find the best people that teach each of the skill sets you need to know, and don't settle on learning "everything this guy has" when you just want to know his specialty.
-prioritize what you specialize in based on your skill and build
-practice it realistically
-Stay off the forums and don't do drugs.

[Vasquez]

Your hands and feet should become weapons - iron palm etc and your body whould be a shield against attacks. this you learn through hard chi kung. soft chi kung lets you project your intent which will deter attackers.

ppl who learn mma tend to be worried about this and that -it just goes to show little knowledge is dangerous.

[Christopher M]

Nothing? ****... was it a little over the top?

[ZIM]

ppl who learn mma tend to be worried about this and that -it just goes to show little knowledge is dangerous.
We are here to protect you
Pushing will protect you
Pushing will protect you
From the terrible secret of space

That is incorrect
Shoving will protect you
Shoving will protect you
From the terrible secret of space

Do not trust the shover robot
Pushing is the answer
We are here to protect you

Do not trust the pusher robot
He is malfunctioning
We are here to protect you

[Anthony]

In the past, a martial art style wasn't complete if you didn't know how to ride horseback, if you couldn't ride horseback while shooting a bow and arrow, if you couldn't build shelter for yourself and hunt food in the middle of nowhere if you were lost, and many other things not related to actual fighting. All traditional martilal arts studied today are incomplete because traditionally, they included learning such things. Times change of course, which is why today martial artists carry machine guns and wear bullet proof armor.

[Vasquez]

We are here to protect you
Pushing will protect you
Pushing will protect you
From the terrible secret of space

That is incorrect
Shoving will protect you
Shoving will protect you
From the terrible secret of space

Do not trust the shover robot
Pushing is the answer
We are here to protect you

Do not trust the pusher robot
He is malfunctioning
We are here to protect you

That is totally against TCMA philosophy. We learn to yield and apply precise chin na. there's no need to push because whn you yield your attacker will fall into empty space.

[Face2Fist]

anyone saw the figth between kid yamamoto and the shaolin guy in the recent K 1 mma event?

no kung fu was used, the shaolin guy was choked out!!!

so much for chi power and mystical strikes

[ZIM]

That is totally against TCMA philosophy. We learn to yield and apply precise chin na. there's no need to push because whn you yield your attacker will fall into empty space.
Ha! Cheers. :)

[johnv]

In the past, a martial art style wasn't complete if you didn't know how to ride horseback, if you couldn't ride horseback while shooting a bow and arrow, if you couldn't build shelter for yourself and hunt food in the middle of nowhere if you were lost, and many other things not related to actual fighting. All traditional martilal arts studied today are incomplete because traditionally, they included learning such things. Times change of course, which is why today martial artists carry machine guns and wear bullet proof armor.

That was the point I was trying to make earlier....nothing out there today is "complete", at least as far as we know. What most people are discussing on this thread is what is "necessary", and restricted to fighting skills only. Completeness is a superset of necessity, and fighting is a subset of what many styles have to offer. An extremely important part, but not everything.

[PangQuan]

anyone saw the figth between kid yamamoto and the shaolin guy in the recent K 1 mma event?

no kung fu was used, the shaolin guy was choked out!!!

so much for chi power and mystical strikes


was this an actual shaolin warrior, if so what generation and what name? if not then BAHH!!

[SevenStar]

Fighters in the ring tend to be good atheletes but they lack spiritual content. I've even been to Thailand to learn the Ram Muay. The biggest difference is fighting with gloves and you can't do DM from TCMA. Ring fights tend to be tough man con test rather than skill.


Dim mak?? tell me you're trolling... please...tell me...

[SevenStar]

They don't have a broader philosphy to what they do, like the ying yang and the book of changes. all they try to do is try to punch harder and faster. pleasssse you make me laugh.


That does it




chi hippy alert!!!!!!!!

[SevenStar]

Doesn't matter if you been thrown in front of a car or down a flight a stairs Ukemi(rolling,leaping,leap rolling,break faling,flips)is Ukemi no matter what
happens if you have correct Ukemi,Timing,Distancing,Taisabaki(body movement)than your body automatically adapts to it.Example given I never practiced diving over a 4ft hedge onto concrete before but since I have good enough Ukemi
I was able to.I once slipped backwards on a wet floor I don't practice slipping on wet floors however since I have good Ukemi I went with it and rolled safely.

you are correct - ukemi IS ukemi. Here's the rub - your situation. go to the middle of the floor - jump and safely roll. Now, go play in the middle of the expressway and unexpectedly get caught in the path of a speeding semi. roll out of the way.

Which was harder? Why? Once you answer that question, you will understand what I was talking about.




The same goes with Muto dori(taking away weapons)I never have taken an Ax from someone but the same ideas behind Mutodori would apply as if taking a Sword or Spear or Knife and so on. When YOUR RING decides to allow people to use weapons,spiting,hair pulling,biting eye gouges and so on then perhaps we can discuss your style being compelete but if You are not training with someone using a weapon on you at full force than how you be sure you can defend against it.One day I decided to be sneaky with my training partner I hid a wooden knife in my back pocket He went in for the shoot I reached in my back pocket pulled out the knife let him take me down into the mount and as soon as he did i stuck the knife into his chest do you train like this in YOUR RING?


See above. As far as MY RING, was the knife real? no? guess what just played a game. your training is no more "real" than a sport fighter's. I've done drills with live machettes, but they are just that - drills - we knew what the other was going to do - it was a game. until YOUR KWOON decides to allow people to use weapons,spiting,hair pulling,biting eye gouges and so on then perhaps we can discuss your style being compelete but if You are not training with someone using a weapon on you at full force than how you be sure you can defend against it. Face it, you too are playing a game. And from the sounds of your posts, your game is far less real than mine...

[SevenStar]

I have seen schools use real blades in actual Mutodori situation(sometimes they get cut trying to disarm)I see no point using an actual live blade to train with
since a wooden one gives the same realistic applications(you can get the idea of getting cut and stabbed but live to train)We train on Asphalt sometimes again we like to try diffrerent types of floors unlike some people who roll on a nice comfortable mat(do you practice your break falls and groundwork on concrete?)
As for the bar kinda of difficult to train there however we can use the same close quarters that a bar provides.Now does your class offer grappling on concrete,
does it allow you to even work with weapons? does it allow you to work with throwing things at each other? What if I push you down a flight of stairs can you roll correctly to avoid injury?If I push you over broken glass can you leap roll over it?It's great you have experience in a controled ring enviroment with none of these varibles and tons of rules with a referee but you know what your playing in a sport period.

see, this is what I was talking about when I said your game was less real than mine. now you just plain are not thinking... a wooden knife gives the same realistic applications? In THEORY it will. But realistically, when you mess up, you will not get cut. IT'S SAFE...a game. Also, you are in a friendly environment - no adrenaline rush to deal with....a game. To answer your question, I actually do do breakfalls on concrete and hard gym floors. I did them initially to see what it felt like, and Have done them several times since when people in class questioned how breakfalls work on a hard surface. However, for SAFETY reasons, (read: it's a game) they should be performed on a mat.

In the ring, you feel adrenaline rushes and various other things while you are dealing with the guy opposing you whom you don't know and who wants to tear you apart. that is far less controlled then being in a friendly environment, playing with your schoolmates. No matter how you look at it, what you do is very controlled.

[SevenStar]

I picked up a knife and a wooden knife
same balance same weight same shape.I would say this a knife is a knife the same defense you use against a wooden one a plastic one a butter knife or a blade with an edge is the same(we are training principles,concepts)If we actually
stabbed each other bled then its not training is it?!Then it becomes attempted murder. Ok but the rules of no eye gouging,no hair pulling,no biting,no using small joint manipluation,no elbows to the head no spitting,no pulling the ears leaving so many varibles out this is not hand to hand this is sporting with rules to win same as soccer.see your confusing rules with realstic training.

Now you're catching on... you are training principles and concepts - that's not the epitome of realistic, but you are coming to what you safely think is close enough to it.

RULES=An agreement between 2 or more parties on what each party can and can not do.REALSTIC TRAINING=An enviroment set to simulate actual combat where anything is allowed in place but certain things are substitued to mimic similar effects.FIGHTING=A confortantion betwen 2 or more parties where anything is allowed and there are no subsitutions of any sort.Now MMA uses Rules
I used the defination of Realstic training.Those who engage in street fights are fighting see the difference? A person should have a basic understanding oh how to use a stick to defend himself and a person should have a basic understanding on how to deal with someone with a beer bottle about to be broken over his head these are weapons and if you only train hand to hand well guess what the person who knows how to use the weapon is going to have the upper hand nuff said.

when you do "realistic training", are you not agreeing to a certain set of rules? I mean, you are agreeing to not actually kill eachother, as you admitted above. The basic understanding you are referring to is taught to you in theory, based on your "realistic training", which as I just pointed out IS bound by a certain ruleset AND it's friendly - you are doing it with your training buddies.

[FngSaiYuk]

Y'know, I'd hate to live in the country where training to fight to the death as realistically as possible (that includes real self defense) is desireable, let alone legal.

Basically, the more realistically you train, the more likely you or your training 'partners' will be seriously injured or die. And the more likely you'll be breaking some law.

Anyways, you can train well enough to handle the average weaponless skirmish, but don't fool yourself into thinking you can handle every random thug that's after your wallet.

[Gangsterfist]

At my kwoon we have steel knives that are dull and rounded tips. They are in the shape of some basic real knives. I don't know where my sifu got them, however they are the most realistic you can get with keeping some safety precautions in mind.

I think I have changed my mind about a complete system. A complete system is something you can use on the fly and adapt to a situation. Whether it be grappling or striking. Its a system that can be effective under pressure.

A lot of what I just said really relies on the practitioner and not the style itself. Some new guys came to one of my training classes the other day and they formally train a northern style of kung fu. Lots of high kicks. Their sifu made them do crazy leg work outs to develope that ba fa jing in their jumps, kicks, and leg movements. So, if you train hard you will get good results reguardless of what style you train in.

I, OTOH, train all southern systems and have more fancy hand techniques over long kicks. The arts I train in are inside fighting (trapping range, no range) so most kicks I will do in real combat will be knee, shin, ankle kicks. However, of course, I am not limited to just that. So we do lots of upper body work outs, and striking work outs. We do infact work out our legs and kicks but not to the extent that these northern kung fu guys did. So, who is to say which is complete and which is incomplete?

Maybe its not style its training. Maybe your training is incomplete and your work outs are half assed? Maybe the training methods you use are effective.

I would say go out and expand your view on other styles before you start to judge what is what. I have had my eyes opened a few times learning different things from different styles from different people.

[ewallace]

If you have one or more relatively attractive women in your class your style is complete.

'Nuff said.

[Face2Fist]

was this an actual shaolin warrior, if so what generation and what name? if not then BAHH!!

it was a shaolin practioner, he was taken down pretty quick and choked.. i guess he didnt have time to use his iron body or his chi blast..

[Merryprankster]

Only if your style includes wrestling in jello pudding with midget female porn stars and her giant body-building clitenis having "partner" can it be considered complete.

[Face2Fist]

Only if your style includes wrestling in jello pudding with midget female porn stars and her giant body-building clitenis having "partner" can it be considered complete.

not really, youre missing the video camera and the fluffers!!~

[ewallace]

Only if your style includes wrestling in jello pudding with midget female porn stars and her giant body-building clitenis having "partner" can it be considered complete.
Wow, MP is a MMA that is also a ****phobe. So much for that stereotype. What a dissapointment. :mad:

[ZIM]

Wow, MP is a MMA that is also a ****phobe. So much for that sterotype. What a dissapointment. :mad:
Nah. ****phobia implies fear.

No fear. More beer. ;)

[Merryprankster]

ewallace, I see from your post that you've blown out your o-ring. :D

[ewallace]

ewallace, I see from your post that you've blown out your o-ring. :D
Thanks for reaching around to point that out. :)

[Vasquez]

Dim mak?? tell me you're trolling... please...tell me...

Why do you say I'm trolling. i'm surprised that you don't know about Dim Mak. This is a kung fu forum isn't it? My instructor will be shocked.

[David Jamieson]

Why do you say I'm trolling. i'm surprised that you don't know about Dim Mak. This is a kung fu forum isn't it? My instructor will be shocked.

ban him now before he fills the forums with his crap.

[Mikkyou]

you are correct - ukemi IS ukemi. Here's the rub - your situation. go to the middle of the floor - jump and safely roll. Now, go play in the middle of the expressway and unexpectedly get caught in the path of a speeding semi. roll out of the way. Like I said before If You have correct Ukemi,timing,distacing,space it is applied to the situation.You do not have to jump in front of moving cars to see if your Ukemi works why? Because if you know how to leap roll it works against anything.Example:I never flipped over a hedge before
never practice it but one day I found I had to because I know how to flip and roll
I did it.
no? guess what just played a game. your training is no more "real" than a sport fighter's. I've done drills with live machettes A person with a knife who is trying to stab you 1.usually does not let you see the knife coming 2.will not give you an idea how the cut is going to be.The example with the wooden knife as I have mentioned lets the knife person attack in no particular order does not let you see the knife counters with punches and kicks.
However, for SAFETY reasons, (read: it's a game) they should be performed on a mat. We don't use a mat but thats just us.
until YOUR KWOON decides to allow people to use weapons,spiting,hair pulling,biting eye gouges and so on then perhaps we can discuss your style being compelete but if You are not training with someone using a weapon on you at full force than how you be sure you can defend against it I just said we use spitting,hair pulling and biting in our school and the weapons are used at full speed and full force which is why I am sore or bleeding sometimes :)
now you just plain are not thinking... a wooden knife gives the same realistic applications? In THEORY it will. But realistically, when you mess up, you will not get cut Yes and when my opponenet really trys to stab me I do get cut with the wooden knife sometimes but I see you want me to have my wrist slit gushing blood and rushing to the hospital see that is streetfighting in my realstic training I get cut on the wrist we stop because I lost we work on it again martial art is not 100% so being cut with a wooden knife and a real one have the same idea you lost.
In the ring, you feel adrenaline rushes and various other things while you are dealing with the guy opposing you whom you don't know and who wants to tear you apart. that is far less controlled then being in a friendly environment, playing with your schoolmates So thats you weak argument is I am do not have Adrenaline kicking in.First being someone who had Chronic anxiety Adreanaline rushes can be controlled how do I know this I was shot up with Adreanaline when I had a panic attack and have dealt with panic attacks for years.
are you not agreeing to a certain set of rules? I mean, you are agreeing to not actually kill eachother, as you admitted above. The basic understanding you are referring to is taught to you in theory, based No written or verbal agreement no rules so yes if we choose to we could kill each other but we won't because its training not duel to the death.Sevenstar it sounds like this:Its only reality training if you go in actual fight get stabbed with real knives,jump in front of cars and challenge every person you meet on the street.
But it sounds to me you do not do these things yet your training is more realistic than mine lol you sound like a hypocrite and anymore posts directed toward me about your realistic fighting just further shows you are one now go home son because you just been schooled.I think I proved my point on this thread any attempts to post about what I said is purely ego intented have a nice day :)

[Gangsterfist]

I just said we use spitting,hair pulling and biting in our school and the weapons are used at full speed and full force which is why I am sore or bleeding sometimes

LOL, you must either be really bad with weapons or using nerf weapons. I have worked out with protective gear with a CLF/escrima guy and those sticks seriously hurt, and if it were at full speed/contact it would have been a huge safety risk.

You spit on each other at your kwoon? I just find that plain down right, disrespectful.

[Reggie1]

I picked up a knife and a wooden knife
same balance same weight same shape.I would say this a knife is a knife the same defense you use against a wooden one a plastic one a butter knife or a blade


A person should have a basic understanding oh how to use a stick to defend himself and a person should have a basic understanding on how to deal with someone with a beer bottle about to be broken over his head these are weapons and if you only train hand to hand well guess what the person who knows how to use the weapon is going to have the upper hand nuff said.

I can see where you are coming from on this. I've never worked w/ a wooden knife, so I wouldn't know. I do know that wooden swords aren't balanced or weighted anything like steel.

But I'd still give a trained hand-to-hand fighter a good chance against some guy w/ a bottle.

[SevenStar]

Like I said before If You have correct Ukemi,timing,distacing,space it is applied to the situation.You do not have to jump in front of moving cars to see if your Ukemi works why? Because if you know how to leap roll it works against anything.Example:I never flipped over a hedge before
never practice it but one day I found I had to because I know how to flip and roll
I did it.

you're either completely missing the point or trolling - not sure which yet. It's not about the ukemi at all - it's about the individual. Like I said, ukemi is ukemi - it will work. We agree there. BUT, there is a difference in the situation. When you are in front of the moving semi, there is a difference in feeling - fear, adrenaline, etc. We've all heard stories about the MA that get mauled in streetfights. It's not because they went to McDojos - it's because they didn't know how to deal with the fear, the adrenaline, etc. They froze and they paid for it. It happens. This is where sport styles have alot to offer especially.


A person with a knife who is trying to stab you 1.usually does not let you see the knife coming 2.will not give you an idea how the cut is going to be.The example with the wooden knife as I have mentioned lets the knife person attack in no particular order does not let you see the knife counters with punches and kicks.

see above. I see what you are saying - I'm not saying it's a bad idea. but the environment in and of itself is NOT reality. it's merely as real as you feel you can make it.


We don't use a mat but thats just us.

what do you train in? I can guarantee you that if you train judo and bjj everyday, you will either have mats or be studentless, as there will be far too many injuries. Not to use them in such instances is stupid. We are on the hard floor in muay thai alot, but we don't do alot of falling there, either.


I just said we use spitting,hair pulling and biting in our school and the weapons are used at full speed and full force which is why I am sore or bleeding sometimes :)

bleeding happens. One of out guys got cut in thai boxing last night. That's not really a big thing. Soreness is very common. However, I seriously doubt you are full speed and force biting anyone - how many chunks of skin have you ripped out? And unless you guys completely SUCK, you are not hitting eachother full force with weapons with no injury. I've been hit with kali sticks enough times to know what a full power strike can do.


Yes and when my opponenet really trys to stab me I do get cut with the wooden knife sometimes but I see you want me to have my wrist slit gushing blood and rushing to the hospital see that is streetfighting in my realstic training I get cut on the wrist we stop because I lost we work on it again martial art is not 100% so being cut with a wooden knife and a real one have the same idea you lost.

once again - then it's not real - it's only as real as you feel you can make it. you really cannot talk about others not have REAL training then...


First being someone who had Chronic anxiety Adreanaline rushes can be controlled how do I know this I was shot up with Adreanaline when I had a panic attack and have dealt with panic attacks for years.

you're darn right it can be controlled. But a cushiony, friendly environment isn't really the place where you will sufficiently learn that, IMO.


No written or verbal agreement no rules so yes if we choose to we could kill each other but we won't because its training not duel to the death.

exactly. you are training, so you are agreeing not to try and kill each other. once again - only as real as you could safely make it.


Sevenstar it sounds like this:Its only reality training if you go in actual fight get stabbed with real knives,jump in front of cars and challenge every person you meet on the street.
But it sounds to me you do not do these things yet your training is more realistic than mine lol you sound like a hypocrite and anymore posts directed toward me about your realistic fighting just further shows you are one now go home son because you just been schooled.I think I proved my point on this thread any attempts to post about what I said is purely ego intented have a nice day :)



schooled? you really are hilarious. As for the more realistic bit, I'm talking in reference to training to cope with factors like adrenaline, fight or flight syndorme, etc. that can mean the difference between you getting out alive, getting beaten of worse. I think you are the one who's been schooled. the problem is that you are too blind too even see it.

[Vasquez]

ban him now before he fills the forums with his crap.

You are even close to asking the right questions let alone understanding the answers. There are many secrets in TCMA which just take time.

[Face2Fist]

You are even close to asking the right questions let alone understanding the answers. There are many secrets in TCMA which just take time.

secrets in TMC? HAHAHAHA!!!!

the only secret in martial arts is (come closer) TRAINING and HARD WORK!!!!!!
now dont go around telling everyone our secret

you grew up watching kung fu movies didnt you?

[Vasquez]

secrets in TMC? HAHAHAHA!!!!

the only secret in martial arts is (come closer) TRAINING and HARD WORK!!!!!!
now dont go around telling everyone our secret

you grew up watching kung fu movies didnt you?

True, we need to train hard but can we rediscover the knowledge from thousands of years in one life time? I think not, and you need a good sifu who will pass the knowledge on to you.

[David Jamieson]

True, we need to train hard but can we rediscover the knowledge from thousands of years in one life time? I think not, and you need a good sifu who will pass the knowledge on to you.

dude...
:rolleyes:

*sighs*

This guy is a troll, ban him now, do it seven, renegade, rub, anyone?, put the word in and get rid of as many of the carradine clones as we can. lol

[Face2Fist]

True, we need to train hard but can we rediscover the knowledge from thousands of years in one life time? I think not, and you need a good sifu who will pass the knowledge on to you.

let me guess

you play a flute, wear sandals and wear a silk kf suit...

[Reggie1]

This guy is a troll, ban him now, do it seven, renegade, rub, anyone?, put the word in and get rid of as many of the carradine clones as we can. lol

Take the pebble from my hand, grasshopper... :D

[David Jamieson]

Take the pebble from my hand, grasshopper... :D

oh god, please let it die, let it die! lol :D

[Reggie1]

oh god, please let it die, let it die! lol :D

David,
You just want it to die because you don't understand it yet. If you spend more time cultivating chi and learning about the internal, and less time being so aggressive, you would understand where Vasquez was.

How much time do you spend training horse stance? Chi kung?


;)

[ewallace]

My chi allowed me to cook a frozen pizza with an open palm. Others say it was because the pizza was on the hood of a black car and the temperature was over 100 degrees. If they only had a clue.

[David Jamieson]

David,
You just want it to die because you don't understand it yet. If you spend more time cultivating chi and learning about the internal, and less time being so aggressive, you would understand where Vasquez was.

How much time do you spend training horse stance? Chi kung?


;)

lol, to me it is apparent that vasquez is a pot smoking, mac using, sandal wearing hippy who thinks wuxia novels are documentaries as opposed to childrens stories.

Ima gonna say the dude is a troll, and not a very good one because he is so blatant in his **** cloud of nonsense.

as for aggression, well who can fight without it? no one that's who. lol, unless of course you're in a friendly match and even then you need a little. No yin and yang? No kungfu. :p

[FngSaiYuk]

lol, to me it is apparent that vasquez is a pot smoking, mac using, sandal wearing hippy who thinks wuxia novels are documentaries as opposed to childrens stories.

OK, gonna have to call that one... There's nothing wrong with Mac's and more people should be usin' them... Also, nothing wrong with sandals if the weather is warm enough. Although I can understand the weirdness of sandal wearers in your area.

[Gangsterfist]

OK, gonna have to call that one... There's nothing wrong with Mac's and more people should be usin' them... Also, nothing wrong with sandals if the weather is warm enough. Although I can understand the weirdness of sandal wearers in your area.


Well, I am biased, and I hate working on macs. I work IT, am apple certified and repair them on a daily basis. Love the OS, hate woking on apple hardware. They are the MOST annoying machines to take apart. Did an ibook upgrade of a hard drive yesterday and decided to count the screws I had to take out before I could get to the hard drive. It was 80 something screws (83 i think total). That is just plain out ridiculous. I own a few macs, and I like my ibook 800mhz g3. Its nice, but I hate taking that ****ed thing apart. Since I do all of my own computer work myself I tend to not buy apple products. Also with very limited 3rd party support and completely proprietary hardware also turns me off. You can't customer build your own mac, you can only get what apple offers. I remember back when they had mac clones, and I personally liked the idea.

Now, if I could run OS X on a PC, I'd probably do that. I also like to play the occasional video game, and macs really don't play games very well.

However, in gernal mac users are the MOST annoying of the users I support for my job. They are all eltists, and think that mac products are so far superior over everything else. When in reality there is nothing a PC can't do that a Mac can, macs crash and have a fail rate just like anything else, if they didn't I wouldn' have a job.

now back to the regular topic of the thread.

[FngSaiYuk]

heheh, ok, not that I wanna derail the thread or anything, but Gangsterfist, but having worked in the industry and supported pc's, mac's (68k & ppc), suns (68k & sparc), ibm's (rs, x, i & z series), hp & some older arch's (such as mips & alpha), I find your comments VERY entertaining. I find proprietary hardware the easiest to work with and the vast majority of clones annoying to deal with. And it's OSX that I recommend, but since you need a mac for OSX....

Anyways, since I'm posting anyways... I don't bother considering a style's 'completeness'. I consider how much fun I'm having and whether or not my current and long term goals are met or are in line with what I'm getting from the style I'm training in at the time. The whole debate over 'completeness' is really rather academic, and like most things academic, is a rather worthless (short of entertaining) endevour for non-academics.... And really, how many that read these forums are academics in regard to the martial arts?

My $0.02

[David Jamieson]

mac has a 9% market share.

decide from that what most people prefer to use. lol

Mac used to have cred with rich media and design houses...but now, they are for simpletons and old people who get frustrated when they click the wrong thing and need to be spoon fed their computing experience. hee hee, *pokes another mac user in the head *poke again! *poke *poke *poke!

[MasterKiller]

mac has a 9% market share.

decide from that what most people prefer to use. lol

Mac used to have cred with rich media and design houses...but now, they are for simpletons and old people who get frustrated when they click the wrong thing and need to be spoon fed their computing experience. hee hee, *pokes another mac user in the head *poke again! *poke *poke *poke! You forgot high school girls that like to color coordinate their computer to their shoes.

Have you seen the new lavendar Imac? EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

[FngSaiYuk]

mac has a 9% market share.

decide from that what most people prefer to use. lol

Mac used to have cred with rich media and design houses...but now, they are for simpletons and old people who get frustrated when they click the wrong thing and need to be spoon fed their computing experience. hee hee, *pokes another mac user in the head *poke again! *poke *poke *poke!
Well, best I can say against that is EVERY person I've converted from pc/windows has been VERY greatfull and has OFTEN told me how the conversion was worth it. They've had ZERO probs w/their computer (OSX based PPC mac).

I have a few experimental desktop conversions to linux that are going fairly well...

[Gangsterfist]

DERAILED_THREAD_02

Okay, here is the real skinny on macs. Yes they are okay machines, I use them, yes their OS is a good one.

HOWEVER,

Their proprietary hardware makes them freaking expensive to fix, and there are NO THIRD PARTY alternatives. I support machines for companies, end users, netwok, software, OS, hardware, repair, building, selling, etc. We do it all. In most cases the mac users I build/repair for are the most annoying. Always telling me how great macs are, like they need to stroke the machines ego. Oh you are such a powerful elite mac, much better than that PEECEE. So, I cannot go to any local computer shop and pick up a powersupply if one goes bad, nope I gotta farking order it from apple and pay their prices, which is totally outrageous.

I am also apple certified, which means I work for an AASP, and have access to service side only documents from apple. Training tools, tech manuals, service manuals, known issues, can speak direct with apple engineers via chat online or phone. Apple's training and diagnostic utilities suck compared to the third party ones out there.

Also, everything is now intergrated into a mac. The new G5s have the MLB (main logic board), and processor built in as one piece. If one goes bad you are stuck replacing both. Thats a 1500 dollar part right there. If you have a mac mini, imac, or emac, don't even think about repairing it out of warranty unless you want to spend a guaranteed minimum of 500 dollars repairing it.

Also, 83 FREAKING screws to access a hard drive in an ibook is farking ridiculous. You know some apple stores won't even upgrade ibook hard drives. They refuse to do it and make you ship it out to apple. Why would an apple store refuse to do that? Probably because from repair view they are designed like utter crap. I am not a big fan of HP or compaq desktops, but their laptops are awesome. Optical drives and HD are accessable with out disassembly. They pull right out with maybe a screw or two that holds them in. I can swap out drives in those things in a few minutes. An iBook takes a few hours.

Customer configuring, is another thing. I have a client that wants x hardware config, with y OS, at a cost of Z per each unit. On a PC I can do that. I can cut corners and use generic parts for lets say a sound card if thats not important. I can use unix, linux, windows, any OS I want basically on a cheap PC. I can't do that on a mac, and there is no such thing as a cheap mac. Except the mac mini which I wouldn't own one due to how hot that thing runs.

Proprietary is good for server end stuff, but for desktops its farking retarded. I would much rather run down to the local computer store and buy a powersupply or video card, sound card, ram or whatever and slap it in than have to order it from the manufacturer, pay their price and not be able to shop around, and then have to wait for it to be shipped to me.

As for the principles in MA, apples can be used here in an analogy. Your art must be effecient, the less downtime a network has the more productive it is. So how can you effeciently run a network? The internet is run by PCs running unix/linux and apache. This method is the most effecient, you should not be dogmatic in your ways and if you find a more effecient way, take that into consideration when training your martial art.

[FngSaiYuk]

Context - it's all about context.... Obviously your point of view is from a hardware support point of view and from the bottom line of raw hardware cost. From the point of view of most people, it's what can get the job done with the less hassles. A lot of software that's needed on the business desktop are windows exclusive, however for most functions that are available under OSX and OSX software, most people just have an easier, more predictable experience under OSX with less downtime or non-productive time due to whatever 'maintenance' or workarounds that occur in the middle of their work with their desktops.
Granted, the cost of the Mac hardware is normally something that a lot of people have a hard time with up front, after working with windows and OSX for a while, most people I've dealt with would spend the extra $$$'s on the mac for the consistent user experience.
Most users also have little need for upgrades that involve opening up their system. And the failure rate of pc clone hardware (consumer level, not business class workstations), is quite high relative to mac hardware.
Anyways, arguments can go 'round and 'round... My point is that for MOST BASIC users that do NOT really want to learn how to manage and maintain a computer, (y'know, akin to people who take their car to some oilchange place every 3-4 months), a mac running OSX is preferrable to a windows based pc clone (provided all the software they absolutely need is available under OSX).

[ewallace]

Macs are for people who want to bash Microsoft but aren't smart enough to figure out Linux/Unix. :D

[David Jamieson]

Context - it's all about context.... Obviously your point of view is from a hardware support point of view and from the bottom line of raw hardware cost. From the point of view of most people, it's what can get the job done with the less hassles. A lot of software that's needed on the business desktop are windows exclusive, however for most functions that are available under OSX and OSX software, most people just have an easier, more predictable experience under OSX with less downtime or non-productive time due to whatever 'maintenance' or workarounds that occur in the middle of their work with their desktops.
Granted, the cost of the Mac hardware is normally something that a lot of people have a hard time with up front, after working with windows and OSX for a while, most people I've dealt with would spend the extra $$$'s on the mac for the consistent user experience.
Most users also have little need for upgrades that involve opening up their system. And the failure rate of pc clone hardware (consumer level, not business class workstations), is quite high relative to mac hardware.
Anyways, arguments can go 'round and 'round... My point is that for MOST BASIC users that do NOT really want to learn how to manage and maintain a computer, (y'know, akin to people who take their car to some oilchange place every 3-4 months), a mac running OSX is preferrable to a windows based pc clone (provided all the software they absolutely need is available under OSX).

he hods his ears, closes his eyes and screams: LALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALA I don't want to change.
Then he falls to the ground kicks his feet and continues to scream about his apple.

In short, a condom could have prevented this behaviour. :D

lol, MACS are crrrrrrrrrap when it comes right down to it. Intelligent people don't use them, business doesn't use them, networks don't use them, software companies don't design for them without huge monetary incentives.

But,go against the grain if you like. Macs were good 10 years ago, but now? They are too expensive to buy, to expensive to fix and frankly too expensive to bother with. They ARE the mcdojo of computing. lol

That's right, I hate macs, I've worked on em, with em and so on, and I can't stand an unflexible machine. Die Mac Die!

[FngSaiYuk]

Originally from this article (http://paulgraham.com/mac.html)

Return of the Mac

March 2005

All the best hackers I know are gradually switching to Macs. My friend Robert said his whole research group at MIT recently bought themselves Powerbooks. These guys are not the graphic designers and grandmas who were buying Macs at Apple's low point in the mid 1990s. They're about as hardcore OS hackers as you can get.

The reason, of course, is OS X. Powerbooks are beautifully designed and run FreeBSD. What more do you need to know?

I got a Powerbook at the end of last year. When my IBM Thinkpad's hard disk died soon after, it became my only laptop. And when my friend Trevor showed up at my house recently, he was carrying a Powerbook identical to mine.

For most of us, it's not a switch to Apple, but a return. Hard as this was to believe in the mid 90s, the Mac was in its time the canonical hacker's computer.

In the fall of 1983, the professor in one of my college CS classes got up and announced, like a prophet, that there would soon be a computer with half a MIPS of processing power that would fit under an airline seat and cost so little that we could save enough to buy one from a summer job. The whole room gasped. And when the Mac appeared, it was even better than we'd hoped. It was small and powerful and cheap, as promised. But it was also something we'd never considered a computer could be: fabulously well designed.

I had to have one. And I wasn't alone. In the mid to late 1980s, all the hackers I knew were either writing software for the Mac, or wanted to. Every futon sofa in Cambridge seemed to have the same fat white book lying open on it. If you turned it over, it said "Inside Macintosh."

Then came Linux and FreeBSD, and hackers, who follow the most powerful OS wherever it leads, found themselves switching to Intel boxes. If you cared about design, you could buy a Thinkpad, which was at least not actively repellent, if you could get the Intel and Microsoft stickers off the front. [1]

With OS X, the hackers are back. When I walked into the Apple store in Cambridge, it was like coming home. Much was changed, but there was still that Apple coolness in the air, that feeling that the show was being run by someone who really cared, instead of random corporate deal-makers.

So what, the business world may say. Who cares if hackers like Apple again? How big is the hacker market, after all?

Quite small, but important out of proportion to its size. When it comes to computers, what hackers are doing now, everyone will be doing in ten years. Almost all technology, from Unix to bitmapped displays to the Web, became popular first within CS departments and research labs, and gradually spread to the rest of the world.

I remember telling my father back in 1986 that there was a new kind of computer called a Sun that was a serious Unix machine, but so small and cheap that you could have one of your own to sit in front of, instead of sitting in front of a VT100 connected to a single central Vax. Maybe, I suggested, he should buy some stock in this company. I think he really wishes he'd listened.

In 1994 my friend Koling wanted to talk to his girlfriend in Taiwan, and to save long-distance bills he wrote some software that would convert sound to data packets that could be sent over the Internet. We weren't sure at the time whether this was a proper use of the Internet, which was still then a quasi-government entity. What he was doing is now called VoIP, and it is a huge and rapidly growing business.

If you want to know what ordinary people will be doing with computers in ten years, just walk around the CS department at a good university. Whatever they're doing, you'll be doing.

In the matter of "platforms" this tendency is even more pronounced, because novel software originates with great hackers, and they tend to write it first for whatever computer they personally use. And software sells hardware. Many if not most of the initial sales of the Apple II came from people who bought one to run VisiCalc. And why did Bricklin and Frankston write VisiCalc for the Apple II? Because they personally liked it. They could have chosen any machine to make into a star.

If you want to attract hackers to write software that will sell your hardware, you have to make it something that they themselves use. It's not enough to make it "open." It has to be open and good.

And open and good is what Macs are again, finally. The intervening years have created a situation that is, as far as I know, without precedent: Apple is popular at the low end and the high end, but not in the middle. My seventy year old mother has a Mac laptop. My friends with PhDs in computer science have Mac laptops. [2] And yet Apple's overall market share is still small.

Though unprecedented, I predict this situation is also temporary.

So Dad, there's this company called Apple. They make a new kind of computer that's as well designed as a Bang & Olufsen stereo system, and underneath is the best Unix machine you can buy. Yes, the price to earnings ratio is kind of high, but I think a lot of people are going to want these.



Notes

[1] These horrible stickers are much like the intrusive ads popular on pre-Google search engines. They say to the customer: you are unimportant. We care about Intel and Microsoft, not you.

[2] Y Combinator is (we hope) visited mostly by hackers. The proportions of OSes are: Windows 66.4%, Macintosh 18.8%, Linux 11.4%, and FreeBSD 1.5%. The Mac number is a big change from what it would have been five years ago.

[These numbers are revised. The original numbers overstated FreeBSD's market share because they included hits from us.]

If you liked this, you may also like Hackers & Painters.

[FngSaiYuk]

he hods his ears, closes his eyes and screams: LALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALA I don't want to change.
Then he falls to the ground kicks his feet and continues to scream about his apple.

In short, a condom could have prevented this behaviour. :D

lol, MACS are crrrrrrrrrap when it comes right down to it. Intelligent people don't use them, business doesn't use them, networks don't use them, software companies don't design for them without huge monetary incentives.

But,go against the grain if you like. Macs were good 10 years ago, but now? They are too expensive to buy, to expensive to fix and frankly too expensive to bother with. They ARE the mcdojo of computing. lol

That's right, I hate macs, I've worked on em, with em and so on, and I can't stand an unflexible machine. Die Mac Die!
Change nothing... my home network includes winxp, win2003, freebsd, openbsd, various linux distros as well as OSX. Out of all of them, most people who try out the various systems really end up preferring OSX. The ones that do end up ponying up for a mac are ecstatic about their system (mostly because their previous experiences are with windows). These are NOT people who want to spend time learning to maintain their computer.
So, sure, if you feel so elite that you can manage and maintain your own computer, fine, I'm just sayin' that for the vast majority who don't care to know how the **** thing works and how to take care of it, that mac's are MUCH better for them.

[Gangsterfist]

In the near future the PC world will put mac to shame with the dual core processors coming out. Apple is still using the same technology from 10 yrs ago (or whenver the 1st power pc came out), it has improved but they need to move on.

Not only does IBM make the PPC hardware based machines better and faster than apple, but they gear them towards buisness end models, and not the consumer. Which is where those computers belong.

The OS for the mac is great, I like it. Nice memory management, easy GUI interfaces for those not so terminal savy people. However, I digress, I can get a cheap PC and slap linux on it, and there is NOTHING it cannot do a mac can. My problem is not with the apple hardware or software itself per se, its with apple the company. I don't really like how they run their company. With their forced upgrades, lack of older support for older systems, high lack of network compatability (though apprently tiger fixed this, however I have not had a chance to play with tiger yet), their ridiculous lawsuits against their own fan sites, WTF IS UP WITH THAT? Their extremely over priced hardware which does not out perform a PC of equal cost at all, infact a 3000 PC will out perform a G5 no problem. My athlon 64 rig I built running windows (my gaming rig) out performs Mac G5s all the time.

Apple is going to have to make some changes in the near future if they want to survive. They have already backed themselves into a corner years ago, and the release of OS X saved their butts, however they are not keeping up with the times hardware wise. While PC hardware is getting faster and way cheaper, mac hardware is not really keeping up with the performance vs cost. Which is why they have such a low market share.

You can counter argue this all day long, however the market is all the proof i need to prove my point.

[FngSaiYuk]

What's funny is we're arguing different things. My points are that OSX is far better suited for most home users. Most home users do NOT need the latest & greatest. Your argument is price/performance and that you don't agree with apple's business practices. Totally different arguments.

So.....

a) I agree that mac hardware costs far more than hardware in the x86 market
b) I agree that Apple's business practices are not ideal
c) In my opinion a mac is still far better suited for general home computing than a pc
d) I wish mac hardware prices were lower and there was at the very least a small and regulated clone market
e) If there were better standards and a more consistent interface to a linux based desktop, including the easy installation of arbitrary linux apps from the end user point of view, it'd soooo kick ass
f) Our opinions are coloured by our stance relative to the various systems and OS', ergo we'll likely continue to argue on items that are not quite what the other is arguing about
g) it's been fun, I really enjoy computer tech, so we'll see what the various companies and project groups bring about in the futre, but I'll prolly not comment any more on this in this thread as we appear to be rather clear on each others stances and from your particular perspective, I agree with most of what you're saying anyways and it doesn't really matter to me whether or not you quite grasp my point - perhaps my forum-fu just sucks, or perhaps I'm just that much more naive about everything outside of my own experience

[FatherDog]

mac has a 9% market share.

decide from that what most people prefer to use. lol

Compare the respective market shares of Choy Li Fut and Tae Bo. :D



lol, MACS are crrrrrrrrrap when it comes right down to it. Intelligent people don't use them, business doesn't use them, networks don't use them, software companies don't design for them without huge monetary incentives.

Whoa, there. Any graphic design artist worth his salt is using a mac, any business that involves video editing is using a mac (including Pixar, who make extensive use of Macs for their image design and pre-render art work), and a lot of technical people are using macs these days, especially the laptops. I work for Princeton University, and we have just as many people supporting Macs as PCs. One of my friends that does security contractor work for government agencies just switched over to Macs and is very happy about it - she's working on a security whitepaper on them for DefCon.

I agree that Mac hardware leaves a lot to be desired, but the OS is leagues ahead of windows as far as stability and reliability goes, and Mac has the best graphic editing software out there, period.

Also, I build my own machines and run Linux on them, and am better than you filthy luddites. :D

[red5angel]

Compare the respective market shares of Choy Li Fut and Tae Bo. :D



Whoa, there. Any graphic design artist worth his salt is using a mac, any business that involves video editing is using a mac, and a lot of technical people are using macs these days, especially the laptops. I work for Princeton University, and we have just as many people supporting Macs as PCs. One of my friends that does security contractor work for government agencies just switched over to Macs and is very happy about it - she's working on a security whitepaper on them for DefCon.

I agree that Mac hardware leaves a lot to be desired, but the OS is leagues ahead of windows as far as stability and reliability goes, and Mac has the best graphic editing software out there, period.

Also, I build my own machines and run Linux on them, and am better than you filthy luddites. :D


Once upon a time Mac started losing big to PC architecture because of it's inflexibility and excluding 3rd party software and hardware makers from working with them. Along came the companies who started pushing the PC and Mac, too late, realized they were losing steam to something much more flexible and down the road much more capable. They pushed it to schools and for a short time pushed the graphics side of things. Years ago Mac started lose even that battle but by then they were so dug into the graphics design shops that the people who used them couldn't give them up even if they wanted too. Now the only thing they have left to cling to is the claim that:

"I agree that Mac hardware leaves a lot to be desired, but the OS is leagues ahead of windows as far as stability and reliability goes, and Mac has the best graphic editing software out there, period."

Sadly no, graphics wise Mac no longer has the edge as you can do it all with PC architecture, 3rd party software designed for the PC, at much lower prices on both ends.
And I've been on a windows machine for 4 years and other then upgrading, its never crashed.

[ewallace]

What makes a MAC complete?

[red5angel]

What makes a MAC complete?

yer mom does a good job of making me feel complete. I mean in that I just blew all over her like in the pr0n movies complete.

[David Jamieson]

Whoa, there. Any graphic design artist worth his salt is using a mac, any business that involves video editing is using a mac (including Pixar, who make extensive use of Macs for their image design and pre-render art work), and a lot of technical people are using macs these days, especially the laptops.

bzzzt. I'm sorry but that is a little hazy in the correctness. :D

Graphic designers should be comfortable in both platforms. The PC market equalled MAC in processing and rendering power in 97 with the advent of the Pentium chip and MMX technology. Before this time MAC had the advantage because it used dual risc chips for rendering. After Pentium speed and MMX tech, MAC no longer held the keys to the kingdom and many many many GD's migrated onto systems that were easily upgradeable, networkable and in general more compatible with the people they had to send their work to and get their work from.

Pixar designed a lot of their own systems when it gets right down to it. As well, they designed a lot of their own software too.

MAC does not have an advantage as far as design house stuff goes anymore and they haven't for quite some time relative to digital art.

Don't make me remind you of what market all the next gen games are designed for (it's pc's running linux and windows :p) and all the technology such as advanced Graphics hardware (ATI, Nvidia et al) are made for PCs.

MAC has very few games desinged for them, Adobe and Macromedia (the two big ass industry leaders in graphics and rich media) design with a favouring of the PC now but still do the mac thing as a side note where it used to be the other way around and if you wanna get the kick ass 3d stuff like Alias' Maya, Discreet 3d studio Max, soft image and so on, well these companies primo editions are designed for PC first as well.

Also, let's not forget GNU and Linux. Yall need a PC for that stuff and much of it is wayyyyyy cool!

Only losers use MACs. lol

[/joking around, throwing out the barbs at the once mighty that have fallen]

[red5angel]

Actually I've been hearing alot about Sun microsystems stations in the graphics design world.

[FngSaiYuk]

What makes a MAC complete? 48bits ::grin::

[FngSaiYuk]

Don't make me remind you of what market all the next gen games are designed for (it's pc's running linux and windows :p) and all the technology such as advanced Graphics hardware (ATI, Nvidia et al) are made for PCs.

bzzzzt.... all the next gen games are designed for the xbox360 & the ps3, thanks for playing ::grin::

[Gangsterfist]

Actually right now, PCs still run the share of the market in all cases. However, I agree with FSY, that the mac OS X is a good OS. There are some problems and limitations I do not like about it, but it definately has its plus. However, its nothing new its based off old free BSD, so its not like apple is being inovative here. They are just recycling older technology into their version of PPC hardware.

Now, Sun spark stations, and that of the such also use PPC based hardware. They also have O2 (oxygen) video card support which are high end video cards used for heavy 3-D rendering.

I will say that most of the Digital audio market out there is run on macs, or at least a lot of the big dogs are. The thing is technology in the next 2 years is gonna make a huge jump to a new architechture probably. Apple is going to be left behind because of their stupid buisness ideals. Dual core processors are already coming out on the PC side this year. AMD is also currently kicking Intels arse in performance.

The internet is run on PCs running unix/linux.

As for an easy to install home user linux package there is one called Linspire. Its not perfect but the OS is based off linux and its pretty solid. Also all the apps you download for linspire already come in compiled installer packs. So you don't have to fuss with manual insatllation of apps via terminal like you do sometimes in linux. Which would be preferred for the home user.

I support home, buisness, everything at my job. I don't always keep on the most current technologies, but I am usually pretty good at keeping up a lot of the major stuff.

Bottom line:

Macs are not that bad of machines. I think their design is retarded at times and not practical for servicing/repairing/upgrading. I think they try to look appealing over being practical. I think that the OS needs work and needs a huge 3rd party bump, and it needs more network compatability. If apple ever breaks that barrier and becomes a harder player in the world market of technology they could be a major player. However, when it comes to running a network and building 150 systems for your companies computers PCs are just more effective and cost less.

However, Tiger has some promise, and I have yet to fully test its capabilities, but if it lives up to its hype a lot of issues I had with the mac OS may be gone now. I will have to find out I suppose.

IMHO, Macs and PCs both get the same job pretty much equally, its more a preference thing. Remember most errors are user related and not the computers fault. If you surf for pr0n all day and get a ton of spyware thats not the Oses fault, thats yours for not protecting yourself.

[Gangsterfist]

As for the video game developement topic.

Its moot to argue because the xbox2, PS3, are basically PCs, and based off PC technology. So the video card market is therefore based on PC technology and designed to best work with a PC. Plus video card companies market their cards towards gamers, which are mainly PC users.

[FatherDog]

Sadly no, graphics wise Mac no longer has the edge as you can do it all with PC architecture, 3rd party software designed for the PC, at much lower prices on both ends.

Uh, sorry, no, you can't. The Mac graphic programs are still better, especially video editing.


bzzzt. I'm sorry but that is a little hazy in the correctness. :D

Graphic designers should be comfortable in both platforms.


Should be, maybe, but the fact is the majority of graphic designers use Macs.



Pixar designed a lot of their own systems when it gets right down to it. As well, they designed a lot of their own software too.

So? They still make heavy use of Macs and essentially no use of PCs - their render farms are all Suns on SPARC architecture, and all of their pre-render art work is done on Macs.



Also, let's not forget GNU and Linux. Yall need a PC for that stuff and much of it is wayyyyyy cool!

Not true at all; you can install just about any linux distribution on a MAC. And even if you don't, OSX is built around a BSD core; you can compile any GNU program on a Mac and it will run fine, and many of the prepackaged versions can be stuck on and just work.

[Gangsterfist]

Actually,

The desktops the designers use may be macs, but the render farm is build of PC clusters.

http://www.canopus.us/us/canopus/pr_ProCoder_RFarm.asp

http://www.root6.com/Integration/ella.htm

Here is a posting for a admin to a render farm. Note you need linux and windows experience.

http://www.miscojobs.com/jobs/L_3/job_163558.htm

http://dv411.com/rfarm.html

http://news.thomasnet.com/fullstory/9967

http://www.linuxnetworx.com/news/4.2.2003.32-Linux_Networx_R.html

So, really Hollywood is using PCs man. Your information is false. The reason Pixar uses macs is because the probably get them for free or very cheap. However Pixar recently switched to the dark side and now runs intel based technology adn Linux.

read this and weap

http://www.macobserver.com/article/2003/02/10.7.shtml

So, really PCs run the world, even the graphic design world.

[FngSaiYuk]

Now, Sun spark stations, and that of the such also use PPC based hardware.

Since when have SPARC's been PPC's?

[Gangsterfist]

Since when have SPARC's been PPC's?


Sorry don't know what I was saying that was suppose to type in as IBM, but I must've not been thinkign when I typed that in.

My point was, Macs are not the only ones that use PPC based technology. Infact it wasn't even developed by apple.

Anyways, I rest my case.

[FngSaiYuk]

As for the video game developement topic.

Its moot to argue because the xbox2, PS3, are basically PCs, and based off PC technology. So the video card market is therefore based on PC technology and designed to best work with a PC. Plus video card companies market their cards towards gamers, which are mainly PC users.
I wouldn't consider the PS3's cell processors 'basically PC's'. I still haven't found a reliable source for the xbox360 hardware. Even though there are many off the shelf parts that are pc compatible in these game consoles does not mean that developing games for the console is the same as developing the game for the pc. There's A LOT that's different, not the first of which is a very specific reference platform to develop from.
PC game developing can be more difficult due to the variety of hardware out there. There's no specific real target platform to design to. Instead most cutting edge companies decide on a bunch of specs that they consider advanced enough and design towards that.

[FngSaiYuk]

Not true at all; you can install just about any linux distribution on a MAC. And even if you don't, OSX is built around a BSD core; you can compile any GNU program on a Mac and it will run fine, and many of the prepackaged versions can be stuck on and just work.
Heh, yah, a lot of people somehow seem to map GNU/Linux to the x86 arch when the linux kernel has been ported to more archs than nBSD and full GNU/Linux OS' are available on almost as many archs as nBSD.

I totally understand tho'... the pc hardware market is HYOOOOOJ by comparison. And there are very few hobbyists that will tinker with non-x86 archs when it's not also part of their job compared to the number of hobbyists that play around w/x86 hardware. Again, understandable considering the availability and low entry of the x86 hardware market.

[FngSaiYuk]

Sorry don't know what I was saying that was suppose to type in as IBM, but I must've not been thinkign when I typed that in.

My point was, Macs are not the only ones that use PPC based technology. Infact it wasn't even developed by apple.

Anyways, I rest my case.
Heheh, yah, I've worked with all of IBM's RISC based archs from the original RT series through the RS series and their Power chips (waaaay kewler than the dinky, by comparison, PPC cpu's in current macs & amigas).

[Gangsterfist]

Unconfirmed xbox2 hardware specs are ati video chip set and risc based processor, based possilby off the PPC technology that is in the G5 processor. However, that was just a rumor.

If you look at what microsoft has done with the console market you will realize what I say is actually true. Every developer can now very much easily port over any xbox pretty easily to the pc world. The xbox is a PC. Based off intel technology. Now, the PS3, and game cube will always be a bit harder to port over due to the reasons you listed. However, I can see more console systems doing what microsoft is doing because it will let the game developers easily port their games to both markets of PCs and console.

Also, the video card market is geared totally towards PC users. They come out first for the PC, and they are more supported by the PC hardware out there. You can use them in several OSes too on the PC. That is because a lot of gamers don't want to play 3-d shooters on a console or be limited to the hardware specs of a console. Even though console hardware is usually a bit before its time.

Also the upgradeability of the PC is more appealing to some people, plus since most consoles no longer want to include Hard drives in their systems because of piracy, this will turn more hard core gamers back to the PC again.

[Gangsterfist]

Heheh, yah, I've worked with all of IBM's RISC based archs from the original RT series through the RS series and their Power chips (waaaay kewler than the dinky, by comparison, PPC cpu's in current macs & amigas).

I kinda wish I had a working amiga to tinker with. Those were really cool machines.

[FngSaiYuk]

Unconfirmed xbox2 hardware specs are ati video chip set and risc based processor, based possilby off the PPC technology that is in the G5 processor. However, that was just a rumor.
Yah, all I've seen is screenshots of upcoming games... and some of them look REALLY nice. Supposedly more info will be released 05/12/05 on the xbox360.



If you look at what microsoft has done with the console market you will realize what I say is actually true. Every developer can now very much easily port over any xbox pretty easily to the pc world. The xbox is a PC. Based off intel technology. Now, the PS3, and game cube will always be a bit harder to port over due to the reasons you listed. However, I can see more console systems doing what microsoft is doing because it will let the game developers easily port their games to both markets of PCs and console.
C'mon now, you're totally ignoring the whole writing direct to the hardware thing as well as consistent timing of the target platform. If it was sooooooo easy to port between the xbox & PC, then why aren't more xbox titles ported? I would really really really want to play Wrath Unleashed on the PC (I do have a winxp partition on one of my workstations purely for gaming). I don't have any stats, but there are far more games on the xbox that have NOT been ported to the PC and have no solid plans of porting to the PC.
The games that are easily portable are ones that are based on gaming engines that are cross platform. These types of games rarely take FULL advantage of each platform.


Also, the video card market is geared totally towards PC users. They come out first for the PC, and they are more supported by the PC hardware out there. You can use them in several OSes too on the PC. That is because a lot of gamers don't want to play 3-d shooters on a console or be limited to the hardware specs of a console. Even though console hardware is usually a bit before its time.
The vid card market is geared towards PCs due to the ovewhelmingly large x86 market period.


Also the upgradeability of the PC is more appealing to some people, plus since most consoles no longer want to include Hard drives in their systems because of piracy, this will turn more hard core gamers back to the PC again.
I find most home users think upgrade = new computer.

Again, I'm not saying the PCs suck or anything like that. I just want to bring up what I feel are flaws in the statements expressed here. The size of the PC market is why anything new is always available for PC's. PC's are just not the end all be all... there are plenty of alternatives that are better suited for particular niches. Right tool for the job and all...

[FngSaiYuk]

I kinda wish I had a working amiga to tinker with. Those were really cool machines.
I'm talking 'bout the NEW amigas, running AmigaOS4 on PPC AmigaOne motherboards.

[Gangsterfist]

Marketing is the key here FSY. Microsoft can boast, XBOX exclusive. So that makes you want to buy an xbox. Personally I played KOTOR 1 when it very first came out at a video game store, I bought an xbox 2 weeks later to have just that game and fable which was in developement at the time. Marketing is why its not. And the hot sellers, aka KOTOR, jade empire, HALO, etc will be ported to the PC in a few months after it hits the xbox, again for marketing purposes. However, xbox does not have the market it wants in console gaming so it will continue to hold onto xbox only titles and it will buy up game dev teams to get people to buy their product. Its free enterprise and microsoft has got the money to do this type of stuff. It will work and if there is a game you want to play so bad that is xbox only you will go buy an xbox. This really hasn't been a big deal until the xbox came out and MS started buying up game dev teams, like rare and team ninja, and then making those games exclusive to the xbox only. Its a marketing strategy. Overall, I am pretty impressed with my xbox console system wise. It does not hold a stick to my PC though as far as gaming performance.

I have already proved PCs are more dominately used across the board for gaming, multimedia, film production, office use, and home use. And that the game market is still geared towards PC users over anything else. That is because the consoles are becoming more like PCs each generation, and that PCs are becoming so common in households that everyone wants to play games. I have clients that hate video games, but are totally addicted to the sims (i have no idea why).


AFAIK, amiga was bought out by gateway and then scrapped. I haven't followed them since and that was a few years ago.

[red5angel]

Uh, sorry, no, you can't. The Mac graphic programs are still better, especially video editing.

Not realy, haven't been for almost a decade now. What you get is Mac making some small jump forward and claiming they are better when in reality, all software is pushed ahead AND that's mostly driven by the PC world. They lost the lead in anything but a solid OS system a long time ago, the only thing holding them up now are the Mac people who think this way, their donations to schools and Microsoft ;)

I'll have to do some digging for some reasearch I did about 5 years ago on this subject. Some chick at a place I used to work used to Mac this and Mac that at everything. According to her if we had Macs we'd practically have world peace ;) Either way I spent about 3 months doing all this research and then gave her this little packet on where exactly she was wrong. 6 months later she bought a PC. I'd like to think I had some influence in that.

Now you've got to understand, I once believed that Mac had it figured out. If they hadn't shot themselves in the foot by excluding third parties for so long, we'd probably be on Macs right now. however, they were short sighted and lost the battle. now their perpetuated by some urban myth that they have the better graphics design software when it turns out paying more for it doesn't necessarily make it better.

[FngSaiYuk]

I have already proved PCs are more dominately used across the board for gaming, multimedia, film production, office use, and home use. And that the game market is still geared towards PC users over anything else. That is because the consoles are becoming more like PCs each generation, and that PCs are becoming so common in households that everyone wants to play games. I have clients that hate video games, but are totally addicted to the sims (i have no idea why).
Like I said before, I am quite aware of the dominance of the pc industry. Then again, there are more TKD places out there ... ::grin::


AFAIK, amiga was bought out by gateway and then scrapped. I haven't followed them since and that was a few years ago.
If you're interested, check out http://amigaworld.net/.

[red5angel]

oh yeah one more thing. those guys at Pixar may have used macs for some of their work, but I bet you big money that they started out on macs from the get go. Thats the "cycle of life" for mac and the biggest reason they still do computers at all. These guys start out in high school learning graphics on macs because macs are donated or given to school systems at a significantly lower price then a consumer would purchase them. They move on to using macs in college for much the same reasons, and some where down the road, they fall into the macs have bette graphics capabilities line of thinking and never really get out. What's funny is there is a reason why those guys end up building their own machines and using sun and all that. They can't let go of mac but those machines are all better for what they need.

[FngSaiYuk]

I'll have to do some digging for some reasearch I did about 5 years ago on this subject. Some chick at a place I used to work used to Mac this and Mac that at everything. According to her if we had Macs we'd practically have world peace ;) Either way I spent about 3 months doing all this research and then gave her this little packet on where exactly she was wrong. 6 months later she bought a PC. I'd like to think I had some influence in that.

5 years ago the mac really was in a bad state. Check out the current mac's and in particular OSX. Good stuff, esp compared to a windows based PC.
I can also understand the disappointment over the old system XX based mac's as well as the reluctance to head that way now. A lot of things in pc+winxp are now MUCH better than on the mac of 5 years ago.

[Gangsterfist]

oh yeah one more thing. those guys at Pixar may have used macs for some of their work, but I bet you big money that they started out on macs from the get go. Thats the "cycle of life" for mac and the biggest reason they still do computers at all. These guys start out in high school learning graphics on macs because macs are donated or given to school systems at a significantly lower price then a consumer would purchase them. They move on to using macs in college for much the same reasons, and some where down the road, they fall into the macs have bette graphics capabilities line of thinking and never really get out. What's funny is there is a reason why those guys end up building their own machines and using sun and all that. They can't let go of mac but those machines are all better for what they need.


Read that article I posted, Pixar is now using intel based computers and linux for their render farm, and not xserves. That is because the PC versions out perform Macs in rendering and straight up number crunching.

[FatherDog]

Actually,

The desktops the designers use may be macs, but the render farm is build of PC clusters.

http://www.canopus.us/us/canopus/pr_ProCoder_RFarm.asp

http://www.root6.com/Integration/ella.htm

Here is a posting for a admin to a render farm. Note you need linux and windows experience.

http://www.miscojobs.com/jobs/L_3/job_163558.htm

http://dv411.com/rfarm.html

http://news.thomasnet.com/fullstory/9967

http://www.linuxnetworx.com/news/4.2.2003.32-Linux_Networx_R.html

So, really Hollywood is using PCs man. Your information is false. The reason Pixar uses macs is because the probably get them for free or very cheap. However Pixar recently switched to the dark side and now runs intel based technology adn Linux.

read this and weap

http://www.macobserver.com/article/2003/02/10.7.shtml


Notice that NONE OF THESE LINKS aside fromt he last one say anything about Pixar. The last one, dated 2003, states that Pixar is switching from Sparc to Intel for its render farms.

THIS link -
http://www.macnn.com/articles/04/03/10/pixar.switches.to.os.x.g5/

dated 2004, states "Pixar has used Linux and Intel-based architecture in 2003, but that Pixar was switching to Mac OS X and G5 workstations for its production work".

So how about you read THAT and "weap".


oh yeah one more thing. those guys at Pixar may have used macs for some of their work, but I bet you big money that they started out on macs from the get go.

Hey, that'd be a NO. As you can see from that article, they WERE using Linux-based Intel architecture, but SWITCHED to MacOS.

[David Jamieson]

ok nerds what have we learned?

what makes a system complete? - nothing, it's the stylist not the style.

pc or mac? - wing chun or ving tsun

and finally:

your favourite band sucks. :p

[Gangsterfist]

oh well i am sure that pixar got that stuff for free or really cheap since xserves are not the best nor fastest machines out there for render farms and the rest of hollywood runs on PCs.

Thanks for the update tho FD, I was unaware they went back to using macs.

[FngSaiYuk]

oh well i am sure that pixar got that stuff for free or really cheap since xserves are not the best nor fastest machines out there for render farms and the rest of hollywood runs on PCs.

Thanks for the update tho FD, I was unaware they went back to using macs.

I doubt they're using the macs for the render farm. The best price/perf for rendering would be a farm of AMD's. The macs are probably used for the design work.

And finally KL/David Jamieson sucks ::grin::

[Vasquez]

Take the pebble from my hand, grasshopper... :D

David carradine is one of the best martial artist in the world. i hope to be like him someday. Don't believe me check the voting results on this survey. He's got my vote. IMOH he is second to Bruce Lee.

http://martial-arts-network.com/survey.htm

[SPJ]

- Special training to enhance certain moves.

They are basic skills practices. Including breathing, actual move drills, practice how to store and release Jing, against resistence with partner or props, slowly to gain proficiency and then real time drills, etc.


- Training to be able to take strikes on different part of the body.

This is called Pai Da Gong (http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1414075723/ref=sib_dp_srch_pop/103-5267131-9128659?v=search-inside&keywords=pai+da+gong).


- Counters for all the moves.

Yes, always study and practice moves and counter moves in pair. And there is more than one counter move. This way we also understand the limits or weakness of the move. To gain advantage in a certain area in a certain move, we also incur disadvantage in other area.


Counters against all counters.

This is a even higher level of learning. This is to improve your first move.

Counter all moves. It is like Yin and Yang. It is Tai Chi.

Counter the counter moves. (http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1410784738/ref=sib_dp_srch_pop/103-5267131-9128659?v=search-inside&keywords=counter+move) It is called the level of Wu Ji. (http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1410784738/ref=sib_dp_srch_pop/103-5267131-9128659?v=search-inside&keywords=wu+ji)

Tai Chi is the ultimate limit. Whenever, you set a factor or a limit. There are things within the limit, Yang. There are things outside of the limit, Yin. They interact in a Tai Chi way.

Wu Ji is ultimate of no limit. Limitless, formless, more than one form, etc.

:D