the 36 throws [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

ninjaboy

05-29-2005, 06:40 PM

so..... anybody want to take a stab at clearing up a point made in the 7* overview article?

what are the classical 36 throws of mantis?

it would be interesting to see this list. if anyone can buck up with the names and/ or descriptions i think it could start a great discussion.

personally, i hate putting things in neat and tidy boxes like that. i think people get too caught up with this over-compartmentalization of tradition ie. "there are 12 of THIS, and 36 of THESE, 8 of THIS, but only 3 of THAT". know what i'm saying? especially when we all do things a little differently for our own reasons.

anyway, i don't see, from the myriad of mantis styles and substyles coupled with the vast array of technique interpretation that this can somehow be contained into such a specific number....however, if there is a definitive classical approach to what exactly exists as throwing principles/techniques i'd still like to see it and talk about it.

so.......there it is. who's next?

sincerely,
neil armstrong

shirkers1

05-29-2005, 06:49 PM

Quick question, is trapping the leg with your leg and pushing the opponent down concidered a throw, or a trip? Example hooking the leg 7* stance and waist cutting, is this a trip or throw? Are they the same thing, or does a throw have to be...well a throw where you physically throw someone with a grabbing tactic. Traditionally speaking what is the difference?

ninjaboy

05-29-2005, 07:47 PM

this is exactly the kind of thing i am hoping to discover through this post.

neil

mantis108

05-30-2005, 11:33 AM

Personally, the traditional cataloguing of techniques into a set number of categories is done for the benefit of continuity and consistency of the system. That are important lessons involved other than just explaining a basketful of functional techniques. This would seem formulaic and esoteric enough that would turn most people off from go futher into studying the system; However, in the long run, it will pay off for those who have patience. IMHO, it is an important mental exercise second to non to the physical exercises within the system. But then that's just my own opinion.

I believe in terms of mantis takedowns involve mostly leg techiques such as kicking, tripping, trapping, etc. The Waist Chop in Bengbu is an example of that. BTW shooting for a single leg would be a takedown instead of a throw in my mind. Throws mostly involve the whole body and can be divided into knockdowns (hard ie the elbow sequence at the end of the Bengbu second road) and uprooting (soft ie hip toss which by the way is rarely done in mantis).

I am not familar with the so-called 36 throws in Seven Star, so I will not comment on that.

Mantis108

Three Harmonies

05-30-2005, 01:21 PM

Many throws in both Xing Yi and Tanglang are categorized under Kao Die, or literally 'knock downs.' These include most of the more sophisticated "trips" such as cut waist, or some of the moves Robert is speaking of in Bung Bu.
I would argue that the hip throw is not used much in Mantis. Tehcnically I cannot think of a Mantis set that I know where there is a hip throw in it!!?? Couple of moves in Taiji and Xing Yi, but I cannot think of any literal movement that is a hip throw. But I certainly use it a lot. It is an integral part of out training.
I think this is where a lot of teachers fall short, in that they have such a prejudice "mixing" styles, in this case putting a "Judo" Hip throw into their Mantis practice. This seems to be the mentality anyways. This is one of the reasons I advocate "cross training" so much. It can only help you in most cases.
Over the recent months I have been totally shocked at how little of time is spent with many systems / families of Mantis on throwing and applicable locking techniques! So few people do it, and even fewer understand these aspects of combat. Throws are the easiest application for anyone of any size as long as they can bridge the gap effectively. So I do not understand why very few teachers show many throws and takedowns. Chin Na is much, much more difficult so I can understand that one. Throws are safer for all involved to execute (you have a much higher chance of breaking your hand punching someone that throwing!). They give you the defender more control in that you can choose to drop the person nicely, or totally toss them into the ground causing severe damage. Remember: "Gravity never lies, and the ground never misses."
Any Qi Xing folk out there that can comment on the 36 throws more?

Jake :D

mantisben

05-31-2005, 12:05 AM

Tehcnically I cannot think of a Mantis set that I know where there is a hip throw in it!!??
Jake :D

The only possible "hip throw" I can think of is in HK 7* Chop Chui. Towards the end of the 3rd road where you swing left and right round-house punches, the "hip throw" being executed when swinging the right arm into the opponents chest.

Of course, this is one of my own interpretations of this technique. A couple of times when I was sparring, I would use this technique. The movement was familiar to me, but I didn't remember where I got it from. Then one evening when I was doing Chop Chui, it hit me.

mantisben

05-31-2005, 12:27 AM

Oso

05-31-2005, 06:15 AM

Neil...what up, dude!?!

Throw = opponent on ground, you still on feet

Takedown = you follow opponent to ground whether to follow up w/ striking (hand, feet or knee) or with chin na/choking/breaking techniques.

This distinction is important to me because there are times when you DON'T want to follow the opponent to the ground. So, when teaching, I define a technique as one or the other for tactics sake.

Deng Ta (sp?) to me is pretty much the same as O Soto Gari.

http://judoinfo.com/images/animations/blue/osotogari.htm

the arms are of course not gripping the gi in mantis but generally striking.

Deng Bu/Pu (sp?) could certainly be a hip throw couldn't it?

I don't particularly see anything wrong with categorizing things in lists. Especially if you are teaching in a commercial setting. The problem is when you think your list is the shiznit over everbody elses list.

mantisben

05-31-2005, 06:30 AM

...
Deng Ta (sp?) to me is pretty much the same as O Soto Gari.

http://judoinfo.com/images/animations/blue/osotogari.htm

the arms are of course not gripping the gi in mantis but generally striking.

Deng Bu/Pu (sp?) could certainly be a hip throw couldn't it?

This looks like the movement I was talking about in Chop Chui, towards the end of the 3rd road. Still, like you said, it would be more of a strike than a grab.

Praying Mantis or not, this is a good throwing technique.

mantis108

05-31-2005, 10:53 AM

Nice definitions but I think we will have to take into account in the context of Mantis. Personally, I can agree on your def. because there is a direct functional use when it comes to ground fighting with mantis.

Hi Jake,

I hear you and I understand your point. I think we are more or less subject to the focus of the style/ teacher. There is no harm in cross training if the basic is strong IMHO.

Warm regards

Robert

Oso

05-31-2005, 10:53 AM

I don't know Chop Choi but we do a similar application at the end of 3rd road of Bung Bu.

I personally have hooked/grabbed the near arm and am hitting accross the collarbone/neck/head depending on how nasty I'm feeling....if I'm real tight in them then I use an elbow into one of those areas.

What I was wondering on the other thread was if they were listing 36 principals or techniques.

Entering the clinch, setting up the throw and the exact tools used to execute a throw will vary by 'style'. But, all throws, irregardless of style, will share the same principles because you are trying to throw another human. The principles are the 'why did he fall down'.

Oso

05-31-2005, 10:58 AM

Nice definitions but I think we will have to take into account in the context of Mantis. Personally, I can agree on your def. because there is a direct functional use when it comes to ground fighting with mantis.
Robert

I'm not following you. Can you define what you mean by '...context of Mantis' for me?

as in: Mantis doesn't generally go to the ground?

mantis108

05-31-2005, 11:43 AM

My understanding of your def. is like the following example:

We do a deng ta and we let it reap. The opponent got their both feet of the ground and crushed his head. You are standing on your feet just looking at him no need to follow up, right? That would be a clear throw by your def. #1

We do a deng ta and for some reasons opponent has good roots and you managed to get him down by subtle changes in your technique. Now you have him down on his side and you close in sticking your knees on his neck and rib also trapping his elbow on your thigh (let say his right elbow on your left thigh) for control. Here at this point you have plenty of options including ground and pound or submission via positional play. This would be your def. #2

Ideally, in Mantis all Shuai techniques would strive for def. 1 like a knock out strike. Even techniques such as the waist chop would strive for that ideal. In a sense, def. 2 becomes a back up plan of sort IMHO. The good thing about this is that it's very direct and clear (and I am all for it) but the downside would be that it blurs the defining line between Shuai techniques that might cause confusion as to when is appropriate to execute a particular move (ie should I or can I go to the ground with the Deng Ta?) That split hesitation might just cause the efficiency of the move when we are at it. That's not really good news for novice. But then I have to say an experience MA guy would properly have not problem whatsoever with that. So, it could be just me being .... ;)

Again there's nothing wrong with your definitions. In fact I quite like it myself. :) Personally I general use dengta in the context of def. #2. It could be a big no no for other Mantis lines which would think that it's a half ass throw. But to each their own. So....

Warm regards

Robert

Oso

05-31-2005, 01:54 PM

ok, gotcha.

I agree the plan is to F 'em up by smakking the head for a KO.

and I think we agree that Plan B needs to be trained for so I think we are on the same page. :)

I think that most people just don't understand that it's harder to get a KO than you think it is.

for me, I teach the knock down and then run like hell before they get up again. :D

Oso

05-31-2005, 06:14 PM

Mark, to answer your question YKW quoted:

IMO, a throw is anything where he ends up on the ground and you are still standing.

Sweeps, trips, etc. can be throws or takedowns by my definitions.

The exact scenario/situation dictates the tactics you decide to follow.

I won't repeat what I said above about the difference between chosing to just throw and to throw and follow (takedown).

I place everything as a subset of 'throws' and 'takedowns'

Also, just to run my mouth some mo, I think 'trips' should be stated as 'sweeps' because you might not be sweeping their leg. It could be there hand/arm if they are prone and it doesn't have to be your leg that is sweeping.....

All throws require grabbing. The only exception is when you opponent uses Bagua circle walking and cross his leg and you can sweep his forward leg without any hand contact.

I'm a little confused by what you are saying here.

Not all throws require grabbing.

Most throws probably require some sort of hand contact but it doesn't have to be a 'grip'.

shirkers1

05-31-2005, 06:41 PM

Just to clarify I know what I think is a throw, I was asking in general to see what the "traditional" meaning of a throw is. Since it is stated that there are 36 whatevers from a "real traditional" school, then maybe they could give us a clear answer as to what is what... but as usual we won't get an answer.

I agree that a throw is anything that puts your opponent on the ground through some sort of throwing, tripping, pushing, tossing, sweeping, pressing, etc or any combo of those together to get the guy/girl/child/dog on the ground.

Oso

05-31-2005, 06:48 PM

right...gotcha....just running my mouth ;)

what sucks is...I REALLY would love to see the list...or even just the first 4, 6 or 9.

Oso

06-01-2005, 03:50 AM

It all depends on what the purpose of your throwing. The fight still continue after your thrown unless his skull got cracked open from that. You may be able to throw your opponent by two points contact such as push his head down and kick his leg off. Without the "leading arm control", there will be too many ways that your opponent could counter you and that could make your throwing fail. Even after you have thrown or taken him down wothout controlling his "leading arm" and put him on the ground, Both of his free arms can still fight back as we have seen in most of the UFC fight. If you have that "grip - leading arm control" then you have a head start for your ground fight because you already got an arm bar on him and you can apply it whenever you want to. This is the main difference between TCMA throws and BJJ or MMA take downs.

Ok. I agree completely. Just didn't quite get what you were saying in the last post.

Only heard about 50 words SC poem but have never heard of 36 PM throws and I don't believe it exists.

Why do you think it couldn't exist?

Judo has 40+ throws. I've only learned a couple of SC specific throws but I'm sure there are probably that many in SC.

I think there could be 36 throws in a mantis curriculum. Remember, many separately named judo throws are variations on a theme.

Three Harmonies

06-01-2005, 08:50 AM

YKW
I am not sure I am following you. I agree with just about everything Oso said. If you are talking about actually grabbing an opponent with your hands, then you are completely and totally wrong! Throws do not require grabbing. Actually the highest level of throwing is without grabbing at all. My teacher constantly proves this with and without boxing gloves on. Sure keeping the arm in your grasp is going to give you the advantage, but it is not a be all for sure 100% of the time technique as you make it sound. Depends on the scenario.
Now if you mean grabbing in the sense that you need to have some sort of control over your opponent with contact.....okay I think I can see that.....maybe. Remember those pesky over/under hooks? No grabbing. What about various leg hooks (inner/outer)? No grabbing needed.
Oso
Where would you classify leg hooks? You are not kicking the leg out, but rather tripping them, yes?

Cheers
Jake :D

Oso

06-01-2005, 10:19 AM

Where would you classify leg hooks? You are not kicking the leg out, but rather tripping them, yes?

it's still a 'sweep' to me. with more of a 'na' feeling because you are locking the ankle or the knee or possibly the hip.

and a sweep can be a throw or a takedown depending upon the results.

for me a 'sweep' is anything removing a supporting member (arm/leg) and thereby taking their base away from them.

thus, on the ground, I can use my arm to sweep their arm and dump them face down on the ground/mat.

this is part of how I look at ground fighting as not being all that different from stand up fighting. the biggest issue is learning to generate energy from other points of contact with the earth than your feet.

What I got from YKW's post was that follow up was easier if you had the near arm on the way down.

But, that, for me, is a takedown, which might be a throw, but might not. there are several techniques that come to mind as takedowns, which require a grab, but are not throws as they don't necessarily impact the ground.

mantis108

06-01-2005, 10:51 AM

I think I would agree with you on the 36 throw list in Mantis. But then it could be one of those "secret" manuscipts that only the sole inheritor of one of the "authentic" Luo Guangyu lineage could own. ;))

May I ask if you would mind sharing the 50 word Shuai Chiao poem? I think it would help the discussion and open up for further study of Shuai element in Mantis. Thanks

Best regards

Mantis108

SevenStar

06-01-2005, 02:14 PM

Judo has 40+ throws. Remember, many separately named judo throws are variations on a theme.

there are 67 throws recognized by the kodokan. 40 original and others that have been added since. They definitely revolve around a theme. Basic - hip throw. opponent avoids the hip throw by trying to step around it - sweeping him throw. He learns to thwart that tecnhique, so you attack his inside of his outside leg as opposed to the outside - springing hip throw...

Three Harmonies

06-01-2005, 05:05 PM

YKW
Please do not take me as being curt, but I really trying to understand your thinking here.
There is a counter to everything, and you are right throwing is not 100% all the time. So I suppose my opponent can grab me on the way down. But they can do that as well if I am grabbing one of their arms, yes? Lead arm control does not totally counter act any counter of theirs does it? I can do a firemans carry (used solely because just about everyone knows what this is) on you, and on your way down you can grab my arm to try and pull me down, lock etc.
I am not saying it is easy to do without grabbing, but it is not needed to grab. Again look outside of CMA at Greco Roman wrestlers, they utilize the under/over hooks constantly!

On the topic of single leg=throw. Totally not getting you their!? So by your definition a throw is only a throw if I end up on one leg? So hip throws do not count?
As for them being in Mantis....look again my friend. Beng Bu is a prime example as Mr. Brazier stated.
I do agree with you about the 36 throws comment. I think it is some strange add on from the "real" inheritors!! :p And I have a picture to proce I am one of them, I have SEVEN DOTS!! :rolleyes: :D
BTW are you a SC guy? With whom/what lineage do you study Mantis?

Robert
Good luck getting any of the SC studs to post the whole poem. They have yet to figure out that just because I have the 50 word poem, it does not mean I will be able to "steal" their art. They are really weird about that topic. I hope YKW will give us more than ten!

Cheers
Jake :D

Oso

06-01-2005, 07:49 PM

there are 67 throws recognized by the kodokan. 40 original and others that have been added since. They definitely revolve around a theme. Basic - hip throw. opponent avoids the hip throw by trying to step around it - sweeping him throw. He learns to thwart that tecnhique, so you attack his inside of his outside leg as opposed to the outside - springing hip throw...

right. to clarify...I meant that if mantis does have 36 throws then many of them would be variations on a theme like judo.

Three Harmonies

06-02-2005, 03:13 AM

Miao Dao is good thanks.
I believe I see what you are saying re: the lead arm. I think our confusion (at least on my end) was in terminology. It is certainly advantageous to maintain control wether or not they are on the ground.
Thanks
Jake :D

Oso

06-02-2005, 04:20 AM

This is exactly what I tried to explain to Jake. Let me use one more example here. If you apply a "bowing - shoulder throw" on your opponent, after the throw, if you release your leading arm control then he can roll and get back up or run away. That will make your throw worthless. But if you still hold his arm after the throw then you can

I agree.

Just a couple of points to keep the discussion going...

Rolling is generally, IMO, a tougher skill to aquire than just breakfalling. So, the person would have to be better than average to accomplish this. Judo an jujitsu players are the only peeps I see incorporating rolling early in the curriculum.

Also, adding 'broken timing' to throws can mess with an opponents ability to either breakfall or roll out. This is how 'sport' throws can readily be made into 'combat' throws.

You have to train in a manner to stay healthy.

**edit**

last night was our monthly trip to jujitsu class and I got a chance to roll with one of my buddies from a year ago. ****, I miss that shiat. I still fared well with him but at the end i was going for tai otoshi and he read it like a Dr. Suess book and sent me flying. sweet!

http://judoinfo.com/images/animations/blue/taiotoshi.htm

mantid1

06-02-2005, 05:20 AM

Break falling and rolling are just ways of dispersing energy. ( I am sure you all know that).

A roll should be taught with certain types of throws that give you more forward momentum. The energy is dispersed through your movemt with the roll.

A break fall is used your body is going straight down (usually) and the energy is absorbed through the whole body and not just in the shoulder or hip with can inure you. This is why we "attack the Mat" with the free arm and have one leg extended. It may still hurt but you dont get injured.

There is the combination of rolling and breakfalling where you roll into a breakfall and pop back up. this is for the throw that is not exaxtly a downward crushing type of throw or a projection type, but a combination of the two.

Rolls - Sutemi

Breakfalls - Ukemi

Combination of the two - Kaiton (not sure about this name)

I would love to see someone who could do a roll out of one arm shouder throw, two arm shoulder throw or two arm drop. You would be the man (or woman).

I was also taught that breakfalling can be considered a form of iron body training. It without a doubt conditions the body to take a fall or a kick and punch.

I love the mantis two person drills for conditioning the arms, but I think it is a better idea to condition the body, since that is where most will be attacking.

This may not belong on a "mantis" forum but I do not see the reason we should not discuss the short comings of mantis and maybe improve upon it.

But then again it, is not as fun as having someone translate an old mantis manual, that does not translate well :)

Oso

06-02-2005, 11:41 AM

This is very true indeed. We call it "half way throw". You just freeze yourself in the middle of the throwing and your opponent's body is flipping half way with leg up and head down. Suddenly the momentum is gone and his body will slide straight down with head hit the ground first. This is why we say that if you don't want to hurt him then finish the throw. If you want to hurt him then only throw him half way.

I like to try to feel which way the opponent was trying to breakfall or roll out of the throw and then determine the direction to jink him. harder to do though.

I would love to see someone who could do a roll out of one arm shouder throw, two arm shoulder throw or two arm drop. You would be the man (or woman).

the way I teach to attempt to beat the throw is to figure out where the circle of the throw is going to take you. then, beat him to that point by taking over the momentum of the throw (stealing back the energy you gave him to begin with). In this manner I do think it is possible to roll out of anything but you need to know how to turn two centers into one and add power to that unit so that as soon as you touch the ground again you can redirect them around you.

ninjaboy

06-02-2005, 08:00 PM

hey gang! very interesting stuff....good to see the topic run off like this. and good to see your voices matt and jake! it's always a pleasure.

sadly, however, we are no closer to being able to catalog these 36 ideas/principles/techniques (or whatever they may be) that were originally sought after but, regardless, it has been educational in other ways. very interesting.

sincerely,
neil

Young Mantis

06-02-2005, 11:18 PM

Well, here is my take on the subject. On our website, under the category of Empty-hand techniques, we list "三十六把占拿跌法" which we translate as "36 Methods of Grappling, Locking, Trapping and Take-Down Techniques". It incorporates most if not all of our sahn sao techniques including takedowns.

The number 36 is not finite. It is very common in Chinese culture to use numbers like 6 6 36, 7 7 49, 8 8 64. One number multiplied by itself. Why the number 36 was chosen I cannot say but I believe that was how it was passed down to us. My Sigung, late Master Brendan Lai used to teach a Chin-na (kum la) course at the San Francisco State University. He once told me that from 36 techniques we get 72. Again, although the numbers I believe are fairly arbitrary, he was illustrating that there are seemingly infinite variations to the techniques in our style depending on the situation and response of our opponent. My other Sigung, late Master Chiu Chuk Kai has a list of sau fa that has 64 techniques. At the end of his handwritten list he writes "8 8 64". Maybe it's an I-Ching thing and someone can elaborate on that since my Taoist studies are a bit rusty.

I don't know if the Shanghai school is referring to the same thing without seeing the Chinese characters. Perhaps they translated the same phrase to mean just takedowns or throws. The sole word in our phrase that represents that element of the style is "跌" which literally means "fall". It is but one element of the phrase. There is no distinction of whether it is a sweep, trip, takedown, throw, etc. Personally, I think sometimes people get too caught up in the nomenclature. So for us, any technique that causes the person to fall is in this category.

Anyway, hope this helps. Oh, and before anyone asks, I don't have a specific list of 36 techniques. I have learned many more than that and they all fit into this category in our school.

Vance
YM

Three Harmonies

06-03-2005, 12:26 AM

Great post Vance. I agree with what you are saying, and it is very true the Chinese pull out crazy numbers that are auspiciious, but it does not always mean anything. So any type of takedown, throw, lock gets thrown into this category of 36 Grappling Methods? Cool. I like that approach.

Cheers
Jake :cool:

K.Brazier

06-03-2005, 04:25 AM

Vance,
Fascinating about what you learned on the numbers.

On the manuscript Interconnected Fists-Lien Chuen- it says in part,

"...As for fanche we say 36 interconnected fists. It is also said 64. It can then expand to 72 changes. To talk of its essence we say 81 transformations..."

On Fanche,
"...You can use fanche together with collapsing(beng), smashing(za), sticking(nien), grasping(na), pressing the door and leaning on the arm..."

So here are 6 key words:
beng, za , nien, na, tieh kao.

I have noticed that what I have for nien you have zhan.
These 2 seem to sometimes get mixed up in old texts as they are a little similar.

So 6 key words and 6 combinations make make a total of 36.

Though this is not sure as another Mantis group uses the 6 keywords:
Yin, yang, gang, rou, xu, shi, ...
In English-
Yin, yang, Unyielding, yielding(or hard and soft), false and real.

But this manuscript, which is not recent, is clearly lifted from General Yu Dayou's Ming dynasty manuscript on stick fighting.

8864
8 short strikes(ba duan) or "elbows" with 8 combinations for 64.

9981
9 keywords which are simialr to 12 keywords plus 9 cominations for 81.
This is a long form which I have never seen.

Robert have you seen the 8864 at the end of Shigung's manuscript?

Oso

06-03-2005, 04:30 AM

Neil: Yes, it would be nice if the Shanghai school would be kind enough to offer at least a glimpse at what they are talking about.

But, since they're not....we move on w/o 'em and share what we do have.

Vance, thanks for the look at your teachers categorizations.

While I agree with you that too much time can be spent on categorizing methods, I have always placed a high emphasis (as learned from my previous teachers) on always looking at a scenario from the multiple opponent angle. More attention needs to be paid to body positioning after you might have tripped/thrown opponent A when there is a B, C and D.

Also, and this is a very general statement, I've found that there is the feeling in CMA in general that ones techniques are going to work every time. I don't see enough attention paid to the fact that your opponent may be better than you. This is a very important part of the psychological training needed for fighting. It's important for our students to understand that there's always someone better and how to handle that emotionally in a fight so that they don't completely crumble.

Three Harmonies

06-03-2005, 07:55 AM

Oso
Yet another good point. Especially when it comes to throws. I tell my guys all the time, the likely hood of you throwing someone cleanly (without them grabbing, or striking on the way down, or when they hit the ground) is slim. I have learned from various Shuai Chiao folk to follow up with a knee strike on the way down. As they hit the ground, you follow through and knee the **** out of them with all your body weight dropping.
All too often us martial artist's think we will only run into someone on the street that know nothing. Ideally this is great as none of us should be fighting anyways, but ideally is not reality.

Good stuff guys, screw the Shanghai group who needs them.
Jake :cool:

Oso

06-03-2005, 08:14 AM

yep, gotta make sure they are going to stay down if you went to the trouble of tossing them.

I try to get accross the idea that you should always expect an opponent to be better than you, or at least semi trained....and I've seen non-trained street fighters who were just plain scary.

avoid, evade and all that is the philosophy but don't you think it's a bit ironic, or paradoxical at least, that we assume in our training that we are going to fight at some point?

mantis108

06-03-2005, 11:34 AM

OMG, this thread is turning out to be one of the best thread ever! :D

First and foremost, thank you Vance for bringing up such a great point and good post. Kevin, indeed there is that line "8 8 64 End" in GM Chiu's Shou Fa notes. I think I showed you and you should have a copy of it already? You would notice that there are actually more than 64 moves listed (ie second section 2 more moves are listed at the bottom of the section). He also said that Bazhou is also 8 8 64 like the I Ching. There are myriad of changes. This can be crossed checked with other Jiang Hualong line and it's consistant as far as I can tell.

Personally, I believe that one of the 18 styles - Yanching's Nian Na Die Fa is in fact another name of Chin Na skill. Chinese like to have a few names to address a person or stuff. This is in a way signifying the stages of life and such things. This kind of practice is also a form of empowerment or acknowledgement. So for Chin Na, you would address it as Fen Jing Cuo Gu Fa, Nian Na Die Fa, Di Sha Shou (72 Earth Goblins hands), or Chin Na Shu. All these names in fact address certain emphasis or function. For example, Nian Na Die Fa points to the sticking and controlling with throw/takedown of the art. Now, most people today think of Chin Na as stand up grappling but IMHO it's definitely about taking the opponent to the ground, or to the wall for that matter, it order to complete took the game away from him. If you use Xiao Chan Si wrist lock, you are not trying to break his wrist. You are in fact trying to take out his roots by applying immense pressure on the wrist joint. If you don't believe me, you can try that on your partner and see how hard it is to forcefully breaking a wrist especially on someone who has training in the art. But if you use technique and get the right angle (pun intended), his legs would literally yield, thus you have superior position.

Now I am not familiar with GM Brendan Lai's teaching but I would imagine that 36 Nian Na Die Fa would make use of pressure points in conjunction of with the control and takedown as the number 36 suggests not only a continuous strategical progression but also provides reference to the 36 major arcupressure points on the body that would often be used when applying Chin Na. Is GM Lai's Chin Na was based on actual 36 techniques remains to be seen. But I would think that it's would more or less consistant with most TCMA's Chin Na skill. BTW, in CCK TCPM Chin Na does involve using pressure points. Now this merely suggests that we aim to work on fine motor skill and details in fighting. It doesn't mean that it's any better or worst than using more gross motor skill oriented grappling skills found mostly in martial sports. It is just another side of the coin.

Chin Na in my experience is largely similar to the hand controling and garment grabbing idea of Shuai Chiao - Judo, and clinching of MMA for the throws and takedowns. But Chin Na works more on striking (use as distractions) plus snatching control on extremities (ie finger, wrist, tendons/muscles, pressure points, etc...) as the initial unbalancing act. In other words, there is a great aspiration of maintaining parameters which sometime can become too idealistic that unless you are twice as strong as the opponent the technique falls apart under intense pressure. But I suppose that's where the gong aspect comes into play. BTW, I think Kung Fu don't necessarily assume the exponent is better than the opponent unlike Karate. In fact, Kung Fu most of the time assume the opponent is better; therefore, we strive to deflect and avoid hard contact in the begining. At least that's what I was taught consistantly. But then I am extra petit on the MA scale so.... lol ;)

So to me Chin Na in fact is Nien Na Die Fa or Di Sha Shou

Just some thoughts to share with you all.

Warm regards

Robert

PS Matt and Jake, thanks for the support and glad that you enjoy the list. I am working on scanning in some old articles of GM Chiu on my site soon. Please stay tune for updates. :)

Oso

06-03-2005, 12:43 PM

ok, well it seems we all do consider the idea that we could be beat in an encounter.
I've just seen a lot of 'this will beat your opponent.'

maybe my perspective right now is that I have only been teaching a mere 4 years and my oldest student at this point is just 3 years with most of them being less than a year...so, I just want to make sure thier egos don't transcend their skills.

YKW,

I think I see what you are saying. Maybe I'm wrong to consider that I might lose a fight no matter how hard I train but...for me it's something that must be part of the whole mindset to fight in the first place.

shirkers1

06-03-2005, 12:48 PM

You know who

plain and simple this list accept for the last one or two is a waste of writing on your part

- Know all possible counters.
- Know how to prevent your opponent from countering you ahead of time.
- Know all possible counters on their counters
- Have ability to make most of your opponent's counters fail.
- Just use this move to set up for next move.

To have a sense of these things and to train them is one thing.. To rely on them as an answer to the one tactic end tactic mind set is going to get your ass handed to you. WHY?

Unless you are a master of the mind reading, time altering style then you never know what is going to happen in a fight.

- You can only react and act to what is happening. Just because you will react to a certain tactic one way doesn't mean the guy you are facing will so your counter theory is out the door.

- Once again your opponents actions are dictated by the moment and you never know what is going to happen. So how can you prevent a counter that you don't even know is going to be applied? Too much "thinking" in a fight will get your grill cleaned.

- Counters to counters is reaching too far into the altercation. Everything changes after one tactic, so any plans you have after 1 tactic is luck of the draw. (think 3 punch combos) 1st punch can be set up for the next two, what if the first one lands and throws the opponents contact points off? Then the rest of the combo is shot. That is a simple punch combo.. you try to apply this to advanced tactics and thought out fighting and you're going to be needing a lot of ice after the fight.

- Yes you need to be able to act on a split second level offensively and on defense, act without to much thought.

- Yes never think of a one tactic fight... Always continue the flow of tactics till you are safe and the threat is over.

It's been said before, so I won't dwell on it. There are too many variables in a fight situation to think in a one tactic fight ending mindset period.

shirkers1

06-03-2005, 01:01 PM

Oso my friend you are completely right to have the mindset that you may not win... But you have to use it correctly. Thinking that you can do damage and the damage being applied is two different things. So you need confidence that you can handle yourself if need be and the brains to know that you aren't going to be able to take anyone that confronts you. The better fighter doesn't always win... Because of all the variables involved. Apply that to street fighting, boxing, MMA whatever and you know this is true.

This "fear" should also help drive you into wanting to get the job done, not stopping with a one tactic fight ending blow. Keep going until the threat is over and hopefully you'll be the one to walk away with less damage. If not and you gave it your best shot then fine... Hopefully you can walk away with a nugget of information to help you in the future. The loser doesn't always lose in a fight. ;)

shirkers1

06-03-2005, 01:59 PM

shirkers1

06-03-2005, 02:06 PM

As for knowing the counters... that is all fine and good. But you have to factor in that I may be thinking that commiting my kick the oponent isn't as conditioned as me and the block will hurt him just as much as the kick getting through to it's intended target or vice versa... These are some of the many variables I'm talking about... You're thinking to much and your going to get blasted because your standing there with tunnel vision thinking too much. If he blocks or counters so what you move on. This isn't an exact science, it is a science but it's one built on the knowledge that nothing is positive and you have to be able to adapt to win.

We can start another thread on this because I don't want to take it off of the topic of the 36 throws. Although this mindset should be applied to throws as well.

Oso

06-03-2005, 02:09 PM

shirkers: Right. I'm not talking about a defeatest attitude but more of one that it doesn't matter if I win or lose, I do what I know to do as best I can.

also, being faced with a superior opponent is an opportunity for sudden growth in your own abilities....or get your ass handed to you :p

It's an extremely delicate balance between critical thinking during a fight and the 'no mind' to be able to react with the subconscious versus the conscious mind. (Much like Sifu Puyot was talking about)

I think you must be able to combine both those skills in order to fight. Or if not combine then switch between active critical thinking and reaction.

....my brain is starting to hurt.....

-N-

06-03-2005, 10:51 PM

The number 36 is not finite.

[...]

My Sigung, late Master Brendan Lai used to teach a Chin-na (kum la) course at the San Francisco State University. He once told me that from 36 techniques we get 72. Again, although the numbers I believe are fairly arbitrary, he was illustrating that there are seemingly infinite variations to the techniques in our style depending on the situation and response of our opponent.
Agreed.

N.

-N-

06-03-2005, 11:47 PM

Now I am not familiar with GM Brendan Lai's teaching but I would imagine that 36 Nian Na Die Fa would make use of pressure points in conjunction of with the control and takedown as the number 36 suggests not only a continuous strategical progression but also provides reference to the 36 major arcupressure points on the body that would often be used when applying Chin Na. Is GM Lai's Chin Na was based on actual 36 techniques remains to be seen. But I would think that it's would more or less consistant with most TCMA's Chin Na skill.
Some pressure points such as for elbow, shoulder, and neck. But as you say, continuous strategical progression maintaining control of the other person. The takedowns often dump the person on his head or cause him to break his fall with his face.

Perhaps typical TCMA Chin Na that has been Mantis-ized with Sifu Lai's particular flavor of small circle, close technique, and explosive force.

N.

mantis108

06-04-2005, 02:16 PM

Thanks for sharing the insight. I really appreciate it. :)

Warm regards

Mantis108

phoenixdog

06-04-2005, 02:38 PM

Funny how no one can list the 36 throws. Back to the secrecy thing. He's a secret for you. In mantis you a person on their head while their arms are trapped so they can't break their fall.

SevenStar

06-07-2005, 10:36 AM

Chin Na in my experience is largely similar to the hand controling and garment grabbing idea of Shuai Chiao - Judo, and clinching of MMA for the throws and takedowns. But Chin Na works more on striking (use as distractions) plus snatching control on extremities (ie finger, wrist, tendons/muscles, pressure points, etc...) as the initial unbalancing act. In other words, there is a great aspiration of maintaining parameters which sometime can become too idealistic that unless you are twice as strong as the opponent the technique falls apart under intense pressure.

That's not unique to chin na - a good example of that in judo and in wrestling is the arm drag. Also, it's not uncommon for people to use what I call "dirty judo" - hitting you in order to set up something. I have been intentionally headbutted in judo competition before.

SevenStar

06-07-2005, 10:38 AM

SevenStar

06-07-2005, 11:07 AM

Fighting in real life and on a computer are two different animals. Where talking about fighting not programs that are pre set numbers and working on mathmatical certainties. Fighting has infinate possibilities and I don't see any one person on this earth being able to compute the actions for a win in a fight. Because nothing is certain, you are dealing with humans, and when there is humans involved there is error.

So say there are 12 counters to my kick.... If I know all of the counters to your counters which counter counter are you prepared for? There are 12 counters to your counters etc. which one do you use? You don't know because it doesn't matter until he acts. Do you see where I'm coming from? If you are thinking about everything at the depth you are implying then you've already lost my friend. The key is to train your skills until you are able to act with your skills no matter what the situation is. Free flowing skills, the ability to execute your tactics at a whim no matter what is happening in a fight. Not thinking about what is going to come if at all.

A good fighter, sees the openings and doesn't think about the opening. The opening is there and the tactic shoots. The oponents reaction to that tactic feeds everything else cause and effect. A good fighter can take a hit as well as give it. A good fighter knows when to walk away. A good fighter knows that thinking too much will leave you one step behind the guy who acts first.

you're right and wrong. No, you don't want to think too much, but you do indeed want to think. Strategy is not so spur of the moment. I want to do what I can to keep you so that I am one step ahead of you. If I see an opening, yes, I think about it - you do to. It's not a long drawn out process "hmm, he's open there - which one of my 23,000 counters do I want to use? maybe this one, no, this..." You think about the opening - yoiu had to, as you noticed it in the first place - then you automatically respond to it with something. THIS is the part that you don't think about. This is also why people limit the responses they use.

Take a judoka, for example. Out of 60+ throws, do they master them all? Heck no. Alot of serious competitors have around 8 throws they compete with - one throw for each direction, and of those 8, three that are their bread and butter. doing so gives them such focus that they can master a technique - or a counter to it - and recognize it instantly. The fewer tactics you have to choose from, the more spontaneous the reaction. Realistically speaking, you will only use a few of them anyway. The little used techniques generally will not be the ones you use in combat, competition, etc. - it is the ones that you drill all the time and have ingrained into your body. Using myself as an example, I know how to counter throws where the opponent turns their back to me with ura nage (basically, a suplex), but tani otoshi is what's ingrained into me, so that's typically what I throw. I make a conscious effort to throw anything other than that counter, as it is automatic.

shirkers1

06-07-2005, 12:35 PM

I think we are both agreeing on the same thing here (which scares me) :D

Well of coarse you "think" about it. But not a drawn out process because then it does turn into anticipation because you don't know how things are going to change during/after the tactic is thrown. But coming from a boxing background I can tell you that when an opening comes your hands act before you think about it in depth. That is the flow I'm talking about. When you watch a fight (boxing or whatever) does your head jerk when a punch is thrown? Do you find yourself moving like you were fighting? Do you see the openings and think why isn't he doing this etc? That is where you will be when it becomes part of you, and thinking and doing becomes one. You act when needed without having to think in depth about it.

mantis108

06-07-2005, 01:41 PM

What I wanted to say was that in today's Chin Na during stand up, teachers are more concerned with SECTIONAL control (ie joint to joint) rather than POSITIONAL control (ie clinching or control of position) Teachers like Dr. Yang is a good example of that. It often leads to a lock flow on the plus side and chasing a lock on the negative side. That's why IMHO striking is needed as a distraction more frequantly in the case of chasing a lock. I am not saying the samething is not going to happen in positional control but the reliance of it is more with sectional control because of the variables presented (ie range of motion, flexibility, etc...) in the limbs. Most of the time positional control is ignored in Chin Na that's taught today as fa as I am aware. I think teachers of Chin Na should make it clear that the skill is not about switching from lock to lock. It is about positional control and that a lock is obtained, and switching of locks only happen, as the situation unfold for the control of a superior position either for knock out or submission.

Warm regards

Mantis108

SevenStar

06-08-2005, 07:59 AM

Funny how no one can list the 36 throws. Back to the secrecy thing. He's a secret for you. In mantis you a person on their head while their arms are trapped so they can't break their fall.

coincidentally, we worked several such throws in judo last night. You rotate fully on them, so even though he can't break the fall, he will land safely on his back. As YKW said earlier, if I stop halfway, he lands on his head.

SevenStar

06-08-2005, 08:32 AM

.......

What I wanted to say was that in today's Chin Na during stand up, teachers are more concerned with SECTIONAL control (ie joint to joint) rather than POSITIONAL control (ie clinching or control of position) Teachers like Dr. Yang is a good example of that. It often leads to a lock flow on the plus side and chasing a lock on the negative side. That's why IMHO striking is needed as a distraction more frequantly in the case of chasing a lock. I am not saying the samething is not going to happen in positional control but the reliance of it is more with sectional control because of the variables presented (ie range of motion, flexibility, etc...) in the limbs. Most of the time positional control is ignored in Chin Na that's taught today as fa as I am aware. I think teachers of Chin Na should make it clear that the skill is not about switching from lock to lock. It is about positional control and that a lock is obtained, and switching of locks only happen, as the situation unfold for the control of a superior position either for knock out or submission.

Warm regards

Mantis108

gotcha.

jwwmantis

06-08-2005, 08:36 PM

Chin Na is to control the person long enough to apply a killing technique. Whether you take them to the ground, take them up on their toes, etc, it does not matter. Control their body and apply a kill technique.

Dr. Yangs chin na does use positional locks. Check out the latest in-depth series.

SevenStar

06-09-2005, 08:49 AM

You may never see a BJJ guy use "head lock" to take down his opponent.

yes you will, though not often. There is a judo throw called koshi guruma, it's basically a headlock throw, similar to your neck surround technique. You will see it more in judo, but I've seen it taught to bjj guys as well as a few other basic throws.

Also, takedowns are way more prevalent than "dragging". you still see people who will jump guard or sit guard, but the double and single leg are the bread and butter.

Oso

06-09-2005, 10:07 AM

coincidence....

been working with a move from Ba Bu Lien Wa (an eagle claw form drawn into the beginning level Pong Lai curriculum by Master Shi) In the two person there is a move that is similar to a single leg and is sorta being used as a defense against a headlock throw. I'm not sure I agree with the exact way it's being employed in the two person set but have taken those two moves out and taught and drilled them as a single leg lift and sweep of the back leg and as a hip toss using the head.

mantis108

06-09-2005, 10:45 AM

There is no such thing as "stand up Chin Na" except those "come along" locks.

In CMA the joint locking and throwing are mixed together. A "complete" and "effective" joint lock should cause pain and also put your opponent down to the ground with the same effect as throwing. If you don't allow your opponent to stand on his feet then you could reduce the chance to be countered.

You may never see a BJJ guy use "head lock" to take down his opponent. You may also never see a CMA use "dragging" to take down his opponent. BJJ guys go down to the ground and then look for a lock. CMA guys use locking and throwing to take down opponent along with the leading arm control. Different approach and require different level of skills which lead into different trainning requirement.

* Sigh * My friend, if you are who I think who you are, you are amongst the most fortunate few that have been able to study under some really great teachers. You might also have GM Han Hsingtang's Chin Na material which I think is superb. I have only seen bits and pieces of his stuff including his "Police Practical Chin Na mannual" for the Taiwan police forces. I love that Chinese text. It's really a gem. It's a thin volume but it contains much more and much practical than a lot of the Chin Na manuals that is available today. In a lot of ways, it advocates remarkably similar strategy to BJJ IMHO. Grappling skill is grappling skill whether it's on foot, on all fours, or on your back.

I agreed with your comment mostly. My point mainly is that the goal of Chin Na control is to take out the opponent's base of support by a grappling measure (ie, joint lock, chock, etc) chiefly through trickering a senory overload (ie pain compliance, etc). The sure sign of that success is taking the opponent to the ground. Whether the opponent drops with a lock or a throw is IMHO a mute point when it comes to grappling (wrestling, BJJ, Chin Na, or whatever means.) Fighting is fighting. What works, works. But in today's TCMA world, people are still teaching the "standard" stand up locking method. If you don't believe me, get a hold of the "earlier" Dr Yang's Chin Na material. Now he may have more "advanced" material that came out recently that I am not aware of which might include the positional control and such things. But why can't or why won't he taught those right off the bat? I am not trying to bash a teacher who has contribute so much to the Kung Fu community but I am just wondering about his mode of thinking when it comes to teaching practical Kung Fu.

I understand the urges to promote stylistic diffferences (Hell, I am all for the wisdoms of TCMA) but I don't think it is healthy to do it at the expense of good sound fighting principles. BTW, I think Sevenstar made a good point about the head lock. So...

Warm regards

Mantis108

mantis108

06-09-2005, 11:02 AM

Oso

06-09-2005, 12:05 PM

Hi Oso,

Kevin showed me this. And we drilled that while he was here in YK. I think the purpose of that ling move is to demonstrate that the form side has a hole in that sequence so it can be taken advantage of that way. So the form side would have to understand the inherit danger of such disposition. The counter was meant to be one of the ways. It is also one that would give the ling side a chance to continue. So, in reality other counters like you'd said would be better options to end the game.

Just a thought to share with you.

Warm regards

Mantis108

Exactly!!!!

I've wondered the same thing....as in "What exactly is the real point on some of the movements?"

there of course has to be give and take in working 2 man material and you need to ALSO take each movement on it's own merits and drill one steps and two steps so as not to completely take the two person form at face value.

mantis108

06-10-2005, 11:13 AM

If you are talking about the "Shaolin Chin Na" then you can see that most of the ending are on the ground. For example, on page 68 (small silk realm), if Dr Yang just step forward his right leg then his opponent will be on the ground. Dr Yang's ending pictures are "almost falling but not falling yet". I don't believe Dr Yang implies "stand up Chin Na".

Thank your for pointing that out. I have no problem seeing that. But then if someone say a novice were to buy the book and trying to learn it, what would they have concluded from looking at the picture? That's why I am saying there create an impression of Chin Na being a stand up grappling. I understand your point of no such thing as stand up Chin Na but it does create that impression and this is material available publically in North America at least. So it is a bench mark of sort for TCMA Chin Na. With great power comes great responsibilities and that is the lot that he has taken up.

What I am getting at is that his series of books so far has fallen under that line that they are more or less anatomy of joint lock skill in an academic way. It demonstrates the technique and its effects individually but failed to provide practical drilling method for the intended audience to be able to pick up the skill's true intent. It is an academic success but not IMHO a functional success. He could have done that easily with fewer locks and variations but focus on the real strategy of applying Chin Na. But it's his rice bowl. So... If you are opened minded check out all other MMA and BJJ products and you will see what I mean. I say he's either minding the conservative Chinese "Masters" view or he's just not paying attention to the dire needs of the TCMA community IMHO.

Go down to the ground doesn't mean that you have to lost your mobility. If you go down to the ground with only one knee. You can still "spring back up" anytime you want to. With that one knee down with your body weight behind, you could put your opponent down by your locking. The advantage? Your opponent will have less chance to counter you after he lost his balance.

Yes, I would often demonstrate that with the transition into arm bar (MMA style) even in the first class when potential student came to try out. This has been quite a persuasive tool for getting the attention of even the experienced crowd to come and train with me. The point is that it is just as easy to go to the ground with TCMA IF need be and that means TCMA is still a viable, functional, and practical martial arts even in today's standard. BTW, you are right that going down to the ground doesn't mean that you lost your mobility whether it is TCMA manner or other grappling styles which BJJ has the lead in that category. The advantage that you speak of is exactly what I am getting at. It is IMHO a crucial point that is not clearly demonstrate or explained in Dr. Yang's material. There are more attention paid to the construction of a lock (sectional control) and the pain compliance factor.

Since most of the locking taught in Taiwan are used by policemen to handle bad guys, Pin down the bad guy to the ground (never allow bad guy to stand on his feet) and then put handcuff on or waiting for help are the main goal. The emphasis could be different from the other traditional CMA locking.

Agreed.

Warm regards

Mantis108