Is It Too Late?

[hskwarrior]

I chose to highjack the essence of this thread found in the kung fu forum section.."check it out, its like sanshou..." and it featured supposedly a wing chun school practicing something like sanshou. well, basically on a lower level it was sanshou, (Not bad for training). but for it being a wing chun school, it interested me to see how wing chung would look in the ring.

The only thing i saw "wing chun" was the horse stances. Everything else looked just like san shou (kick boxing mixed with some throws) maybe a little "UFC" because they were landing elbows and knees like thai boxers.

before i ask this question let me preface it by saying "every martial art system has what everyone else has,mostly (basics wise), a punch is a punch a kick is a kick. but. And prior the ufc and the emergence of Ong Bak, most hand systems never practiced knee strikes, we are all so caught up in how good our hands are. as expected, we're hand systems. then they come into the picture.

Now, my question is..."is it too late?" ..Since this new fad of (No disrespect intended) Thai boxer wannabe's, focusing on knee and elbow strikes andbringing it to the commercial level, forcing all to adapt if they want to keep their students
from switching sides, is it too late. IS IT TOO LATE to start training to use our knee and elbow strikes without looking like we are riding the "Thai Boxer Train?"

I mean yes, the thai boxers are masters at using their knees and elbows. So could we, it we train to use them in similar fashions. but the key questions is how do we pull this off without looking like we stole it from them. Inspired maybe, but not stolen.

hsk.

[David Jamieson]

in both the northern and southern shaolin traditional styles i have learned and am still learning there are inclusive to the mix knee and elbow strikes a plenty.

as for wing chun, it has always been repleat with elbow strikes, they are evident mainly in chum kiu and biu ji. there is more emphasis on them in the last two forms than in the more foundational form of siu nim tao.

[bigdoing]

....In choy lee fut, ng lu ma (five wheel horse) is almost all elbows (ding ji ma with hands near waist or rib cage in a sow choy motion) and then when drop into lok qui ma (kneeling horse) its like the elbows do a kay sow (45 degree type sow body mechanic but again with elbow).....or when we do diu ma (cat stance) we drop the same arm as the leg on its toes, down with a smashing elbow....


hell ya weve got elbows.....

now knees......a few that i noticed, in some of the forms....wu dip (buttergly palms) with the knee shooting up........the opening of a lot of our primary forms, with the whole hand flower motion on one leg...again, knee shooting up......

hell ya, weve got them both....elbows a bit more.....from my observation...

[hskwarrior]

thanks for your input, and i know we got elbows, as matter of fact we got elbows all day for you.

but what im referring to now is if we start focusing on using our knees and elbows, we will look like the followers. in that video clip i saw more kick boxing and thai boxing than i did any wing chun.

and yes choy lee fut has many elbows and tricks from the elbows, coming from all angles. in our tiger claw form we do devestating elbow strikes. even in the fut san stuff we just picked up has some real nice elbows.

but as choy lee fut people we train our kwa sow chop more than we do our knees and elbows. and to do elbow strikes you need to be in pretty close. and i've seen too many people afraid to get in close. most are just too afraid to get hit.

Also, what im saying is in (for choy lee fut people) the ring, can we and how do we use elbow strikes and knee strikes and have someone watching and say "OOOOOH he he them with a choy lee fut elbow (or knee)? thats what im asking. how do we not look like kick boxing or thai boxing? is it possible or is it too late?

[Eddie]

In the end, fighting is fighting. Im not exactly sure of the question, but it does seem to me that you want to ‘justify’ your fighting style (Im talking in broad here, not referring to anyone here specifically) with some kind of trademark CLF style, or Form. While the essence of most styles does not only lie within the moves, that’s just what we see at surface level, the keys probably lies deeper ie, strategy, power generation, movement dynamics…, so much more.

I look at my Che Kuen, and I see fighting principles, not rigid moves. If I follow these principles as set out in my guidelines of moves (from my form) I should be fine, and possibly even look like a CLF fighter, but in the same breath, those are fighting principles and the physical may even resemble other forms of fighting, both Western and Eastern.

One can get into the ring, and stick to CLF form, but still look like a kickboxer. This reminds me of a post that was posted here last week or so:


Forgive me guys but I had to speak on this, when considering drunken boxing as a fighting style, consider the mentality of a drunk, this is what was taught by my teacher Lau Yee Chan of the Eight immortals system. Yes there are techniques unique to this school alone. The eight immortals style does not imitate one as if he was drunk in a fight much like Tai Shing Pek Kwar doesn't imitate monkey when they fight, nor does white crane imitate a bird when they fight, but the tactic are very deceptive and relentless. Last but not least because this system originated in Mo Dong(wu tang), consider its energy and sensitivity which is most important, explosive power, inch power, reeling power etc. Most find it hard to learn because to truly understand eight immortals style one must understand the relationship between intent, energy and spirit.

Troy Dunwood

Our school has had really good success with CLF in the ring, in both amateur and professional San Shou fights. In my opinion, CLF was designed for the ring (and the street of course, but lets stick to the argument), we just need to focus on the principles. There are allot of knees and elbows in the style too… I know this is probably a very weak argument, but Im going to post this picture anyways http://wushu-verlag.com/img/articles/buch/andere_stile/choy_lay_fut.jpg :eek:

We should also not forget that although styles may seem to stay traditional, it doesn’t mean that it doesn’t still need to develop and evolve. It doesn’t take anything away from CLF.

[Eddie]

how do we not look like kick boxing or thai boxing? is it possible or is it too late?

one can still throw nice sow choys and been choys with 10ounce boxing gloves on :rolleyes: in fact, you can still pretty much stick to your style with very little adaption. your body and stances may look like a kickboxier, but fighting isnt in the body only :cool:

[SevenStar]

I think the bigger question here is "why should you care?" I am a thai boxer. I throw elbows and knees all the time. But, since I've trained in traditional styles, I also use the side and hook kick a lot. I am not concerned whether or not they think I'm trying to "copy traditional guys" - I like those two techniques because they work well for me. I also recently started a capoeira class. Although it has knees, I use them A LOT in the roda. I don't care if they think I'm trying to make capoeira look like thai boxing. In the end, the main goal is making yourself more effective. to worry about what others think or your reasoning is to limit yourself. Look at the MMA guys of today - their philosophy is adaptation. Where would mma be today if they were concerned about how people felt about the direction they were taking their style?

[Mulong]

Actually, we aren’t riding the so-called bang wagon per say, because our styles do possess these elements, but sadly, with time these notions have been pushed way back into the foreground, that few remember that it exist.

For example, hongjiaquan, possess numerous elbow strikes, just like chaquan; however, you need an experience Shifu to highlight those techniques, which are can be perceived as secondary techniques extending from a strike, i.e., hand, palm, or fist.

[David Jamieson]

I would also add that use of techniques is generally dictated by the range you find yourself in.

Elbows and knees have more usefullness at very short or clinch range. When use as long range tech, they tend to be a wash.

[Ben Gash]

If you fight in a kickboxing format then you will at some level always look like a kickboxer, as it grew out of the format, rather than the format growing out of a style.
Interestingly (perhaps) I teach my San Shou group a very stripped down Bak Sing Fut Gar framework, and while at some levels they look like kickboxers, at others they look like Bak Sing fighters.
I've always used knees and elbows in CLF (I mean look at the cover of LKH's book! ) and the key is to practice your entry techniques. I can usually get close enough to my opponent to do it, because I've been bridging from my first Gwa Chui. I also get my students used to getting close to each other early, to try and condition the discomfort out of them.

[Chief Fox]

I'd say look inside your style's forms for applications that could be interpreted as knee or elbow stikes.

For example, when I'm doing a form, I always visulaize certain strikes. But while doing some of those same moves as two man drills, I always find something I didn't know was there. Like, "oh, this could be an elbow right here" or "hey, I could do it how it's done in the form or I could put an knee in right here".

So, I guess Im saying that those knee and elbow strikes are already there if you look for them.

I also agree with (not sure who said it). But if you fight in a kickboxing environment with kick boxing rules then what you're doing will look like kick boxing.

Hope this helps.

[SevenStar]

I'd say look inside your style's forms for applications that could be interpreted as knee or elbow stikes.

For example, when I'm doing a form, I always visulaize certain strikes. But while doing some of those same moves as two man drills, I always find something I didn't know was there. Like, "oh, this could be an elbow right here" or "hey, I could do it how it's done in the form or I could put an knee in right here".

So, I guess Im saying that those knee and elbow strikes are already there if you look for them.

I also agree with (not sure who said it). But if you fight in a kickboxing environment with kick boxing rules then what you're doing will look like kick boxing.

Hope this helps.

I actually think that is part of the problem. yohu LOOK for it in a form. The teacher should SHOW it to you and you should drill it. I know that the thought pattern there is different from a more traditional CMA attitude of you discovering all of these things on your own, but it also accelerates your learning and gets you more familiar with drilling the techniques. Modern arts take the same hit on that. thai arts have a hook kick and a side kick. Many people do not know this though, because not many people teach them, as they aren't as predominant in the ring.

[Chief Fox]

I actually think that is part of the problem. yohu LOOK for it in a form. The teacher should SHOW it to you and you should drill it. I know that the thought pattern there is different from a more traditional CMA attitude of you discovering all of these things on your own, but it also accelerates your learning and gets you more familiar with drilling the techniques. Modern arts take the same hit on that. thai arts have a hook kick and a side kick. Many people do not know this though, because not many people teach them, as they aren't as predominant in the ring.

Maybe I mis-spoke or mis-typed. While I do agree that being taught and drilling certain techniques are the best way to learn. What I was trying to say is, be aware of the possibility of other techniques while drilling.

For example: Technique "A" works great on opponent "1" but not so great on opponent "2". So technique "A" is modified into technique "B". Technique "B" was always there inside technique "A" but you had to look for and be aware to see it.

Does that make sense becaues now I'm confused. :confused:

I'm going to go home and workout. :D

[Slade]

hehe, probably talking about my old school, it was chuengs style wing chun plus we had san shou class taught by wing chun instructors and a champion MMA guy, cant remember his name. of course its not wing chun only cos we learnt BJJ in there as well as thai stuff and chinese wrestling..

[SevenStar]

Maybe I mis-spoke or mis-typed. While I do agree that being taught and drilling certain techniques are the best way to learn. What I was trying to say is, be aware of the possibility of other techniques while drilling.

For example: Technique "A" works great on opponent "1" but not so great on opponent "2". So technique "A" is modified into technique "B". Technique "B" was always there inside technique "A" but you had to look for and be aware to see it.

Does that make sense becaues now I'm confused. :confused:

I'm going to go home and workout. :D


dangit, now I'm confused. I think we are in agreeance on this. But, (at least when I trained CMA) even though it would be shown where knees and elbows could be placed, we didn't drill them anywhere near enough to be proficient with them. The same goes with throws. Based on that experience, I can understand why some people may think that these things don't exist in CMA.

[Eddie]

but sevenstar, throws are big in chinese martial arts.
i'd go as far as to say, if you cant throw, cant fight. thats why i love san shou.
cool thing is, throws are very effective in street

[SevenStar]

I don't disagree that they are big in cma... in forms - at least in my experience. My main focus, and the focus of other CMA guys that I know, has primarily been striking, regardless of the style, other than shuai chiao. they were all about throwing. I know of a few longfist groups that do a lot of throwing, but not all of them do. A good, well known example is Dr. Yang Jwing Ming. how often do you see him throwing? his apps are generally striking related.

[Ben Gash]

I always teach lots of throws, as do my teachers. I've never been to JWM's school, so I don't know what they do there (what people show in books and what they do in classes aren't always the same). Indeed, as the majority of JWM's books are on Chin Na it's somewhat innaccurate to say that all they do is striking.
Many movements in forms, especially in longfist, don't make any sense except as throws, and if a school isn't teaching you how to apply every movement in the forms you should be asking questions (I can do about 3 hours just on applications of bows).

[Eddie]

you are right sevenstar. Im very good friends with the local YMAA down here, and I understand what you are saying.

i was watching a taiji pushhands demo the other night (on video), and one could have sworn it was a judo match.

[Infrazael]

Frank,

Since my mom has this phobia of driving long distances during the winter months, I'm stuck at home practicing Choy Lay Fut on my own. Now this is all fine and fun and I have no problems with it, I've decided what the hell, since I can't go to CLF class for a while why don't I take up something else, check it out, compare it to the CLF etc.

So I joined up at a local MMA school about 5 minutes away, it's a good school with a couple of pro fighters from UFC and Pride and stuff. Anyways ever since I started learning the boxing and Muay Thai, I've kept on comparing/contrasting it with the CLF, in terms of technique, footwork, movement etc.

Now the boxing I love, it's great, I consider it merely an addition to my CLF techniques. Their jab is awesome, their cross is different and works well, they train in a different uppercut which simply adds to my CLF arsenal. Now I'm not very fond of their overhand hooks because. . . . . Sau Choys are just simply better.

I also learned the Muay Thai kicks, they actually have 2 kinds, 1 for the legs and head, and another for the body. The leg and head kick you kinda bring your leg up, open your hips, and don't chamber the leg. You pivot in the balls of your supporting foot, and twist and lean back slightly. You bring the leg up, then chop it downwards like you have a dead leg, causing maximum momentum. It's rather like the Sau Choy, the primary deal is to cause as much whipping energy as much IMO, followed by muscular force, etc.

The kick to the body comes up, and again you don't chamber your leg. It cuts upwards at about a 45 degree angle, and this is the "fast" roundhouse that you see guys do to each other's ribs. IMO, these kicks are alot more powerful than snap kicks, but if you miss you end up spinning due to the massive rotational force generated by the kicks.

Then there's the knees/elbows. In actuality. . . . . . they're not much different than the CLF elbows. Muay Thai has just got more, and more variations. Some include back elbow, horizontal elbow, spear elbow, diagonal crushing elbow, rising elbow, and in Muay Boran you have spinning elbows and all that good stuff.

When you do them it doesn't "look MT" or "look CLF". . . . . it looks like elbow techniques. I think what differentiates us from them are the overall body mechanics, movements etc. We fight more like boxers, except with alot more emphasize on the bridging, attacking the limbs stuff etc. . . . I like it alot more, in boxing if you're getting overwhelmed you're taught to cover, weave, roll etc, while we just attack the attack. :D

In Muay Thai the punching is pretty pathetic. . . . . most Thai boxers train their legs and kicks alot more anyways, and elbows/knees and clinch. I think what we CLF guys can learn about "MT elbows" are merely the way they use them, they take those ideas and incorporate it into the CLF. MT is amazing clinching skills, and I have yet to see a round knee in CLF yet. Even our rising knees aren't perfected to their degree.

All in all, knees and elbows are for close range, and guess who else likes close range besides Muay Thai? Choy Lay Fut. . . . . . . . . . . . :rolleyes: :p :D

Peace guys

PS -- Sau Choy pretty much owns every single boxing punch in terms of pure power.

[Infrazael]

A well know CMA master in Taiwan who knew nothing about Muay Thai had defeated 8 guys in a theatre office by using his "elbow striking" only. All of those 8 guys were sent to hospital after that fight (the whole thing were reported on newspaper in Taiwan).

Elbow and knee existed in CMA long before Muay Thai. The following clip show a CMA "Ju Chuan - elbow form":

http://johnswang.com/elbow_form.wmv

CMA guys used knee more than Muay Thai guys. Besides you can strike with your knee, you can also use your knee to throw - Kuai. Knee can also be used as counters for many throws (inner leg hooking, outer leg hooking, front cut, ...).

Sanshou is just an integration of CMA skill and we should not treat it as foreign MA by using:

- Boxing hands,
- Muay Thai kicks,
- Judo throws.

We need to have confidence in our CMA system. We got everything. It's up to us to train it well. Forms in CMA are used for "teaching" and "learning" only. It's up to individual to convert the information from forms into application drills and then apply in fighting.

I disagree. CMA does NOT use more elbows and knees than Muay Thai. If you watch Muay Thai fights in Thailand, craploads of them practically walk into each other's clinch and elbow/knee/underhook away. . . . . . I'ts kinda sad really, their punching is so crappy lol.

You can say every style has everything. . . . . but that's simply a delusional fantasy. It's not a "real-word thing" buddy. For example, I can say my CLF has EVERYTHING, and I mean EVERYTHING. Punches, bridges, elbows, knees, throws, sweeps, etc. . . . you can even go far enough to say "CLF works on the ground."

But you know what? This is all IN THEORY. In reality, our respective arts specialize in an area, and dominate in that area. My CLF forefathers concentrated in striking, and we continue to dominate the striking game today, with Sau Choys, Chop Choys, Gwa Choys, Kup Choys, Biu Jongs etc. Yet, as a result of such focus we lose other things, ie knees, elbows, clinch, etc. Our kicks are good, but the snap kick and the MT kick are still totally different.

It's like saying Muay Thai has better punches than CLF. That's simply ABSURD talk right there. . . . . in Thailand they don't even score punches *sighs*. Their punching is ungodly awful, it's indescribable. Yet, they specialize in other areas, roundhouses, knees, elbows and clinch. Their throws aren't very good either.

You're saying that CMA has the POTENTIAL for everything (except submissions ON the ground). Thats' all good ON PAPER and IN THEORY. We DO NOT dominate EVERY SINGLE range, format, or fighting style. . . . . to think so would be pure arrogance. Arrogance doesn't lead to evolution.

I've read your quote. . . . and no, I believe in my CLF 100%, even more than my boxing and Muay Thai. Yet I learn from these two systems to FURTHER my CLF, to strengthen what my CLF class and Sifu does not emphasize as much.

I think it's time to throw off the Ego shirt and learn something.

[Eddie]

in taijimeihua mantis theres a form called 8 Elbows. As I understand it, the 8 elbows include knee strikes and even head buts. Pretty much what we in CLF would call " ding".

The issue is not that there are everything in every style, it just is that there are everything you need, in every style. Chinese Martial arts are pretty complete.

[Eddie]

You don't need to learn any foreign MA to be a good Sanshou fighter. Nobody said that one CMA style will be enough.

I won't call it "ego" but "faith".

I agree. I look at CLF, Xiao Bei, and Taijimeihua tanglang, and all these styles pretty much cover all you need to be a good san shou fighter. the difference in them all are just different strategy and different ways to generate force etc. Supplementing your style isnt a bad thing, as long as you are mature enough to understand the differences in the styles you are supplementing from.

people often look at Asian styles and comment on the boxing skill, but its only cause we have a different approach in the western MA to boxing. If two asian guys are fighting, its all fine, there wont be much of a difference, but the problem comes when people from different back grounds clash.

Learning good boxing skill is always good

[Infrazael]

Yes, but it's always San Shou this, San Shou that. . . . . . San Shou isn't the only form of comptetion, you know.

In San Shou the clinch rules are DRASTICALLY different, as are the elbow/knee rules from Muay Thai and MMA. If you only rely on San Shou fights, then if you fight MT rules you're gonna get eaten in the clinch, if you fight under MMA rules you're gonna get killed on the ground.

I'm not saying CMA or San Shou sucks, that's just the way it is. Just like how a MMA guy, and a Thai Boxer will get eaten if they fight under San Shou rules.

So why limit yourself to one ruleset? Go out and spar Thai boxers and boxers, go fight wrestlers and grapplers. If you never do you'll never have the experience of facing one, and thus be a one-dimensional fighter (this is also true for say, Thai boxers who refuse to train San Shou or something else).

[SevenStar]

So I joined up at a local MMA school about 5 minutes away, it's a good school with a couple of pro fighters from UFC and Pride and stuff. Anyways ever since I started learning the boxing and Muay Thai, I've kept on comparing/contrasting it with the CLF, in terms of technique, footwork, movement etc.

Enjoy it!!! Keep us updated.


Now the boxing I love, it's great, I consider it merely an addition to my CLF techniques. Their jab is awesome, their cross is different and works well, they train in a different uppercut which simply adds to my CLF arsenal. Now I'm not very fond of their overhand hooks because. . . . . Sau Choys are just simply better.

nah, the purpose is just different. isn't a sau choy a forearm strike? (I'm not a clf guy) The over hand is meant to exploit a hole in your opponent's guard. A forearm strike could not do this.


I also learned the Muay Thai kicks, they actually have 2 kinds, 1 for the legs and head, and another for the body. The leg and head kick you kinda bring your leg up, open your hips, and don't chamber the leg. You pivot in the balls of your supporting foot, and twist and lean back slightly. You bring the leg up, then chop it downwards like you have a dead leg, causing maximum momentum. It's rather like the Sau Choy, the primary deal is to cause as much whipping energy as much IMO, followed by muscular force, etc.

The kick to the body comes up, and again you don't chamber your leg. It cuts upwards at about a 45 degree angle, and this is the "fast" roundhouse that you see guys do to each other's ribs. IMO, these kicks are alot more powerful than snap kicks, but if you miss you end up spinning due to the massive rotational force generated by the kicks.

There are more kicks than this. This is merely two versions of the roundhouse. Another version is the switch kick. In addition, there is the teep, back kick and several other kicks, however, you will likely only learn the roundhouse, teep and back kicks.


Then there's the knees/elbows. In actuality. . . . . . they're not much different than the CLF elbows. Muay Thai has just got more, and more variations. Some include back elbow, horizontal elbow, spear elbow, diagonal crushing elbow, rising elbow, and in Muay Boran you have spinning elbows and all that good stuff.

Yes, there are LOTS of variations.


When you do them it doesn't "look MT" or "look CLF". . . . . it looks like elbow techniques. I think what differentiates us from them are the overall body mechanics, movements etc. We fight more like boxers, except with alot more emphasize on the bridging, attacking the limbs stuff etc. . . . I like it alot more, in boxing if you're getting overwhelmed you're taught to cover, weave, roll etc, while we just attack the attack. :D

attacking the attack is not good when there are so many punches coming at you. If boxers did that, you would see A LOT more 1st and 2nd round KOs. Besides, their aim is to KO the guy - they are better served by trying to achieve that purpose and not attaking the limbs. boxers don't bridge, I'm guessing because of the speed. It would be nearly impossible to connect and stick with a jab - they are too fast.


In Muay Thai the punching is pretty pathetic. . . . . most Thai boxers train their legs and kicks alot more anyways, and elbows/knees and clinch. I think what we CLF guys can learn about "MT elbows" are merely the way they use them, they take those ideas and incorporate it into the CLF. MT is amazing clinching skills, and I have yet to see a round knee in CLF yet. Even our rising knees aren't perfected to their degree.

punching is definitely not their strength. The reasoning behind that is that all of the other techniques are much more devastating. Consequently, they would rather use those.


PS -- Sau Choy pretty much owns every single boxing punch in terms of pure power.

I would put money on that not being true. the haymaker is a very powerful punch and also utilizes a wide arc. Also, the forearm will be easier to block. The fist is more likely to slip through their guard.

[SevenStar]

Elbow and knee existed in CMA long before Muay Thai. The following clip show a CMA "Ju Chuan - elbow form":

http://johnswang.com/elbow_form.wmv

CMA guys used knee more than Muay Thai guys. Besides you can strike with your knee, you can also use your knee to throw - Kuai. Knee can also be used as counters for many throws (inner leg hooking, outer leg hooking, front cut, ...).


While this is true, you guys do not have it perfected to the degree that we do. On the same token, MT has takedowns but they are not developed anywhere near the degree that shuai chiao guys are.

[Infrazael]

Sevenstar -- I fully understand the implications of the Overhand exploiting an opening in your opponents guard.

However the Sau Choy is meant to break the break the guard, or go over it. If they want to block it, let them by all means. . . . . the nature is to break past the guard, and if that doesn't work, you slip another technique through at a different angle.

As for your talk of Haymakers, Sau Choys are essentially those, except striking with the inner forearm and the whip energy is far more efficient and powerful than using purely muscular forces, ie a Haymaker. Plus, if I'm thinking what your definition of Haymaker is (ie, big, unbalanced crazy swing), then it doesn't even come close because you have no root, balance, and you're completely opening yourself up with a wild Haymaker (think, streetfighters, untrained fighters etc).

Plus, with 16 oz. gloves it's kinda hard to slip an overhand punch through anything, and the Sau Choy generates more power anyways because of the whip.

[SevenStar]

However the Sau Choy is meant to break the break the guard, or go over it. If they want to block it, let them by all means. . . . . the nature is to break past the guard, and if that doesn't work, you slip another technique through at a different angle.

unless it's coming at a downward angle, it's not gonna break anything though - unless you are refering to the possibility of the strike deadening their arm or something. Either way, if you subscribe the the practice of not chasing limbs, then there isn't a huge need for slamming my forearm into their arms.


As for your talk of Haymakers, Sau Choys are essentially those, except striking with the inner forearm and the whip energy is far more efficient and powerful than using purely muscular forces, ie a Haymaker. Plus, if I'm thinking what your definition of Haymaker is (ie, big, unbalanced crazy swing), then it doesn't even come close because you have no root, balance, and you're completely opening yourself up with a wild Haymaker (think, streetfighters, untrained fighters etc).

you can't possibly think that the hook and haymaker are all muscle... that would make them merely arm punches, which is a big no no in any style. You're thinking of the same punch, but with the wrong association. "street fighters" use them alot and have no balance when they throw them - and even then, they are very powerful. A proper haymaker has the same mechanics as it's sister punch, the hook.


Plus, with 16 oz. gloves it's kinda hard to slip an overhand punch through anything, and the Sau Choy generates more power anyways because of the whip.

1. not really - people tire and Guards drop. People have too much space between their hands and cheek while punching, leaving them open for counter. See where I'm going? There is a time and place for it.

2. as stated above there IS a whipping action.

3. in fighting, you wear 10 - 12oz gloves. 16 oz are only training gloves.

[Infrazael]

Cool Sevenstar, thanks for the mature replies here, I think we can both get some new knowledge.


unless it's coming at a downward angle, it's not gonna break anything though - unless you are refering to the possibility of the strike deadening their arm or something. Either way, if you subscribe the the practice of not chasing limbs, then there isn't a huge need for slamming my forearm into their arms.

I usually don't hit the arms. Sau Choy whips up, then down and comes into their head, collarbone, shoulders, and neck. For bridging/blocking/knocking ther hands away we have other techniques.

As for you saying Sau Choy coming down. . . . . that's how you throw it. It always comes down, it's never a horizontal punch. Think of it in 3 movements:

1. You load your arm
2. You whip it up
3. You crash it down like a hammer

But I think I understand what you're sayin about the overhand hook, I will definitely try it more now you've made it clearer. About your Haymaker speech. . . . . I actually think the Sau Choy IS pretty much a haymaker, except we're banging with our forearms instead of hands, and it's VERY controlled in terms of positioning, but not in speed (impossible to slow down).


you can't possibly think that the hook and haymaker are all muscle... that would make them merely arm punches, which is a big no no in any style. You're thinking of the same punch, but with the wrong association. "street fighters" use them alot and have no balance when they throw them - and even then, they are very powerful. A proper haymaker has the same mechanics as it's sister punch, the hook.


I wasn't talking about a trained boxer throwing it, sorry about that. I was talking about pure "streetfighters" ie untrained fighters throwing really big hook thingys at you. . . . slowly, and with all muscles.

But that's why we use the term "haymaker" right? If it was controlled, we'd call it by the proper boxing lingo, THE OVERHAND HOOK.

Peace

[Eddie]

In San Shou the clinch rules are DRASTICALLY different, as are the elbow/knee rules from Muay Thai and MMA. If you only rely on San Shou fights, then if you fight MT rules you're gonna get eaten in the clinch, if you fight under MMA rules you're gonna get killed on the ground.



nope, not true. fighting is fighting, if you are a good martial artists, you should have some knoweldge of close range and clinch too. People make a way to big a deal about the clinch sometimes. although under muay thai rules you are not allowed to execute hip throws, there are still sweeps and other type of take downs. The two arts arent all that different, and most real fighters I know are just as skilled on a san shou platform as they are in the muay thai ring. Besides, as we have all been saying all along, if you are training kung fu, you should know how to use your knees and your elbows.

I love the beauty of muay thai, the richness etc, and I love the directness of san shou.
BTW- most of our san shou fighters compete in Muay Thai and Thai Boxing (no elbows) tournaments with great success. Our local san shou scene isnt that big, but most of the fighters compete in all these events.

[Eddie]

for a tournament you can still do a sow choy, just turn your fist inside, and hit with the glove area. dinamics are all the same.

[Infrazael]

Eddie, thanks for the mature reply. I agree that a good fighter should know how to play under various circumstances. . . . . . but look at it this way:

I'm talking about the general effectiveness and evolution of a particular speciality within specific styles. IE -- in Muay Thai the clinch is developed to a higher, more complex extent than say, Boxing, Wing Chun, Hung Gar and CLF. Whereas in Hung Gar the bridge is developed to the extremity, and CLF whipping Jing and the ability to fire combos from virtually all directions.

I agree, being a CLF fighter I am ok in the clinch, I know to some extent how to fight in it and execute a throw (actually, not really), but our training methods and focuses are different than Muay Thai's, therefore we don't train as much in it!!! You see my point? IE, a boxer isn't gonna be able to throw proper Chop Choys and Sau Choys just cuz he can punch, he's never trained in them. Just as our elbows/knees, while good, solid and powerful, lack the variations, methods and "tricks" that MT boxers have developed throught EXTREME USE of them.

Whereas, as CLF fighters we have perfected the game of longfist at a point-blank range. . . . . . I'm sure you know what I'm talking about.

[Ben Gash]

As for you saying Sau Choy coming down. . . . . that's how you throw it. It always comes down, it's never a horizontal punch.
Not true, it can be horizontal, diagonally down or diagonally up, depending on the type. Remember, sow choy just means swinging fist, it's what comes before that specifies how it's delivered.

[Infrazael]

Yes, but you can say that's the way I fight. It's just my personal interpretation. . . . . you can use a horizontal as well, I just don't know why.

Plus I use to throw hundres of Saus a day to practice them, and I always do it diagonal so it's basically ingrained into my memory now. ;)

[Fu-Pow]

Not true, it can be horizontal, diagonally down or diagonally up, depending on the type. Remember, sow choy just means swinging fist, it's what comes before that specifies how it's delivered.

However, in the LKH curriculum the Sao Chui is pretty much always practiced hitting downward at 45 degrees. Infrazreal trains in that lineage of CLF, hence, his observation. But, for sure, Sau Chui can be thrown horizonal or even up. I know of one application from Mak Sifu with a horizontal sau chui. Also, a 45 degree Sau Chui can be used as a block if you need to do so.

[Fu-Pow]

I'm talking about the general effectiveness and evolution of a particular speciality within specific styles.

Absolutely, there IS specialty. Strategy, body mechanics, form, intent of any art evolved because of certain history. All martial arts are evolving to meet the needs of the practioner, whether they are becoming more specialized or more generalized to meet new needs. Martial arts are as much a PROCESS as they are anything else.

[Infrazael]

Absolutely sihing . . . . . just wanted to clarify that's what I'm saying. Look at the context of sports MA for example. . . . let's use boxing as an example. Just take a look a the boxing guard, and it's evolution. Take a look at ancient Greek/Roman boxing, Thai boxing, Irish, etc. . . . . then take a look at classic fighters such as Joe Lewis and later Ali, then Tyson etc. . . . . .

You can see the progress evolution of the boxing guard. Much of this has to do with the rules, the gloves, what you can do and can't to an opponent. I believe this format applies to virtually every MA. . . . they need a "paradigm shift" in order to adapt and survive. Look at the CLF hands; it was developed for fighting multiple opponents in warfare, and needs to be learned in a short amount of time. Hence the simplicity, fluidity, and the huge range it covers and it's "chain-attacks."

Then take a look at Hung Gar, it was meant to be used on boats and soft earth, to be a close-quarters system that's very tight, yet powerful. I've read in Wing Lam's books that the original forms are actually like Wing Chun's, you can perform them on a square table without even moving!!!

So think about it; 200 years ago, a HG guy and a CLF guy both goes to war (open war, that is). CLF guy is trained to tackle multiple opponents, cover a wide range, and hit lots of things, and chain his attacks and attack multiple angles. HG guy is trained to fight in a very tight and conformed space, fight with an iron root, and move in hard, forceful movements. . . . .

Who do you think will do better on the battlefield?

Let's take a look at another scenario . . . . . . a fight on a boat, the water is moving, etc. While CLF might be able to do fine, here's where the HG really shines now, having an iron, hard stance, and not relying on any space whatsoever.

Of course, over time, and now in 2005 our respective systems have all evolved, and I think a Hung Gar and CLF guy can be equal in all aspects provided you train and learn properly, and have a small Ego and be able to learn from your own style's weaknesses.

Look at the development of Muay Thai; desire for globization led them to "water-down" the rules, make them slightly safer. Headbutts were banned, groin shots were banned, and more western boxing hands were adapted. If you see the current MT fights they are pretty **** different form the OLD SCHOOL ones, where they pretty much fought NO RULES, like the oldschool Chinese San Da/Gong Sau rules. . . . . . . .

Look at San Shou. Exclusion of massive elbows/knees and clinch has allowed us to do what? Focus on the throw, perfect the throw, and be better at the throw than other styles, even Judo possibly (since San Shou does no Gi throws).

So yeah. . . . . . my point.

[Eddie]

I see your point, the only thing is, people often asume that some fighters arent skilled in certain ranges, because of the style they fight. These days with all the information around, experienced fighters prepare all ranges. Lets not forget, we are talking sports martial arts here, unless you were talking more loosely. Down here in SA, the pro san shou events often allow knees too. As we already established, elbows arent that uncommon in Chinese arts, even our LKH style has elbows in just about every form (tit jin comes to mind).

There are many kung fu guys who supplement their kung fu with thaiboxing. In LKH branch, one of the Hong Kong Teachers who used to teach down here in SA, master Yuen Hong Chow, was very skilled in Muay Thai.

My point is, as martial artists, we should not be bothered about " style" as much as we should be bothered about strategy. As posted before, I divorced the two concepts in my head.

Perhaps that is what Bruce Lee was on about when he spoke about no form etc? :rolleyes: (not that Im a bruce Lee Fan, but anyways)

[Infrazael]

Now I agree with what you are saying Eddie. . . .

That's why I like to think, and like people that think outside the box. It's like understanding forms, your interpretation of them, and what you get out of them.

I also like your idea of being worried about strategy rather than style/system, because when we think strategy and application, we think in practical, everyday terms rather than some hypothetical, theoritical formula that only works on paper.

To be, studing MMA and such isn't about "cross-training" in styles/systems as most people do, but rather to expand my CLF to other areas, and building upon aspects of CLF that aren't as specialized as CLF's other areas.

Of course we have elbows, look at Tuet Jin, etc. . . . . . . CLF has great potential for ALOT of stuff, we just have to train in that stuff. That part of training includes looking at other people, styles, strategies to find out the MOST practical, effective, efficient formula of executing these maneuvers.

Peace

[Fu-Pow]

My point is, as martial artists, we should not be bothered about " style" as much as we should be bothered about strategy. As posted before, I divorced the two concepts in my head.

Perhaps that is what Bruce Lee was on about when he spoke about no form etc? :rolleyes: (not that Im a bruce Lee Fan, but anyways)


I think that what we (as in martial arts students and teachers) are concerned about is not that a student will round out his knowledge or skills but that the student will basicallly be able to do a lot of things (ie ranges, techniques, strategies) in very mediocre way.

Its OK to be well-rounded but when you take on too much and start cherry picking and choosing aspects (ranges, strategies, techniques) of styles that don't integrate well together....well then you got a martial artist that is one big mess going in 20 different directions.

What I'm saying is that, I think its OK to build on to a skill set that you already have mastery of. But jumping around from art to art, or range to range is not gonna make a better fighter....and perhaps even more importantly you are not going to have a very good idea of what the PROCESS is to gain mastery over anything.

And what kung fu is ultimately about, is not the PRODUCT (ie the skillset, form, or whatever), or how many trophies you have or whatever. That's just an external, although still important, measure of your progress.

Ultimately it is about what you gain through the PROCESS of hard work (gung) and effort (fu) that you put into mastering something. Because that will lead to mastery of "the self." You can apply that to whatever you do in life....whether you do knitting or brazilian jujitsu.

Have a good weekend.

[Eddie]

well said fu pow. you dont need to mix your martial arts, you should find all the tools within your style, the thing is just, you need to prepare for that. For eg, as infrazael said, some people arent to skilled in the clinch. Now preparing yourself to ' survive' the clinch, doesnt mean you have to go and learn study thaiboxing and change your style, it simply means you need to go prepare for that situation. for eg, I would get my partner and let him get me into a hold, and then try what ever tools I have to my disposal to get out of the clinch. My CLF strategy would be to charng fu his a.ss :D , and it usually works, but you can choose from your arsenal of techniques, as long as you stick to the rules and principles (from both the style as well as the rules of the tournament).

the more I look at CLF, no more i realise it is a no nonsense, no frills, very dynamic art.

[Infrazael]

well said fu pow. you dont need to mix your martial arts, you should find all the tools within your style, the thing is just, you need to prepare for that. For eg, as infrazael said, some people arent to skilled in the clinch. Now preparing yourself to ' survive' the clinch, doesnt mean you have to go and learn study thaiboxing and change your style, it simply means you need to go prepare for that situation. for eg, I would get my partner and let him get me into a hold, and then try what ever tools I have to my disposal to get out of the clinch. My CLF strategy would be to charng fu his a.ss :D , and it usually works, but you can choose from your arsenal of techniques, as long as you stick to the rules and principles (from both the style as well as the rules of the tournament).

the more I look at CLF, no more i realise it is a no nonsense, no frills, very dynamic art.

Well CLF pretty much kicks ass.

Notice how we usually hijack every thread and turn it into a discussion about how much CLF rocks?

[Shaolindynasty]

"Well CLF pretty much kicks ass."


It's about time somebody had the balls to tell the truth around here

[Fu-Pow]

Well CLF pretty much kicks ass.

Notice how we usually hijack every thread and turn it into a discussion about how much CLF rocks?

Haha....:D

[SevenStar]

To be, studing MMA and such isn't about "cross-training" in styles/systems as most people do, but rather to expand my CLF to other areas, and building upon aspects of CLF that aren't as specialized as CLF's other areas.


I think that many people today misconstrue the term MMA. It doesn't mean simply "train in everything so that you can have the longrang strikes fo CLF, the powerful kicks of muay thai, the throwing of a judoka, the ground maneuverability of a wrestler, etc." MMA is about training a stand up style and a gorund style. Period. For example, if you train CLF and judo, you are an MMA.

[Infrazael]

Pretty much SevenStar. . . . . . . I use CLF for striking, submissions for ground. In between I learn some muay thai kicks and expand my punching capabilities by practicing western boxing.

I wouldn't call myself a Thai boxer though, or a Western boxer. Those are mere projections of my CLF training that have increased my knowledge and overall abilities.

[hskwarrior]

hey whats up folks.

its good to see that the thread i hijacked and brought here is still going strong.

What i was doing was picking your brains to see where most of the choy lee fut people minds states were on today's choy lee fut training. Now (for training purpuses only) i consider other styles to be enemies-somewhat. The reason for that is it keeps my mind sharp at the further development of the gung fu our clf ancestors laid down for us.

As a street fighter I know that elbows and knees are important tools to have, and to be honest I've never seen an old style gung fu school focus on those aspects. its only been mainly the hands. I mean they also did sweeps and such, and another thing i've neve seen people train to use the knees and elbows until know.

In my personal training i would use the same methods of training used by other styles. in the type of school i come some of our training methods were kind of out dated-still effective-just old. as i said in my personal training i like to use thai pads to train with-especially the short but bulky ones used for round house kicks and such, but i would use them to biu jong, elbow, even sow choys and things like that. but as i said that was how "I" liked to train.

but i love to teach. and i want my students to say we train how our sifu would train. At first i was just worried that if i strongly emphasized the use of elbow strikes and even knees, i was at first-worried that we could look a little bit more trendy, and not old school as i like it. I trained the old chinatown way, now training is a little more modern.

The Lau Bun branch has stayed "old school" for decades. I think it was my sifu who was amongst the first if not the first to have some influence over the further development of Lau Bun Hung Sing CLF via his own flavor. And to keep our ancestors proud i think its good to bring choy lee fut into todays world.

What i mean by "todays world" is we face different challenges since the times are completely changed from whence they (the ancestors) called themselves choy lee fut fighters. Today we as amercians have to face a multitude of styles from all over the world. Today we have to deal with grapplers, shootfighters, street brawlers, then we have to focus on how to deal with Thai style boxers, MMA, as well as all those other styles.

I hope that our CLF ancestors are proud that there are people out there taking what they started and bringing it to the next level.

I know that some of you will respond from the "general" martial arts point of view, but i am being very exclusive to just they choy lee fut people here on this one. Im sure you all will have some very valid points, but i hope you can see where im coming from.

Thanks, this was really inspirational.

peace

[Infrazael]

Frank, and all the other CLF guys.

What "IS" CLF???

A mixed-style molded into a near-perfect, ass-kicking, ****ed-off, pugilistic experiment gone horribly wrong enough to make Hung Gar, Muay Thai and Western Boxing look like a potential victim for that Sau Choy or Chop Choy to the throat.

What did Chan Hueng do? He mixed, and he refined, and he created. And On the Seventh Day did Chan Hueng say "I have created my Choy Lay Fut style of kung fu" and Chan Hueng was pleased. :p

Now, what can we keep on doing to honor his Legacy? Keep refining. Never stop refining. If we see something WRONG, correct it. . . . don't let diseases rot away simply because of "tradition for tradition's sake." If we see an advantage. . . . press it, just like the way we fight.

My 2 cents.

[Eddie]

No, I dont agree. Knees and elbows have always been part of traditional kung fu. Few styles comes to mind immidiately, Baji, Mantis, Xiaobei, wing chun, hung ga, taiji, shaolin, CLF, etc etc etc. nothing modern about it.

I do get what you mean tho, and I agree on some points too

[SevenStar]

Frank, and all the other CLF guys.

What "IS" CLF???

A mixed-style molded into a near-perfect, ass-kicking, ****ed-off, pugilistic experiment gone horribly wrong enough to make Hung Gar, Muay Thai and Western Boxing look like a potential victim for that Sau Choy or Chop Choy to the throat.

Where are these guys at that can do this to other fighters? You would think that they would at least pop up on the san da scene, right?

[Ou Ji]

Not really. Their mom's won't let them stay out that late and besides, they had a fight in the 3rd grade so they have no need to prove themselves to anybody.

:D


Dang I'm such a troublemaker these days.

[Fu-Pow]

san da scene

Define "sanda scene."

[Shaolindynasty]

They do pop up in sanda and have been for decades. There is allot of info on CLF full contact fighters out there.

BTW, there is no "pure" clf. It was created as a mma and following generations of clf pratitioners have influenced their branches with technique from different styles. Buk Sing is influenced by northern shaolin, my branch is influenced by lama, LKH branch has Shek kin's northern style influence.

It's not really a big deal.

[Eddie]

hey sevenstar,

i have also looked around the web, and noticed that it seems to me that not many schools in the States are very big into san shou. The schools that seem to be big, are the ones who only does san shou, but I am probably wrong.

I still see very little difference to CLF training and san shou training (appart from wearing the gloves), and it can be pretty effective in the ring. OBVIOUSLY, it all depeneds on the fighter in the end, but its silly to ' blame' the style.

Last night I downloaded some video clips of the site from a CLF school in mexico. It had some clips of Chan Yong Fa doing various things. Saw some really nice san da training on there. They are a traditional school, but they seem to even make use of modern tools.
anyways, heres the link. http://usuarios.lycos.es/choyleefutmx

[hskwarrior]

I agree that CLF was initially created from systems taught by li yau san, choy fook and ching cho, but i've been doing choy lee fut for about 25 years (24 really) and in our school we never really focused on elbows and knee strikes. it was always about the one hitter quitters of CLF that we focused on. And most of the time a street fight is too unpredictable to try to launch them as part of your arsenal.

In San Francisco, the street fights are always just around the corner, and since the area i grew up in is now the latin version of bloods and crips its pretty dangerous. one day out if front of the late brendan lai's martial art supply store these 4 guys thought they recognized this rival gang member and instantly started pounding him. The best the guy could do was throw a couple of punches then run a little and do it all over again. I always watch the way other street fighters fight pick apart their mistakes, i use them as a visual training method.

anyhow, I don't see a dilemma about people using their elbows and knees, i was just worried that we were too late and other thai-like styles would think we were jumping on the band wagon because when i think about it in my school we have a lot of elbows, devastating ones too, but it was never our focus.


Now, the Buk Sing Branch is directly related to the Fut San Hung Sing Kwoon.
Tam Sam himself called himself a "Hung Sing man. It was only about 5 students who went to learn the northern stuff. The students prior to those five for the student exchange between Ku Yu Jeong was all hung sing choy lee fut. But tam sam had the right idea, check out other styles and intergrate what he thinks would benefit his system, but choy lee fut-tize them first.

peace

[Infrazael]

Kinda like how I'm learning Muay Thai to CLF-tize it into what "I" need. Western Boxing is nice too, teaches you some new ways to throw a punch that I find really helpful.

SevenStar. . . San Da Scene's in China. I'm sure you saw the fights between the top San Da players vs. the Muay Thai players in Thailand, etc?

[Eddie]

hskwarrior, I agree with your post.
infrazael,
the san da wong series you speak of is not the ultimate san da " scene" as seven meant. But, as you mentioned this, if you watch those videos you can see how corrupt china judges are. Those videos are good reference material and nice to watch, but in my opinion, they server more as government propaganda than anything else. Dont get me wrong, I love san da more than MT, but let the better fighter win, regardless of the stlye, race, or nationality

[Infrazael]

I agree mostly with you, but you have to agree it was pretty sweet when one of our San Da fighters KOed the Muay Thai guy IN Thailand with a round kick.

[SevenStar]

They do pop up in sanda and have been for decades. There is allot of info on CLF full contact fighters out there.

BTW, there is no "pure" clf. It was created as a mma and following generations of clf pratitioners have influenced their branches with technique from different styles. Buk Sing is influenced by northern shaolin, my branch is influenced by lama, LKH branch has Shek kin's northern style influence.

It's not really a big deal.

that's interesting... What denotes it as clf then? Do all of the various styles have the same fore set of techniques?

[SevenStar]

And most of the time a street fight is too unpredictable to try to launch them as part of your arsenal.

Maybe I misunderstand you here - are you saying that a fight is too unpredictable to use knees and elbows?


In San Francisco, the street fights are always just around the corner, and since the area i grew up in is now the latin version of bloods and crips its pretty dangerous.

Sounds like my town. We have surrenos 13, ALKN, La Raza and others, in addition the the norm - bloods, crips, GDs and vicelords.


anyhow, I don't see a dilemma about people using their elbows and knees, i was just worried that we were too late and other thai-like styles would think we were jumping on the band wagon because when i think about it in my school we have a lot of elbows, devastating ones too, but it was never our focus.

Back to my original point then, why would you care What they think? MT has takedowns, and we teach them. We don't care if someone thought we were jumping on a san shou bandwagon. Becoming a better fighter is more important than that.

[Shaolindynasty]

Sevenstar- All CLF has the same base, meaning we all utilize certain basic tools. See the page on 10 elements at www.ngfamilymartialarts.com for the most part these "technique principles" can be found across the board.

Hskwarrior- Just because a specific school focuses on a specific part of CLF doesn't mean that the style as a whole isn't good at certian techniques. Your school may like to punch another CLF school may like to elbow. It comes down more to the individual training specific aspects than to the style.

Kinda like if you learn both sword and spear, yet you practice ony spear then your sword won't be good. It doesn't mean that you can't train your sword and make it better.

as for CLF using elbows-

From www.ngfamilymartialarts.com


Lau Chung was a well-known Hung Sing Choy Lay Fut practitioner teaching in Hong Kong. During this period, a foreign military officer by the name of Norris offered a cash prize to any Chinese boxer who could defeat him in a match. Defeating many of the local Chinese boxers made Norris boastful and arrogant. Lau Chung took on the challenge and ended the fight by breaking Norris’s ribs with an elbow strike. As the fight was fought under gloved western boxing rules, the elbow strike that Lau Chung had executed was considered an illegal technique. From the hospital Norris ordered Lau Chung’s capture for his offense. As the foreign military leaders would no doubt do him great harm for his actions, Lau Chung decided to leave Hong Kong for Macau. As the incident began to cool down, Lau Chung relocated to Canton. While believing he was safe, Lau Chung was unexpectedly assassinated by a fellow Choy Lay Fut practitioner hired by those associated with Norris in Hong Kong.