if TCMA is not applicable then....

[monkeyfoot]

Whats the point?

Right. Recently theres been a lot of hoo har between MMA guys and Traditionalists. Many people are saying that traditional kung fu and traditional training are useless as it can never be used in the ring etc. I read a site the other day stating that forms were almost pointless for learning to fight and that people shouldn't see them as 'how you fight'. It also said that stances are never used in a real fight and other things to that effect.

So I ask. If this is true then WHY was the style created in the first place? Why would there be 'unusable' techniques within a form? I dont get the logic behind saying TMA is basically bollacks.....

Maybe our understanding of TMA is different to that of old.....maybe we have missed the point somewhere along the line.

craig

[David43515]

I think you have to look at stances as fluid rather than static postures. We trained ALOT of stance work at our school, but it was always emphasised that you don`t hold them when fighting because you don`t stop moving. Power is generated by bodyweight in motion (Up/down, laterally forward/back/side-to-side, and by twisting...or by combinations of these). Stances are positions you move through while generating power, not positions you hold.
They`re like towns on a map. You may drive through several to get where you`re going. The journey isn`t just the towns, but it`s not just the roads inbetween either.
For example, if someone throws a kick to your head and you take a 1/2 step back while dropping your weight...you`ve just moved into a backstance. Now while move in to counter-punch you typically transfer your weight evenly to both feet (Horse stance) then to you lead foot as you reach full extension (Front stance) and then maybe draw your weight back again as you change positions (Horse or Cat stance).
Mobility and balance are so important for being in the right position defnsively and offensively. That is the #1 reason for practicing stance work. You hold static postures to devlope strength in the legs and balance so that as you pass THROUGH the posture while moving you don`t lose all your power and fall over.
I was a bouncer for 2 years and aside from just bear-hugging someone to pull them out of an active fight, everything I did was TCMA. Blocking,striking, chin na, throws, footwork,weapons training, it`s all there.
As for forms not being useful...Heavybags teach structure, but are very limited in teaching footwork. Conditioning is important,but doesn`t teach you to hit. Sparring is a great tool, but it doesn`t allow me to use all my tools as agressively as I might want all the time. Forms training does all these things. Obviously forms aren`t the end-all,-be-all of traditional training, but they teach things that can`t be learned as effectively in other ways.
Forms training requires alot of thought to understand the many possible applications for a type of movement. And because it requires alot of thought...it`s harder to immediatly se the value of it. But think of it this way, until you break down a form`s various movements and annalyze the applications which you might want to practice seperatly, while you`re just doing the form a couple 100 times to learn the movements....you`re learning balance ing new positions, getting aerobic conditioning, building strength, practicing footwork, and building muscle-memory. Not a bad way to spend class, eh?

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi Craig,

David has made some very good points!

It is important to keep in mind that different methods of training are designed for different goals, needs and environments. The methods of fighting when the CMA were originated and organized into their styles were different then than they are now. Culture influences how individual combat is perceived and fought. The forms we do today may not have been exactly the same as those 500 years ago. If one was working as security for caravans or as a bodyguard then most likely the training methods they used were closer to today’s MMA. I am not referring to the grappling per se, but the more realistic training methods.

Special Forces and police Special Teams train in as close to real world environments and scenarios as possible. This is because psychologically, when we are under stress we tend to react automatically according our trained programming. If we have programmed into our behaviors actions that are superfluous then we have done ourselves a disservice. We have endangered ourselves and the others we are intending to defend by programming actions that are not useful to the purpose at hand.

On the other hand, if we are utilizing the MA as a way of life with a greater purpose of learning to unify our mind, body and spirit, then forms training will teach us to move with speed, agility and grace, enhancing our cardiovascular system, develop concentration and fortitude under physically stressful circumstances.

It isn’t that the traditional ways aren’t beneficial or useful, but they are not always the most efficient use of our time depending upon our personal goals.

[TenTigers]

The argumant that fighting has changed is not a valid point. Aside from the firearm, nothing has changed. All strikes are simply angles of attack, whether fist,sword, clup, knife. Grappling has always existed. Adrenal response has always existed. The only thing that has changed is that the western mind is all about instant gratification, and McDonald's I want it now, my way mentality.
There are many people teaching "Traditional Chinese Martial Arts" but in reality, there are very few who actually understand it, and are teaching it correctly.
Unfortunately,"TCMA" is becoming a catch phrase, and will be thrown around more and more. I have been in Martial Arts for over thirty years. I have met many, many people, many, many well known Sifus, and Senseis. Very,very few who actually understood, and are teaching Traditional Martial Arts. It is not neccesary to mention names. All you need to do is ask yourself,"Is what I am learning an art that was developed for life and death conflicts, or am I learning something less than effective?" After thirty years, I still am a student, and I still marvel at how many of the real techniques are just so incredibly devastating, and when I witness someone who truly posesses these skills, I am overwhelmed.

[Ford Prefect]

I am not saying TCMA is useless or any TMA for that matter. One argument can be made that:

A) Empty-hand techniques were paid attention to only sparingly as most fighting since man evolved has always been done with weapons. Similar to how our armed forces rarely practice it, and 200 years from now somebody could be studying the ancient art of US Marine-do and make the same "it was used in combat" argument for the effectiveness of his art.

B) Stylized, ritualistic combat... Much like how Civil War reinactors train with muskets and old, out dated battle techniques and tactics. They wouldn't be foolish enough to claim that in a modern setting in modern culture, that these techniques are effective in battle.

Myself, I think it is a blend of the above and the fact that most TMA's don't train to fight really. You can have the sharpest technique in the world, but if you don't spar a lot to work it against resisting opponents, hit bags to develop power, and hit pads to develop timing and distancing, then you are going to be way behind the game.

The majority of people who gravitate to a TMA have a different mind set than the majority of people who gravitate to a combat sport. Thus the training is different and it is reflected in the ring.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

TCMA is alive and well.. AND quite applicable.. The problem is that whenever people are amazed by some new style's temporary domination of the sport they jump ship to be on the "cutting edge".. True TCMA will dig into their art and find the cure for the latest flavor of the month.. too few people have the discipline to find the answers in their own arts.. TCMA has lineages spanning thousands of years, and nothing "new" has developed in that time.. combat is still combat and anything goes.. the longevity of a system is evidence of its history of dealing with challenges, the weaknesses of today's students are not the style's weaknesses.. Though, it will become so if teachers keep diminishing the Art to caress the $ out of lazy students..

The first place to look when you question your art, is in the mirror..

Be well..

[David Jamieson]

There is no training that when done with correct mind and intention, fails in the area of application.

From any style, any system etc etc.

Most of the people who make derogatory comments oabout traditional martial arts methods have little or zero experience with them and have simply spent too much time hanging around reading threads at bullshido. :p

it's true.

There are more people in the MA world (that's tma, mma, all of it) who talk out of their asses than just about any other sport or practice.

[hskwarrior]

BULLSHIDO??????

(bULL--SHEET--OH)?????


IS THAT CORRECT?

[lkfmdc]

The argumant that fighting has changed is not a valid point.



The answer, like many things, is both yes and no.....

Fighting does change over time. Hopology, ie the history of combat, teaches us that the knight in plate armour did not fight like the Renaissance gentleman....

More directly to the point, police instruction in different parts of the world IS geared differently because different cultures do fight differently

In the US, major metropolitan areas have become "boxing towns" (NY, Detroit, Chicago, etc)... while rural areas retain a strong wrestling tradition (just got back from doing a fight event in Willard OH... big boys with good wrestling made for a fun night of MMA)...

In teh UK, the head butt is an ingrained part of their fight culture (Korea as well)

Japan is a knife culture, it's police train with the full expectation that a knife is hidden and will be used

BJJ wasn't part of mainstream fight culture in th 1980's ...

Fighting in inevitably influenced by the fight culture that originated it... a lot of TCMA is based upon a structure of bridges, sensitivity, clinging and trapping... if an American boxer doesn't "give you that structure" your technique is going to change....

[Knifefighter]

Almost any area of human involvement- physical performance, computers, transportation, telecommunications, medicine, space travel- has been tremendously enhanced by modern technology and scientific knowledge.

Unarmed combatives are no different. Training methods and fighting techniques that were used hundreds or thousands of years ago are mostly outdated today. Modern technology and knowledge allows for more efficient and effective use of training time and techniques.

Modern human performnace training makes use of principles such as periodization, plyometrics, complex training, specificity of training, peaking, force/velocity relationships, specific energy system training, blood lactate monitoring, and many others that bring human performance to maximum levels.

On the other side of the spectrum, you have many traditional martial artists who believe that forms and static stances are good ways to develop technique and power. These things may have been useful in the context of the past where little was known about physiological and biomechanical adaptation, but not by today's standards.

[David Jamieson]

Almost any area of human involvement- physical performance, computers, transportation, telecommunications, medicine, space travel- has been tremendously enhanced by modern technology and scientific knowledge.

Unarmed combatives are no different. Training methods and fighting techniques that were used hundreds or thousands of years ago are mostly outdated today. Modern technology and knowledge allows for more efficient and effective use of training time and techniques.

Modern human performnace training makes use of principles such as periodization, plyometrics, complex training, specificity of training, peaking, force/velocity relationships, specific energy system training, blood lactate monitoring, and many others that bring human performance to maximum levels.

On the other side of the spectrum, you have many traditional martial artists who believe that forms and static stances are good ways to develop technique and power. These things may have been useful in the context of the past where little was known about physiological and biomechanical adaptation, but not by today's standards.

I've heard this argument before. It is partially true, but not whole in truth in my opinion.

The reason being, the body form has remained fun****etally the same for many thousands of years.

Empty handed or non firearm weapons fighting has been trained to levels that go beyond any new machine or device of the modern age can give. Knowledge of the act of fighting is something that is only augmented by diet and nutritional knowledge, technique refinement is done through practice of the technique and there is still no proof that modern ways are much different than old ways in the areas that really count.

strength development has always had the use of weight or weighted devices as well as body weight exercises which are done to teh zenith in asian practices.

conditioning is always about enduring incoming and having the gas to go the long haul as well. Methods for this are numerous and not greatly improved by tiny enhancements in technology to carry them out, you still have to do the work.

technique is from many known principled sources and validated through application of it.

static stance training is always called on the floor in regards to inefficiency but in context to the art it is combined with, it is a fundamental step in making progress and it is a beginning method to set the foundation. Stances move onto the mobile delivery platforms they are intended to be as soon as the student develops the correct structure through static training. I have yet to see anything tabled that makes it 100% clear that this method is inefficient. I've seen more cases that show it is an efficient way to get structure ingrained to a student to move forward in the art that is based off those structures.

Because someone calls something a name that hasn't been used before, does not mean that thing did not exist prior to it's 'final definition'. A good example is plyometrics. All the rage right? What if you knew these exercises were done ages ago? What if they are still done now, but called something else?

What about force feedback, bagwork etc etc? What if you knew that this was all around for ages. What if you found out that superficial anatomy has been around for centuries and knowledge of motion has been around for ages before it was termed kinesiology?

Training for fighting these days is geared towards a venue specifically. If it is competitive fighting in all ranges, then training is geared to get the results for that venue. Some of those training methods have great overlap into other uses, ie: mma to the street does ok, but so does for real tma. You gotta train for what it is you're gonna do. How does a modern and efficient fight trainer go against someone armed with a knife? And if they want to ask or get some info on that, where are they going to go to find out?

In short, the efficient v proclaimed non efficiency of tma v mma is moot. Has never been satisfactorily prooven outside of fairly spurious imo claims.

Yes, advances have been made in teh understanding of the workings of our body, how we burn fat, how to train endurance without being counterproductive to the whole and so on. But much of these are common sense in many respects and have been done correctly for years. Even olympic athletes can only shave micro seconds in their given sports with all these amazing advances. Boxing, wrestling, et al have on teh other hand, when it comes to application and expression remains relatively unchanged but for the rules and venues they have applied to them.

There's many a boxing gym in the modern day that doesn't have very much difference to what is in it from what you would have found in a boxing gym 50 years ago.

some validity to that argument in short, but doesn't cover the big picture by any means.

[SevenStar]

Whats the point?

Right. Recently theres been a lot of hoo har between MMA guys and Traditionalists. Many people are saying that traditional kung fu and traditional training are useless as it can never be used in the ring etc. I read a site the other day stating that forms were almost pointless for learning to fight and that people shouldn't see them as 'how you fight'. It also said that stances are never used in a real fight and other things to that effect.

So I ask. If this is true then WHY was the style created in the first place? Why would there be 'unusable' techniques within a form? I dont get the logic behind saying TMA is basically bollacks.....

Maybe our understanding of TMA is different to that of old.....maybe we have missed the point somewhere along the line.

craig

1. leave this argument in 2001 where it belongs.

2. out argument is that if you want to fight in the ring, you need to change the way you train. it's not your style that's not working, it's the training methods employed.

3. forms can be used to created fighting drills which CAN be used for fighting. Practicing the entire form over and over won't help much.

4. it was created in the first place because at one time it was needed. things change over time. people used to ride horses everywhere. Why don't we now?

5. stances are never used in a fight - at least not statically. A lot of cma train them statically. stances are transitional and should be trained as such. this is another training methodology difference. "modern" styles don't spend a lot of time on stance straining. footwork drills teach you how to move. Also, stance training doesn't increase strength, like many think. It increases muscle ENDURANCE.

[MasterKiller]

5. stances are never used in a fight - at least not statically. A lot of cma train them statically. stances are transitional and should be trained as such. this is another training methodology difference. "modern" styles don't spend a lot of time on stance straining. footwork drills teach you how to move. Also, stance training doesn't increase strength, like many think. It increases muscle ENDURANCE.

Yoga isn't used in a fight, at least not statically. A lot of modern styles (including BJJ) recommend Yoga training to increase flexibility and to train your body to hold extreme postures so that in a fluid, transitional state you can explode through the posture without damage.

[TenTigers]

"On the other side of the spectrum, you have many traditional martial artists who believe that forms and static stances are good ways to develop technique and power."

You have proved my point-these so-called traditional Martial Artists don't understand their art, their forms, or usage. Like I said, TCMA, when taught correctly is highly effective. Just because a guy wears a satin uniform or a starched white gi, has an altar, or tatami mats, speaks fluent Cantonese/Potung,Japanese, says "Oss" every five seconds, and can quote Sun Tzu, means absolutely nothing.
Bottom line-if you are practicing a Traditional Chinese Martial Art, and it is not effective, it's not the art that sucks.:eek:

[Chief Fox]

I am so sick of this argument. MMA practitioners and even wanabes all say that TCMA isn't applicable.

My first question is: What's your deffinition of "traditional"? Everyone has a different deffinition of that word. For some people it means stance training. For others it means forms work. For still others it means something different. Just because I do stance training or work on forms doesn't mean that I don't also spar against a "resisting" opponent.

My second question is: Applicable to what? If the answer is MMA style of combat then maybe it isn't applicable. But don't tell me it's not applicable to combat on the street or combat with weapons. MMA vs. a person with a knife or stick, guess what, MMA looses. MMA vs. multiple opponents, again, MMA looses. So MMA guys are all about saying that it doesn't apply but again, what they mean is, it doesn't apply to their prefered style of "sport" combat.

I'd love to go into this more but it is so ridiculous.

[SevenStar]

.
As for forms not being useful...Heavybags teach structure, but are very limited in teaching footwork. Conditioning is important,but doesn`t teach you to hit. Sparring is a great tool, but it doesn`t allow me to use all my tools as agressively as I might want all the time. Forms training does all these things. Obviously forms aren`t the end-all,-be-all of traditional training, but they teach things that can`t be learned as effectively in other ways.

not really. There is a difference between using your footwork against nobody and using it against an opponent. Likewise, there is a difference between using all of your techniques full force against the air using them against an opponent.


you`re learning balance ing new positions, getting aerobic conditioning, building strength, practicing footwork, and building muscle-memory. Not a bad way to spend class, eh?

you're building muscle endurance more than strength, but I digress. forms are good for the other things you've listed on some level.

[SevenStar]

Yoga isn't used in a fight, at least not statically. A lot of modern styles (including BJJ) recommend Yoga training to increase flexibility and to train your body to hold extreme postures so that in a fluid, transitional state you can explode through the posture without damage.


I don't disagree with that. He was saying that one of the arguments is that stances aren't used in fights. I'm agreeing with said person. doesn't mean don't train them. i also stated they build endurance...

[SevenStar]

I am so sick of this argument. MMA practitioners and even wanabes all say that TCMA isn't applicable.

My first question is: What's your deffinition of "traditional"? Everyone has a different deffinition of that word. For some people it means stance training. For others it means forms work. For still others it means something different. Just because I do stance training or work on forms doesn't mean that I don't also spar against a "resisting" opponent.

My second question is: Applicable to what? If the answer is MMA style of combat then maybe it isn't applicable. But don't tell me it's not applicable to combat on the street or combat with weapons. MMA vs. a person with a knife or stick, guess what, MMA looses. MMA vs. multiple opponents, again, MMA looses. So MMA guys are all about saying that it doesn't apply but again, what they mean is, it doesn't apply to their prefered style of "sport" combat.

I'd love to go into this more but it is so ridiculous.

the typical definition of tradional is people who train stances and forms as opposed to more "modern" things like bagwork, mittwork, weight training, etc. for example, karate and tkd are considered traditional. wrestling and thai boxing are not, even though wrestling is older than both tkd and karate, and tkd really isn't traditional at all.

as for applicable, this goes back to what we have all seen. I have seen more than a handful of TMA get their arses handed to them in streetfights. the ones you didn't wanna mess with were the wrestlers and boxers. the TMA almost always got stomped. And I was in tma at the time, so that jaded my outlook of tma. heck, on my night job, the tkd guy we had got his arse handed to him on a few occasions. But that happens and can happen to anyone, which is what people don't think about. As for mma vs a person with a knife or stick, there was an article recently about a thai boxer (read: sport fighter) who chased THREE armed assailants out of his home. so, just as we can't make our generalizations about what is applicable, you can't make it about mma vs weapons. I personally have been in multiple assailant fights at the club I work. I won. generalizations suck.

[PangQuan]

Bottom line-if you are practicing a Traditional Chinese Martial Art, and it is not effective, it's not the art that sucks.:eek:

anyone with any questions whether TCMA is effective or not should read this line over and over until they understand it.

[SevenStar]

The argumant that fighting has changed is not a valid point. Aside from the firearm, nothing has changed. All strikes are simply angles of attack, whether fist,sword, clup, knife. Grappling has always existed. Adrenal response has always existed. The only thing that has changed is that the western mind is all about instant gratification, and McDonald's I want it now, my way mentality.

I would disagree - I think you are looking at the obvious and not beyond. tactics are what has changed. considering most attacks these days don't start with a wrist grab, why are TMA still teaching them? if they were as evolutionary as green willow stated, then most schools would've phased this out by now. naturally the angles are the same - as long as we are human and our number of limbs and range of movement don't change, it will be the same. Heck, a lot of tma and sport styles have the same techniques, but it's the training methods that matter most. Going back to tactics, people now will pull your coat over your head and stomp you while you can't see. Did they do this back then? if not, fighting is different, as it has changed tactically. Also, there are more people now who have training. This changes fighting also, because now you need to be that much better.



There are many people teaching "Traditional Chinese Martial Arts" but in reality, there are very few who actually understand it, and are teaching it correctly.
Unfortunately,"TCMA" is becoming a catch phrase, and will be thrown around more and more. I have been in Martial Arts for over thirty years. I have met many, many people, many, many well known Sifus, and Senseis. Very,very few who actually understood, and are teaching Traditional Martial Arts. It is not neccesary to mention names.

whose fault would that be? if they didn't understand, why were they allowed to teach?

[SevenStar]

In teh UK, the head butt is an ingrained part of their fight culture (Korea as well)


korean? I know africa and brazil, but wouldn't have guessed korea. is there a specific art where the headbutt is prominent, or is it just a general regional technique that is used?

[Golden Arms]

/Rant
Train more, talk less. And I like hearing that stances cannot be used in a fight, maybe someone could explain to me how I used them yesterday to smash my opponents legs, destabilize him, and throw him?

Fighting is fighting, but just because you havent seen it before doesnt mean it isnt being done. The deeper you go in any style of fighting, the higher the level of refinement in technique. Past a certain point, even fellow practicioners of what you do dont get how you do some of it, or what you are doing, so how do you expect the average person that likes fighting to understand those subtleties? It never ceases to amaze me that just because something becomes commonly accepted, especially on here, that it somehow makes it 'more right'.

I train with one guy that has worked hung gar for almost 35 years for 25+ years now he has been specializing on hitting someone in the eyes, liver and spleen. According to this place, you CANT aim for those spots and hope to hit them under pressure. Tell that to him.

I dont know if maybe a lot of TCMA schools dont train hard or correctly or what, but I am always in amazement at these posts. If you just do it alot, the puzzle puts itself together for you, I cant think of a single movement I have learned that doesnt have quite a few applications in combat, most of them simple. Hang around the treachery of old men for a while, and you may think differently.

[Golden Arms]

Originally Posted by TenTigers
Bottom line-if you are practicing a Traditional Chinese Martial Art, and it is not effective, it's not the art that sucks.

anyone with any questions whether TCMA is effective or not should read this line over and over until they understand it.

Amen....I wish I had thought of that.

[TenTigers]

"the typical definition of tradional is people who train stances and forms as opposed to more "modern" things like bagwork, mittwork, weight training,"

evidently, the typical definition has been created by people completely ignorant of actual traditional Martial Arts training. These are things that perhaps someone who has taken several months at a commercial McKwoon, or reads books and magazines, as opposed to actual experience.
I don't know ANY AUTHENTIC, traditional Chinese Martial Arts school that does not use focus pads,heavybags, weight training,hard contact, and conditioning.
Of course we don't want to name names, so please don't start listing these schools, unless you wish to do so in PM. But I can name several in NY area that you can walk into and you will not see what you seem to think is TCMA, and these are the schools in my opinion and experience that are exactly that.

"There is a difference between using your footwork against nobody and using it against an opponent. Likewise, there is a difference between using all of your techniques full force against the air using them against an opponent."

This again is not how TCMA is trained or practiced-properly

umm, btw-I have had people grab my wrist. Also, it is taught to Police and LEOs for weapon retention. Many women are grabbed as wellas youths. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Pulling a jacket over someone's head has been around as long as there were jackets. What, you think Hockey players invented it?

[lkfmdc]

korean? I know africa and brazil, but wouldn't have guessed korea. is there a specific art where the headbutt is prominent, or is it just a general regional technique that is used?

My Korean transliteration may be off but it sounds like "bok chi gi" or head striking... my wife jokes about how common a tactic it is, and I know tons of WW II era stories about rude soldiers (both US and Russian) getting head butted by irate Korea farmers.... also, two of Tae Kyon's original 12 techniques are variations on a head butt.

[TenTigers]

In the preface of his book on Kum La Sau (written in 1936), Liu Jin Sheng says-

"...If we speak about the salvation of our Motherland, first of all we have to advocate our national martial art to keep up people’s spirit. Although recently the central authorities following instructions of the prime-minister encourage exercises in national martial arts and both in the center and in provinces schools of national martial art were founded, but besides wrestling, only two schools, Shaolin and Wudang, were noticeably spread. Also, individual training (mastering of forms) is prevalent in those institutions but the applied aspect of techniques learnt is ignored. Therefore, if a man who has been exercising, say, even for twenty or thirty years and who engages a western boxer or a Japanese judo wrestler, he will surely be defeated. Striving for nice-looking movements without practical use and absence of fighting spirit are at the bottom of it. In this way we shall lose little by little all the heritage of our ancestors who brilliantly used all methods and techniques in a combat. Now foreigners say with a touch of irony that the Chinese martial art is nothing else but a dance with energetic movements. Our ancestors knew how to drill by twos, one against another, and alone. They were able to employ various techniques one after another in a fight, attacking continuously the enemy so that he had no time to defend himself, nothing to say about fighting back. That is why such well-known generals of the Ming dynasty as Qi Jiguang, Yu Dayou and others encouraged a practical approach to training and rejected all showy and perfunctory things [with Qi Ji Guang writing in the 1500's!]. They made a glorious mark in the history."

Liu later says, "Today sciences develop, all branches of knowledge improve from day to day. Only our national martial art does not make any progress..."

"Over the past few months, I've read a few Republican era gung fu books, and there seems, at least to me, to be a pattern of most of the authors not being very concerned about style or position, while being more concerned with effectiveness and cultivation. Most of the authors made a call to find the applicative and functional side to gung fu, and in some instances, like with the author Tang Hao, a call to expose and denounce the mythical/unrealistic/non-functional side to gung fu."

This was in another forum-made up of TCMA guys-Illusionfist is the contributor/
He then goes on to comment:

"I've learned a lot about what the "elders" thought about gung fu by reading these books. I feel that most westerners and modern Chinese are equally deluded when it comes to understanding the efficacy of gung fu methods. If we look to the written evidence, there has been a clarion call for realistic, effective training for centuries."


so, what are your thoughts? (Thanx, Chris)

[SevenStar]

I train with one guy that has worked hung gar for almost 35 years for 25+ years now he has been specializing on hitting someone in the eyes, liver and spleen. According to this place, you CANT aim for those spots and hope to hit them under pressure. Tell that to him.


To be more correct, we say that it is much harder to hit someone in the eyes when they are moving and resisting. which is VERY true. out of curiosity, how has this friend trained to really hit someone so accurately in such a soft, vulnerable place without hurting them?

as for the spleen, I've never seen it mentioned as such a target, and we've NEVER said that about the liver. matter of factly, we had a recent post about liver shots and their effectiveness. boxer julio cesar chavez was a master of them...

[SevenStar]

My Korean transliteration may be off but it sounds like "bok chi gi" or head striking... my wife jokes about how common a tactic it is, and I know tons of WW II era stories about rude soldiers (both US and Russian) getting head butted by irate Korea farmers.... also, two of Tae Kyon's original 12 techniques are variations on a head butt.

sweet. ya learn something new every day!

[SevenStar]

I don't disagree that these things are used. rock pole, pulleys, vases, etc. are the equivalent of strength training. Not all schools today do these things though. No need for names.

[quote]This again is not how TCMA is trained or practiced-properly

according to david 43515, one of the benefits of forms is that you can strike full power with all of your strikes, and that you can't do that while sparring. If he's not hitting air, then what is he hitting?


Also, it is taught to Police and LEOs for weapon retention.

different animal and situation. They are grabbing the wrist to control the weapon arm - the assailant is not grabbing THEIR wrist.


Pulling a jacket over someone's head has been around as long as there were jackets. What, you think Hockey players invented it?

you mean they didn't?? seriously though, it is a tactical difference. Not only that, but it's one that is quite possibly regional, which brings up a whole different issue. I gotta say though, of all the "my master had x challenge match" stories, I've not yet heard one where this was done.

[PangQuan]

I had a friend back in the day that i used to hang with alot. we would spar all the time.

neither one of had any formal training, mainly movies a few pointers from the older generation thats about it though.


I had not seen him for several years. I saw him just over a week ago. Told him i had been practicing traditional chinese martial arts for a while. he was eager to see the difference in the way i work.

we always used to be pretty toe to toe. now he cant even touch me.

the only difference in our lives....TCMA

proof enough for me.

say all you want to discount my experience...:rolleyes:

[SevenStar]

In the preface of his book on Kum La Sau (written in 1936), Liu Jin Sheng says-

"...If we speak about the salvation of our Motherland, first of all we have to advocate our national martial art to keep up people’s spirit. Although recently the central authorities following instructions of the prime-minister encourage exercises in national martial arts and both in the center and in provinces schools of national martial art were founded, but besides wrestling, only two schools, Shaolin and Wudang, were noticeably spread. Also, individual training (mastering of forms) is prevalent in those institutions but the applied aspect of techniques learnt is ignored. Therefore, if a man who has been exercising, say, even for twenty or thirty years and who engages a western boxer or a Japanese judo wrestler, he will surely be defeated. Striving for nice-looking movements without practical use and absence of fighting spirit are at the bottom of it. In this way we shall lose little by little all the heritage of our ancestors who brilliantly used all methods and techniques in a combat. Now foreigners say with a touch of irony that the Chinese martial art is nothing else but a dance with energetic movements. Our ancestors knew how to drill by twos, one against another, and alone. They were able to employ various techniques one after another in a fight, attacking continuously the enemy so that he had no time to defend himself, nothing to say about fighting back. That is why such well-known generals of the Ming dynasty as Qi Jiguang, Yu Dayou and others encouraged a practical approach to training and rejected all showy and perfunctory things [with Qi Ji Guang writing in the 1500's!]. They made a glorious mark in the history."

Liu later says, "Today sciences develop, all branches of knowledge improve from day to day. Only our national martial art does not make any progress..."

"Over the past few months, I've read a few Republican era gung fu books, and there seems, at least to me, to be a pattern of most of the authors not being very concerned about style or position, while being more concerned with effectiveness and cultivation. Most of the authors made a call to find the applicative and functional side to gung fu, and in some instances, like with the author Tang Hao, a call to expose and denounce the mythical/unrealistic/non-functional side to gung fu."

This was in another forum-made up of TCMA guys-Illusionfist is the contributor/
He then goes on to comment:

"I've learned a lot about what the "elders" thought about gung fu by reading these books. I feel that most westerners and modern Chinese are equally deluded when it comes to understanding the efficacy of gung fu methods. If we look to the written evidence, there has been a clarion call for realistic, effective training for centuries."


so, what are your thoughts? (Thanx, Chris)

I've heard similar before. shuai chiao drills in the manner described, as opposed to using the long forms. they also engage in sparring and other things. About two years ago, mantis 108 had a thread where he described the (for lack of a better term) de-evolution of CMA, combt wise. how, back in the day there was lots of drilling and only one or two forms through today, where it is the complete opposite - lots of forms with little drilling.

[SevenStar]

I had a friend back in the day that i used to hang with alot. we would spar all the time.

neither one of had any formal training, mainly movies a few pointers from the older generation thats about it though.


I had not seen him for several years. I saw him just over a week ago. Told him i had been practicing traditional chinese martial arts for a while. he was eager to see the difference in the way i work.

we always used to be pretty toe to toe. now he cant even touch me.

the only difference in our lives....TCMA

proof enough for me.

say all you want to discount my experience...:rolleyes:


for some reason I'm in a debate mood today, so sure, let's discount it. nothing against you, I like all of your posts, but since I'm being a devil's advocate...

1. you were friends. That indicates a mindset contrary to fighting. I've seen street fighters and tma slapbox - the tma held his own. It was in the real fight - where the mentality was completely different - that he got owned.

2. you have trained in SOMETHING. arguably, any training is better than none. a better test would be if you two had both been training during your separation.

[GeneChing]

Love you differences in cultural combat styles post. That's so true. I learned to head butt from a Brit that I used to fence with. He was a rugby player, and we got a lot of mileage out of it in fencing. You see, I had this solid stainless steel mask. I could drop in like a bowling ball into someone's sternum when we went corp-a-corp. It wasn't a legal move, so I got a lot of warnings, but never pushed it to the point of getting disqualified. Meanwhile, my opponents would be have this great flinch reflex instilled in them, so a little body feint could produce an opening. And if it didn't and I lost, at least I hurt the dude. ;)

Anyway, different fighting cultures and fighting styles are the key factor. MMA fighters have convinced the current martial world that the ring is the world, and not just another fighting culture. MMA is its own fighting culture so MMA works best there.

True, it is less restricted, but it is far from everyday fighting. For one thing, those fighters are highly trained and in peak physical condition. I try not to get in real fights with those sorts of people :p Most of the 'real' fights I get into are as a psych tech, so I usually fight people under the influence. TCMA works fine for me there.

[Golden Arms]

Seven, regarding the practice of hitting the eyes, or any finger attacks from people that use them a lot, it tends to follow this pattern from my experience.

1)lots of finger conditioning, including exercises that not only strengthen your fingers but instill muscle memory and body confidence in the use of the fingers on targets.

2)drilling the movements in the air in shadowboxing style situations on a regular basis, as well as specializing a lot of the time in counterattack type movements, slipping, etc

3)picking different targets like speed bags, wooden dummy, spot on a moving heavy bag, etc, and touch it with your fingers in the middle of doing your bag work, as well as trying to develop body awareness of exactly where your hands are in several ways.

4)learning how to hide/telegraph those movements the least amount possible.

Those 4 together add up to a person being used to using the technique with confidence, and being able to set it up well. If anything, the hard part is when the partner speeds up the sparring since it become much harder NOT to use it on them. Not a lot of mystery there, just a lot of work. You can apply a similar regimen to most types of movements and get them proficient over time ie: drill it multiple ways, both with and without resistance, and on moving targets.

Yeah it would be nice to know somebody with replacable eyes to practice on, but I havent found that person yet, tell me if you meet them.

[David Jamieson]

the methods of toughening fingers for use in thrusting, poking or jabbing have a lot to do with a couple of things.

compression of the finger and relief of neuralgia through desensitization.
THere are no muscles on the fingers themselves and grip strength is dependent on hand muscles but more on forearm muscles that control the lengths of the ligatures that in turn open and close the fingers.

the compression exercises are both slow work and striking work. the striking work has the side effect of relieving the neuralgia to some extent.

It's not a common thing to do, it takes a long time before you get it to the level that we see portrayed in movies, so it's not likely that it's a common weapon developed.

Palms and fists seem to win the day, so the thing that finger thrusts have when trained properly for the purpose of striking a hard target is that they're not all that commonly used and pretty much non extant in mma type sports due to rules and equipment used.

[mantis108]

Hand to hand combat wasn't deemed as the most essential combat skill according to General Qi Jiguang. But it is a great way for physical education for the troops as he pointed out. This is military view; civilian perspective is a different matter.

Pugilism in old Chinese perspective is more geared towards conditioning or building a sound mind in a sound body. The mystic approach of training pugilism is IMHO for having a uniformed knowledge base so that transmission and transformation of knowledge can take place with relative ease and efficiency. This is a rather unique feature in traditional Kung Fu. The idea is that a simple man can become a soldier and if given the oppotunity can become a commander, who would have knowledge of battle formation, logistics, etc, while at the same time working on his own salvation (spiritual quest). OF course, this is much easier said then done.

Kung Fu is trailing behind other modern MA in the combat sport department is like some of you pointed out that the training methodology is getting off the mark. It is not that we don't have all the conditioning stuff - cardiovascular, strength, coordination, impact, etc. We simply theorized too much and can no longer function at the optimal range. I often said that Kung Fu nowaday is like animal that inbreeding too much that we got a lame monster at hand. We have forgotten how real street fight is like. We have over theorized and over analysized street fighting. Worst of all, we stop learning from and paying attention to reality. Take simple the headlock for example, it's the most common street fighting thing. How many Kung Fu people drill that? How many forms in Kung Fu actually teach to use them and to counter that? If you look at Judo and BJJ, this is one of the most basic things that they drill WITHOUT form. Having said that does that mean that we don't have that or we can't do that in Kung Fu? Certainly not! It is just a matter of refoucsing the training methodology.

Going back to the basic even going back to the drawing board is what Kung Fu needed in this literally highly competitive market.

Mantis108

[PangQuan]

for some reason I'm in a debate mood today, so sure, let's discount it. nothing against you, I like all of your posts, but since I'm being a devil's advocate...

1. you were friends. That indicates a mindset contrary to fighting. I've seen street fighters and tma slapbox - the tma held his own. It was in the real fight - where the mentality was completely different - that he got owned.

2. you have trained in SOMETHING. arguably, any training is better than none. a better test would be if you two had both been training during your separation.

the simple fact that being trained in any trade and have it produce any form of positive results, indicates that there is potential within that particular activity.

the thing that many people dont take into effect is change. things do change, but with every change there is opportunity for potential. the greater the change, the greater the potential. this applies to all scales. from single one on one combat, to the evolution of man and his creations through time.

if you train with this in mind as well as a multitude of other elements, and act upon the changes accordingly, there should be no reason why your art should deminish in its effectiveness.

traditional chinese martial art has never remained stagnant, this goes against one of the foundary priciples within its creation and continual evolution. change. each master will recieve teachings as a pupil, and with these teachings they learn the skills that their teacher can give to them, as best as the teacher can dispense them. this is the duty of the teacher, it is the quest. to find the student you feel is capable of recieving all you have to offer, and to create a better practitioner than you ever have been. IF this cycle is completed traditionaly, then the art continues to change, flourish, grow, evolve and ADAPT with each generation that is a part of this traditional process. because that generation is alive in the moment and capable of understanding change and modern times.

the problem is that this is not a process that continues on a scale that it should. there have been set backs, and delusions.

[Fu-Pow]

5. stances are never used in a fight - at least not statically. A lot of cma train them statically. stances are transitional and should be trained as such. this is another training methodology difference. "modern" styles don't spend a lot of time on stance straining. footwork drills teach you how to move. Also, stance training doesn't increase strength, like many think. It increases muscle ENDURANCE.

And why do you need muscle endurance?

A: So you can maintain your stance during a fight to keep your center of gravity low.

And why do you need to keep your center of gravity low?

A: You lose your connection to the ground and your center of gravity comes up and you "float," making you that much easier to take down. No root, no legs and all the fancy hand technique in the world doesn't really mean ****.

[Knifefighter]

... in TCMA, weapons use was the preferred method - but maybe you didn't want to teach your weapons (the good stuff) to every newbie off the street, so you had him cut his teeth on empty hand forms for a while - if he leaves, np biggie, he didn't get the goods; if he stays, all you do is throw a wepon in his hand and have him do his empty hand stuff with a few modifications - so the first 10 to 15 years wasn't really a waste of time...
Maybe not a waste of time, but a pretty inefficient way to spend 10 to 15 years.




but the good stuff still permeates: you can look at forms like bassai and naihanchi (tekki)...
... you can think that you are blocking in all diferent directions, or you can see it as a strike/throw/counter throw combo, and you are learning to use the power of the hips / pelvis to generate rotatory power
The fact that you have to look at these forms and then do an intrepretation of what they mean shows that this is an antiquated approach compared to modern standards.

[Becca]

The argumant that fighting has changed is not a valid point. Aside from the firearm, nothing has changed. All strikes are simply angles of attack, whether fist,sword, clup, knife. Grappling has always existed. Adrenal response has always existed. The only thing that has changed is that the western mind is all about instant gratification, and McDonald's I want it now, my way mentality.
There are many people teaching "Traditional Chinese Martial Arts" but in reality, there are very few who actually understand it, and are teaching it correctly.
Unfortunately,"TCMA" is becoming a catch phrase, and will be thrown around more and more. I have been in Martial Arts for over thirty years. I have met many, many people, many, many well known Sifus, and Senseis. Very,very few who actually understood, and are teaching Traditional Martial Arts. It is not neccesary to mention names. All you need to do is ask yourself,"Is what I am learning an art that was developed for life and death conflicts, or am I learning something less than effective?" After thirty years, I still am a student, and I still marvel at how many of the real techniques are just so incredibly devastating, and when I witness someone who truly posesses these skills, I am overwhelmed.
Dang! too long to put this in my sig...:(

But that was very, very well put.

Especially the first paragraph.

Beautiful.
:)

[Knifefighter]

The argumant that fighting has changed is not a valid point. Aside from the firearm, nothing has changed. All strikes are simply angles of attack, whether fist,sword, clup, knife. Grappling has always existed. Adrenal response has always existed. The only thing that has changed is that the western mind is all about instant gratification, and McDonald's I want it now, my way mentality.
What has changed is our knowledge of training principles that maximize fighting ability.

[Green Cloud]

In the CMA you have guys that are good at forms and some are fighters, no matter what, forms are a necesary part of the training.

Forms develop power stregnth speed and stamina, wich are an essential part of fighting.

Sure one can jump rope or lift weights that is a lot easier to do, but how interesting is it to do. Modern forms of training are great and an easier way to get in shape, unfortunatly it is a mundane way to train and could get boring fast.

When doing forms training Your getting both an anarobic and an arobic work out, while maintaning flexibility, working on focus,memory, and developing your fighting tech.

Then you have fighting this is an arena to help you develop your tech. In some cases you have to abandon some of the pretty stuff in the forms, but then again some people are involved in the CMA to build not just the external but the internal.

Sure is it harder to learn Kung Fu to fight over MMA?? Of course it is, but then again that is why it's called an ART . Everything else is just a sport.

[PangQuan]

some people just are not capable of understanding what traditional training entails as a whole, and are not able to put it to actual use in thier regime.

this doesnt bother people that make use of the applicable traditional methods. it makes us laugh.

these people will never understand, not truly, though they may think they do. they dont.

To be a traditional training program it MUST contain elements of modernity. this is essential to follow along the path of change and to adapt accordingly with its flow, non resistance. those who claim to be traditional yet resist this practice are in fact very far from traditional, they have created a static practice within the belief that ancient ways alone mean traditional. Traditionality entails a way of being, a way that is deeply entwined within the culture that the tradition was started.

Tradition does not deny the modern. This is a MYTH that many believe.

[Knifefighter]

In the CMA you have guys that are good at forms and some are fighters, no matter what, forms are a necesary part of the training.
And that's why most "modern" fighters are better- because they don't do forms as a "necessary" part of their training.


Sure one can jump rope or lift weights that is a lot easier to do,
Not easier... just more effective... not the jump rope, but the weights.



Sure is it harder to learn Kung Fu to fight over MMA?? Of course it is,
Yeah, right.

[SevenStar]

the simple fact that being trained in any trade and have it produce any form of positive results, indicates that there is potential within that particular activity.

using that logic, there is potential in tae bo...


the thing that many people dont take into effect is change. things do change, but with every change there is opportunity for potential. the greater the change, the greater the potential. this applies to all scales. from single one on one combat, to the evolution of man and his creations through time.

I do agree with you here - you had the greater change.


if you train with this in mind as well as a multitude of other elements, and act upon the changes accordingly, there should be no reason why your art should deminish in its effectiveness.

bad training methodology will diminish it. Also, there may be a better way of training something. As you said, the greater the change...

[SevenStar]

And why do you need muscle endurance?

A: So you can maintain your stance during a fight to keep your center of gravity low.

And why do you need to keep your center of gravity low?

A: You lose your connection to the ground and your center of gravity comes up and you "float," making you that much easier to take down. No root, no legs and all the fancy hand technique in the world doesn't really mean ****.


Not really sure what your point is here. Nobody ever said you don't need endurance. The point was that is doesn't build strength.

[Chief Fox]

A form contains a series of techniques that can be used in combination or alone.

Forms are the defining elements of a style.

Forms are a way to practice and refine your technique without a training partner, just like shadow boxing.

I consider forms to be a part of my training, just like weight training, aerobic conditioning, drills and sparring.

I think learning forms are essential to learning kung fu.

BUT if all you do is forms or if all you do is try to collect as many forms as possible then this to me, is not the best way to become a more effective fighter.

To me, these are the benefits of form training.
1. learn technique
2. increase speed and agility
3. increase body awareness
4. Improve full body fluid motion
5. increase flexibility
6. cardio vascular benenfits

When I learn a form, I take the techniques and I try to perform them on my wooden dummy. I then take those same techniques and do them on the heavy bag. I then drill the techniques with a partner. Then I attempt to apply them in sparring.

I would say that if you do ANY kind of technique training on your own like sahdow boxing then you are basically doing a form. The difference between that and a kug fu form is, its a longer string of different techniques and many people (including some who are actually doing the form) don't understand all the applications for the techniques. The techniques that are not understood are therefore considered to be pointless. I would agree that if you don't understand a technique but you are doing it in a form then it is pointless.

One last thing, many of these misunderstood techniques when applied properly can be very unexpected in a combat situation and can make the difference in winning and loosing.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think that doing forms is the only way to train for fighting. I realize that there are many effective training methods that don't include forms at all. Form training is one way to train. How effective it is or how much it applys, in my opinion, depends on the individual.

[PangQuan]

using that logic, there is potential in tae bo...



I do agree with you here - you had the greater change.



bad training methodology will diminish it. Also, there may be a better way of training something. As you said, the greater the change...


were you to take the one element in tae bo that holds potential and at it to your program, you have then made use of tae bo's applicable qualities.


i did have the greater change :p


this is correct, the bad habits will diminish any trade. i would label myself as a TCMA, yet at the same time i include several elements from external sources into my style. does this take away from the fact of me being kung fu man, i dont think so. I just happen to apply other ideas to my training.

Take late master CTS for instance. Im sure we can all agree he was one of the few to touch our generations that could be considered a kung fu master. yet at the same time he knew western boxing... this did not make him a boxer, this made him an smart kung fu man. he just used what he liked and added it to his personal style, and left out what he didnt need. thats what kung fu is. its an accumulation of usable techniques. before other ideas were present they used what was there. The animals, and thier own bodies. process of elimination. today we have the ability to add many other ideas to our kung fu.

[Becca]

Originally Posted by Knifefighter
The fact that you have to look at these forms and then do an intrepretation of what they mean shows that this is an antiquated approach compared to modern standards.

Are you saying you don't drill? 'Cause I've never seen a drill that works 100% of the time without some interpritation... What about combos? I have seen many a fighter go out there and fight without using a single combo, too. But they loose rather badly.:rolleyes:

If I choose to start by using my teacher's drills and combos, is this wrong? And if he, in tern, chooses to teach me the same combos and drills his teacher first taught him? :confused: I honestly fail to see what if inefficiant about that...:rolleyes:

My first post on this topic was in reference to a comment made by TenTigers that was so absolutly true about martial arts schools, it astounds me that people like you fail so badly to see it. You have based your oppinions off of an ideal you either got from personnal experience or from observation.

Now, keeping in mind the the simplest answer is usualy true, aske yoyrself if what you saw worked? If no, then ask why it is still in use after so many centuries.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it would not have... Just because you fail to grasp why someone else is doing something you don't agree with or understand, doesn't make it wrong for everyone else.

I don't have any clue as to how one would publish a magazine. So would that quallify me to crisisize Gene on how he runs KFO? Nope. You don't do forms and see no point in doing them. Does this qualify you to give advise about doing forms... Nope.

[gabe]

Forms are just a tool. Great for muscle memory. So what?

In boxing, I wasn't allowed to hit the heavy bag or spar until my mechanics hitting air were right. When I got sloppy during sparring, my coach made me pay for it by making me go back to hours of shadow boxing. It's just a tool. And it fixed my mistakes. I wouldn't be able to fix them while my partner is taking my head off.

[SevenStar]

Sure one can jump rope or lift weights that is a lot easier to do, but how interesting is it to do. Modern forms of training are great and an easier way to get in shape, unfortunatly it is a mundane way to train and could get boring fast.

not really. I can vary pad drills all day and you will never be bored because I am constantl changing the combinations. I can put together a circuit of exercises and vary the exercises each session. A form on the other hand is always the same form. you can vary the speed and the tension, but that's about it. Now, which is more mundane?


When doing forms training Your getting both an anarobic and an arobic work out, while maintaning flexibility, working on focus,memory, and developing your fighting tech.

how is that different from padwork, sparring, bagwork or shadowboxing? They all do the exact same thing.


Sure is it harder to learn Kung Fu to fight over MMA?? Of course it is, but then again that is why it's called an ART . Everything else is just a sport.

I wouldn't say harder. It takes longer by design, but that doesn't make it harder.

[gabe]

Sorry, I had considered shadowboxing a type of forms training. Nothing modern about it.

[Becca]

Sorry, I had considered shadowboxing a type of forms training. Nothing modern about it.
Many of the anti-form people don't consider that forms are a type of shadow boxing. That is just not how they want to see it, so they don't.:)

[SevenStar]

Are you saying you don't drill? 'Cause I've never seen a drill that works 100% of the time without some interpritation... What about combos? I have seen many a fighter go out there and fight without using a single combo, too. But they loose rather badly.:rolleyes:

you're missing his point. He's saying that you should not have to extrapolate the application of a technique from a form; it should be shown from the get go, as opposed to being hidden in the form.



My first post on this topic was in reference to a comment made by TenTigers that was so absolutly true about martial arts schools, it astounds me that people like you fail so badly to see it. You have based your oppinions off of an ideal you either got from personnal experience or from observation.

as we pointed out, that paragraph by TT really isn't true... fighting has changed, tactically if nothing else.


Now, keeping in mind the the simplest answer is usualy true, aske yoyrself if what you saw worked? If no, then ask why it is still in use after so many centuries.

I hate that argument. we still drive cars after all this time, but are we still driving a model T? we still use projectile weapons, but why aren't we using slingshots?


I don't have any clue as to how one would publish a magazine. So would that quallify me to crisisize Gene on how he runs KFO? Nope. You don't do forms and see no point in doing them. Does this qualify you to give advise about doing forms... Nope.

knife and I both have a traditional background. We have indeed done forms before.

[SevenStar]

Many of the anti-form people don't consider that forms are a type of shadow boxing. That is just not how they want to see it, so they don't.:)

the main difference is that shadowboxing is dynamic. forms are not. It's always the same form. The intent is somewhat different as well. You can argue that because you are working technique and hitting air that they are the same. If you choose to argue that, then so be it...

[lkfmdc]

Hate to sound like Lao Tzu but the strenth of TMA is also it's greatest weakness...

For example, TMA assumes attacks from all directions, no time to square off, assume a stance, etc.... ie there is no "structure"... whereas most so called combat sports assume a basic position and work from there... the problem is, learning to throw everyting equally, from both sides, from all positions, is an imposing task...

TMA teaches forms as a movement study, rather than a set single application, it has multiple possibilities, it is adaptable to situations, that's great if you've been doing it for 15 plus years, for a newbie :confused:

[Golden Arms]

you're missing his point. He's saying that you should not have to extrapolate the application of a technique from a form; it should be shown from the get go, as opposed to being hidden in the form.

If you dont fight, you probably wont get it. If you do a lot of bag work, 2 person drills and sparring, nobody should have to explain it. If you were teaching a kid how to shoot a gun, would the first thing you taught them be what parts on a persons body to aim for for highest lethality, or would you show them how to use the gun and get proficient for a while first? I think a factor also is that to be a truly skilled at anything past a certain point, you need to be able to become your own teacher instead of only looking TO your teacher for the next step. That is the whole idea..if you get a form, you can take that thing, work it for 10 years on your own, and as long as you work at keeping good body mechanics, making live drills out of the techniques, etc, you can be a very proficient fighter that also has material they could teach to another person that may have a different build, mindset, etc and may find something different they like technique and usage wise out of the same set. Yeah it sure is useless LOL. People could argue that the jab is useless too, or or clinching, or whatever, its all based on context.

[Chief Fox]

the main difference is that shadowboxing is dynamic. forms are not. It's always the same form...

"I hate generalizations"

[SevenStar]

If you dont fight, you probably wont get it. If you do a lot of bag work, 2 person drills and sparring, nobody should have to explain it. If you were teaching a kid how to shoot a gun, would the first thing you taught them be what parts on a persons body to aim for for highest lethality, or would you show them how to use the gun and get proficient for a while first?

speaking in terms of a newbie, you shouldn't expect them to extrapolate anything. And even still, there are several applications to each technique, some may involve things he hasn't learned yet. He can't extrapolate what he has not been shown in this case. Also, IME, you start doing forms before you start sparring.


I think a factor also is that to be a truly skilled at anything past a certain point, you need to be able to become your own teacher instead of only looking TO your teacher for the next step. That is the whole idea..if you get a form, you can take that thing, work it for 10 years on your own, and as long as you work at keeping good body mechanics, making live drills out of the techniques, etc, you can be a very proficient fighter that also has material they could teach to another person that may have a different build, mindset, etc and may find something different they like technique and usage wise out of the same set.

that's fine and good, but you cannot teach yourself when you are just beginning. He11, boxers, wrestlers, etc. evolve their own style and preferences over time - that's a natural progression and you don't need forms to do it. an infighter will explore how to make the most of his infighting techniques and his head movement. an outboxer will explore using things like his jab and teep to their fullest capability. The result is fighters with the same training developing different specialties and abilities, which is ideal.


Yeah it sure is useless LOL. People could argue that the jab is useless too, or or clinching, or whatever, its all based on context.

the jab has offensive and defensive purposes, you cannot argue it as useless, realistically, other than stating why it's unnecessary in a grappling match, where it is illegal anyway. You may, however, be able to argue the clinch.

[Green Cloud]

not really. I can vary pad drills all day and you will never be bored because I am constantl changing the combinations. I can put together a circuit of exercises and vary the exercises each session. A form on the other hand is always the same form. you can vary the speed and the tension, but that's about it. Now, which is more mundane?



how is that different from padwork, sparring, bagwork or shadowboxing? They all do the exact same thing.



I wouldn't say harder. It takes longer by design, but that doesn't make it harder.

Seven star I was refering to the benefit of forms training not pad drills. Most styles including kung fu incoorperate pad drills, thats an elementary part of the training.

As far as mixing up the training regiment that's a normal part of the training, as far as using equipment, what if you don't have any to use or a training partner well that's when form training comes in handy.

But if your talking about shadow boxing then well that's like doing forms on a very basic level.

Forms are very exciting and fun not mundane.

[hskwarrior]

i agree with green cloud.

forms are far from boring and mundane. i know many people who have finished their systems forms and go right back to basics because they have a new understanding and want to master the form.

a form is something to master. not just mundanely perform because your sifu said to. but i won't try to teach anyone here. if you perform a form and it sucks but you think its great then you're no longer teachable. you've reached your pinnacle. move on.

but even my sifu still practices his forms at the age of 60.

i don't believe there's anyone here that has completely grown out of forms. the forms hold keys. but if you don't want the keys. fine. i do!!!!


hsk

[SevenStar]

Seven star I was refering to the benefit of forms training not pad drills.

you were comparing them to other training methods and making a case as to why they aren't mundane any modern stuff is. A case that I refuted.


As far as mixing up the training regiment that's a normal part of the training, as far as using equipment, what if you don't have any to use or a training partner well that's when form training comes in handy.

you don't need any equipment for a circuit, nor do you need it for shadowboxing.


But if your talking about shadow boxing then well that's like doing forms on a very basic level.

Forms are very exciting and fun not mundane.

they are less dynamic that shadowboxing, which is why they are more mundane.

[SevenStar]

i agree with green cloud.

forms are far from boring and mundane. i know many people who have finished their systems forms and go right back to basics because they have a new understanding and want to master the form.

a form is something to master. not just mundanely perform because your sifu said to. but i won't try to teach anyone here. if you perform a form and it sucks but you think its great then you're no longer teachable. you've reached your pinnacle. move on.

but even my sifu still practices his forms at the age of 60.

i don't believe there's anyone here that has completely grown out of forms. the forms hold keys. but if you don't want the keys. fine. i do!!!!


hsk

sure a form is something to master. So are basics. that doesn't by default make them not mundane. However, that is a personal perspective, so there's really no need in our debating it. What constitutes "keys" are respective to the art you are referring to.

[hskwarrior]

sure. that's right.

[hskwarrior]

the only time i see sets boring or mundane is when i think i have mastered it.

no matter what, if we put down the set and come back to it later on in time you begin to lose that flare you once had. the fun part is getting it back.

plus i like to think i'm fighting someone when doing sets.

lastly, forms are a good way to let out stress after a long hard day. i have often told my sifu that if it weren't for having my gung fu i would be in bad shape. but when im ****ed i do my forms. when im sad about something i do my forms.
afterwards i feel pretty good.

but yes you could get the same effect from hitting the bag or sparring someone as well.

you are right, no need to argue the point.

hsk

[Green Cloud]

you were comparing them to other training methods and making a case as to why they aren't mundane any modern stuff is. A case that I refuted.



you don't need any equipment for a circuit, nor do you need it for shadowboxing.



they are less dynamic that shadowboxing, which is why they are more mundane.


You say tomato I say tomato, fist of all I didn't say shadow boxing is mundane it is exciting, so is forms training. Forms are for people that like them instead of doing generik work outs.

In Choy lee fut there are forms that contain several hundred movements, bust one of those forms out in full speed and full power and that's the equivalent of running 5 miles in 5 minutes, not to say it increases your memory.

Any way I'm not sure what point we are dabating, I'm just trying to point out the benefits of forms training. It's just a more sophisticated way to train.

[hskwarrior]

try doing sup gee kow da 5 times full speed.

but forms do increase your memory. i feel forms is good because it makes you remember the new moves and such. the key to having a strong memory is to keep learning. thats why forms are food for your mind.


hsk

[Knifefighter]

The forms fans here have said that there are extraneous movements in forms that are not used when fighting. This goes against one of the basic principles of modern training- that of specificity.

Modern, efficient training methods attempt to mimic the actual activity as closely as possible. Throwing in superfluous movements that must then be removed during the real activity (fighting) is a very inefficient way of learning.

Learning forms with movements that are not applicable when used for real teaches maladaptive motor movement patterns (i.e. bad habits).

[Knifefighter]

In Choy lee fut there are forms that contain several hundred movements, bust one of those forms out in full speed and full power and that's the equivalent of running 5 miles in 5 minutes,
Not even close. I challenge you to go the local running track and attempt to do a five minute mile. You will find there is no comparison. Most people who do forms cannot come close to running a five minute mile.



not to say it increases your memory.
Any type of physical activity has been shown to increase memory.

[Ou Ji]

IMO, forms fall into two categories. They are either training forms or fighting forms.

Training forms will have moves that may not have direct applications or will be in a sequence that doesn't make fighting sense.

Fighting forms are just that, sequences of moves that simulate fighting. They are examples of how to combine the moves into fighting combos.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally Posted by Fu-Pow
And why do you need muscle endurance?

A: So you can maintain your stance during a fight to keep your center of gravity low.

And why do you need to keep your center of gravity low?

A: You lose your connection to the ground and your center of gravity comes up and you "float," making you that much easier to take down. No root, no legs and all the fancy hand technique in the world doesn't really mean ****.



Not really sure what your point is here. Nobody ever said you don't need endurance. The point was that is doesn't build strength.

My point is that stance training builds endurance AND strength (at least enough for you to hold your body up in a lowered position)..... this isn't just some kind of general strength and endurance....its for a very specific purpose.

My point is that stance training develops the strength and endurance that allows you to do the kung fu foot work correctly....ie to be mobile/agile and yet keep your center of gravity low. In virtually all kinds of martial art when the center of gravity comes up you become more vulnerable.

(Incidentally some internal style fool ya with a high stance but often they're actually more sunk into the ground then the external styles.)

This isn't the same kind strength that is required for "explosiveness"....for that you need to do something akin to plyometric type exercises....which incidentally many styles of kung fu contain by virtue of the movement in their forms (ie quick direction changes, dropping into and exploding out of low stance.)

Do you understand what I'm saying now or would you like to discuss this further?

[Matrix]

Most people who do forms cannot come close to running a five minute mile.There is no correlation between being able to run a five-minute mile and doing forms. Just as a person who spars or fights MMA may or may not be able to run a 5-minute mile. They're two different skill sets.
Having said that, I totally agree with your point that doing a form at full speed is NOT like running a five-minute mile. And I'm speaking as someone who has run many 5-minute miles... and I do forms as well. :)

[Green Cloud]

has anyone watched a gymnastics routine??? Is it just flipping around or just proper form in action. Forms are part of the beautiful ART of Kung FU, forms also teach the practitioner proper movement.

You learn how to cunduct your self in a gracefull maner when in a sressful situation. Forms teach constant refinement in movement. As far as I'm concerned if you can't look good when you fight then your just a brawler not a Martial Artist.

Kung Fu atracts people that are looking beond the external. Fighting is easy, looking good in a fight that's onother story. Kung Fu forms are for the perfectionist and perfection is not an accident.

Creating beauty is found from within in kung fu and brought out. You can be but ugly perform a great set and you are transformed into a swan.

Who cares what people that don't do forms think, I don't but step in the ring with me and you will see how beauty can defeat the beast.

If I lose I won't care because I'l be too busy looking pretty (Jim Kelly)

For the rest of you that don't get it well I don't expect you to that's why the Chinese feel the way they do about Lofans when it comes to Kung Fu.

[Knifefighter]

has anyone watched a gymnastics routine??? Is it just flipping around or just proper form in action. Forms are part of the beautiful ART of Kung FU, forms also teach the practitioner proper movement.
Exactly... gymnastics, ballet, modern dance, jazz dance, forms- pretty much all the same stuff.


As far as I'm concerned if you can't look good when you fight then your just a brawler not a Martial Artist.
That's the problem with most TMA practitioners. They think that real fighting is going to look like what is done in the forms and two man sets.


Fighting is easy, looking good in a fight that's onother story. Kung Fu forms are for the perfectionist and perfection is not an accident.
Fighting is many times harder than any form a person will ever learn.


Who cares what people that don't do forms think, I don't but step in the ring with me and you will see how beauty can defeat the beast.
Does that mean you will be stepping into the ring at the upcoming full-contact event in your area?

[Yum Cha]

"What has changed is our knowledge of training principles that maximize fighting ability"

I find this comment rather delusional, even though I understand your point and perspective Knifefighter.

The heydey of personal combat is long, long gone. Gladiators, Highlanders, Samurai, Fencers, Rough and Tumble wrestlers, Chinese bandits. You fought until you defeated your opponent and it often meant you killed them. Dead. Or, they killed you. It was all on the line.

I still know berserkers that will not lose, beat them with the hand, they get a stick, beat them with a stick they get a knife, beat the knife they get a gun, beat the gun they burn your farking house down, and god save you if you have a wife and children... These guys scare you before they even come around the corner, and they are crazy from the get go.

Get serious - sport is sport, real is real and the two do not share much, even if you pretend they do. So, talk about training methods, talk about developing skills, aggression, suffering pain and inflicting same, but nothing maximises fighting ability like fighting for your very life, as I'm sure more than one of you can attest to.

And, fighting for your life is a rare circumstance these days, whereas it was simply part of your training in times gone by. Many fell, fewer rose to fight again.

Ross made a comment in his rant about skill vs toughness. More than just a little insight there I reckon.

So, back to the question for all of us, what do you train and why? Is it so hard to accept that different people have different circumstances, different goals and different personalities? Yet the search for the panacea goes on....

Tell the guy suffering from Cystic fybrosis that form training is worthless, when its keeping his lungs functioning. Tell the hopelessly insecure pint-sized bloke that forms training is worthless, when it gives him his first ever taste of confidence. Tell the retarded kid who for once could defend himself from the village bullies that forms training is worthless....

I defy you to show me any form of training that doesn't involve repetitive actions as a part of the system. Techniques, combinations, forms, how much different is it really?

Does it come down to numbers.....a combination is 2-5 moves, but a form is anything over 5? If you practice a single leg takedown into a mount is that 2 techniques, a single combination or a small form? Or does it only depend on the number of times you do it. If you do it once a day its practicing applications, if you do it twice its a form?

Why not call a spade a spade, this is all about posturing, and has nothing to to with Kung fu. You really get a sense of small pen1s syndrone around here sometimes....

[Matrix]

I agree with your following comment.....

Forms teach constant refinement in movement.
That's the art, the refinement of the craft. But it has to be functional as well or it is just an art and the 'martial' part of the term 'martial art' is not required. So it may look good, like fight scenes in a movie may look good, but they may be less than practical or effective. Besides, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. What looks good to me may not be so to you. We all have our biases.

For me, the beauty may not always be apparent to all of the onlookers, it may be somewhat hidden, but the results will speak for themself. There are no style-points in a fight.


If I lose I won't care because I'l be too busy looking pretty (Jim Kelly)Well, he didn't end up looking too good in the end, did he. ;)

[Knifefighter]

The heydey of personal combat is long, long gone. Gladiators, Highlanders, Samurai, Fencers, Rough and Tumble wrestlers, Chinese bandits. You fought until you defeated your opponent and it often meant you killed them.
You are right as far as weapons are concerned. In the past most fights to the death were done with weapons.
As far as unarmed combat, the athletes of today are probably heads above those of the past.


Get serious - sport is sport, real is real and the two do not share much, even if you pretend they do. So, talk about training methods, talk about developing skills, aggression, suffering pain and inflicting same, but nothing maximises fighting ability like fighting for your very life, as I'm sure more than one of you can attest to.
Sport is sport, but it is much closer to "real" than performing forms or standing in stances.


Tell the guy suffering from Cystic fybrosis that form training is worthless, when its keeping his lungs functioning. Tell the hopelessly insecure pint-sized bloke that forms training is worthless, when it gives him his first ever taste of confidence. Tell the retarded kid who for once could defend himself from the village bullies that forms training is worthless....
Put each of these people through modern training methodologies and each would be better prepared. Nobody is saying forms are worthless... just that there are better ways to train if your objective is fighting.


If you practice a single leg takedown into a mount is that 2 techniques, a single combination or a small form? Or does it only depend on the number of times you do it. If you do it once a day its practicing applications, if you do it twice its a form?
Perfect example of modern, efficient training vs. outdated, inefficient training.
When you perform a single to a mount using modern training methods, you have the feedback of another person who will gradually add resistance and throw counters as you go through the drill.
Forms have no resistance, no counters, and no feedback.


Why not call a spade a spade, this is all about posturing, and has nothing to to with Kung fu.
No, it's about debating training principles.

[Green Cloud]

Yum cha, these guys don't get it, they just cut and paste and atack irellevant points that mean more when the post isn't cut and pasted so they can get a jab in.

They just don't understand, "father forgive them they know not what they do" (Jesus). You are trying to make sense to people that think that Jhon Wayne is the man when it come to fighting. It's called the western mentality that's why the rest of the world huffs and puffs at the U.S.

[TenTigers]

"The forms fans here have said that there are extraneous movements in forms that are not used when fighting. This goes against one of the basic principles of modern training- that of specificity.
"
yeah, no sh!t. there are no extreaneous movements-
plain and simple-listen real fuknclose,'cause I'm only gonna sya this till I'm blue in the face,,,
there are no extraneous movements, no non-fighting applications, no movement for movement sake in forms. Look, if you thought your art was important, and want to pass your art down intact, why in Gods name wiould you put crap into the forms? When will you guys ever get this through your thick effin skulls-if there are moves in your forms that have no application, then either you don't understand the movement, or it's made up bullsh!t. There is no in between. If you don't see application in a traditional set, then either you are retarded, or your teacher sucks. There is no in between. and by the way, if your teacher is any good,..well guess what? It's you. Now shut up and get on the short bus.

(I should drink more often-that was a **** good post!)

[Green Cloud]

This is a mute point, Kung fu people train the same way MMA people train, that icludes circuit training, weights, cardio and all other aspects of conditioning. The only difference is In Kung fu we have a larger variety of training tools available to us.

Some say weapons training is antiquated, I say it's just another for of conditioning hand eye coordination. Oh yea lets not forget that in kung fu the focus in the training is street fighting. Give me a broom and I'l house you with it.

Not to mention that certain individuals that I refuse to adress directly practice stick fighting, wich is taught by teaching set patterns (forms) and two man sets. I guess anyone who has had formal training would know that.

For instance the sinawally patern. Oh ask the guys that run the dog brothers events they can explain if you don't know what that is.

I have friends that do bjj and you know what they showed me set drills(forms) translation a series of tech. that can be practiced without a partner.

Once again Traditional Kung Fu is more than just fighting, it's about manetaining principles and ideals of a respected culture. It's about Culture
and you know what they say well some people just don't have culture.

[Green Cloud]

This is a mute point, Kung fu people train the same way MMA people train, that icludes circuit training, weights, cardio and all other aspects of conditioning. The only difference is In Kung fu we have a larger variety of training tools available to us.

Some say weapons training is antiquated, I say it's just another for of conditioning hand eye coordination. Oh yea lets not forget that in kung fu the focus in the training is street fighting. Give me a broom and I'l house you with it.

Not to mention that certain individuals that I refuse to adress directly practice stick fighting, wich is taught by teaching set patterns (forms) and two man sets. I guess anyone who has had formal training would know that.

For instance the sinawally patern. Oh ask the guys that run the dog brothers events they can explain if you don't know what that is.

I have friends that do bjj and you know what they showed me set drills(forms) translation a series of tech. that can be practiced without a partner.

Once again Traditional Kung Fu is more than just fighting, it's about manetaining principles and ideals of a respected culture. It's about Culture
and you know what they say well some people just don't have culture.

[TenTigers]

ahem, er, World Tae Kwon Do Federation Taeguk forms...living proof that this can and does happen...

that does not count-in my book. Tea Geuk forms were an attempt at making TKD completely Korean-basically diue to the fact that their forms were *******ized Shotokan forms-not that there is anything wrong with that-I happen to liie the Chon-Ji and Palgue sets. I do not like the Tea Geuk forms.
We are more or less, speaking of TRADITIONAL KUNG-FU FORMS.
I also realize that here are moves that are not applicable directly to fighting, such as hei-gung moves that work the lymphatic system, etc. But other than those, every move is applicable. If it is artistic, it is only because of the sequence of the moves that have anaesthetic quality/ But make no mistake-every move is designed to kill. period.

[Green Cloud]

"The forms fans here have said that there are extraneous movements in forms that are not used when fighting. This goes against one of the basic principles of modern training- that of specificity.
"
yeah, no sh!t. there are no extreaneous movements-
plain and simple-listen real fuknclose,'cause I'm only gonna sya this till I'm blue in the face,,,
there are no extraneous movements, no non-fighting applications, no movement for movement sake in forms. Look, if you thought your art was important, and want to pass your art down intact, why in Gods name wiould you put crap into the forms? When will you guys ever get this through your thick effin skulls-if there are moves in your forms that have no application, then either you don't understand the movement, or it's made up bullsh!t. There is no in between. If you don't see application in a traditional set, then either you are retarded, or your teacher sucks. There is no in between. and by the way, if your teacher is any good,..well guess what? It's you. Now shut up and get on the short bus.

(I should drink more often-that was a **** good post!)


I like it when Rick gets mad, but don't forget about the Ng ga pei form. Why bother sharing that valuable info with these guys;)

[Yum Cha]

Green Cloud. Thanks for the nod.

KF, don't get me wrong, I have a grudging respect for you, and many of the other ground squirrls, but you miss the point.

You said, "...just that there are better ways to train if your objective is fighting."

quite a big IF as far as most people are concerned.

Fighting who and how? When and where? Or most importantly Why? You can bet your a$$ that anybody who forces me into a fight is going to face some kind of weapon, from a key to a pencil, a pint glass, an ash tray, pool cue or at worst, a mouth full of bloody puke and teeth.... and that's just in class :D

Matt wrestling is just as unrealistic as temple dancing, the truth is, you fight the man, not the style, and the better man wins the day. Thats the real deal.

[Green Cloud]

Knife fighter I love you man, and so does Jesus and Buda:rolleyes: Come to the light.

[Green Cloud]

Why are the greeks the best at wrestling?? beacuse they never leave their training brothers behind:rolleyes:

[Green Cloud]

Sorry but I had to add some levety, before this turns into another flame war.

[Knifefighter]

This is a mute point, Kung fu people train the same way MMA people train, that icludes circuit training, weights, cardio and all other aspects of conditioning. The only difference is In Kung fu we have a larger variety of training tools available to us.
There are boatloads of kung fu practitioners and instructors who think weight training is counterproductive.



Not to mention that certain individuals that I refuse to adress directly practice stick fighting, wich is taught by teaching set patterns (forms) and two man sets. I guess anyone who has had formal training would know that.

For instance the sinawally patern. Oh ask the guys that run the dog brothers events they can explain if you don't know what that is.

I have friends that do bjj and you know what they showed me set drills(forms) translation a series of tech. that can be practiced without a partner.
Set patterns without resistance/without a training partner are just as inefficient in training with sticks as empty hands... Same with much of the way the old school way sinawali patterns have been taught... Same with BJJ drills done without a partner.

[Green Cloud]

how are you supposed to learn stick fighting without learningbthe sinewally pattern, by asmoses. Or do you teach someone by going Umm just bash that guy over the head till someone learns a continueous figure eight.

[Knifefighter]

Matt wrestling is just as unrealistic as temple dancing, the truth is, you fight the man, not the style, and the better man wins the day. Thats the real deal.Fights are fought on the ground at least as often as they are standing. "Mat wrestling" is equally effective as any type of standup fighting.

[Knifefighter]

how are you supposed to learn stick fighting without learningbthe sinewally pattern, by asmoses. Or do you teach someone by going Umm just bash that guy over the head till someone learns a continueous figure eight.
There are many stick teachers using less than modern training techniques, but those who are up to speed with these methods will teach and train the same way one would teach other modern fighting methods.

BTW, Sinewali is not figure 8.

[Green Cloud]

How do you teach someone a jab if your punching them in the face while they are trying to learn the basics of the puncn??? Ho do you take a frail person who is scared of their own shadow how to fight??? Is it by bashing him in the face while he is trying to learn a basic tech.???

I think that would be counterproductive. I know how about showing that person a series of movements that will build his self confidense, then slowly take him into fighting moves, then into a sparring situation once he has gained confidence.

[Green Cloud]

There are many stick teachers using less than modern training techniques, but those who are up to speed with these methods will teach and train the same way one would teach other modern fighting methods.

BTW, Sinewali is not figure 8.

UUMM what are ya talking about man. BTW anything that has a continueous flow is considered a figure eight.

[Green Cloud]

Fights are fought on the ground at least as often as they are standing. "Mat wrestling" is equally effective as any type of standup fighting.


I've seen dislocated shoulders from chicken wings and some broken elbows from arm bars, but nothing beats a broken Jaw delivered by an efortless right hook.

[Knifefighter]

UUMM what are ya talking about man. BTW anything that has a continueous flow is considered a figure eight.
No, the figure 8, or "snake" motion is the figure 8. Sinewali counts are done by the numbering system, i.e. 1/3/2/4 etc.

[Knifefighter]

I've seen dislocated shoulders from chicken wings and some broken elbows from arm bars, but nothing beats a broken Jaw delivered by an efortless right hook.
I prefer the even more effortless arm break after unconsciousness has set in from the back choke with the hooks in.

[Green Cloud]

youre wright in CMA we just use the figure eight as a generic term for anything that is a continuous motion. Like the 123 motion in the sinawally like when we do the figure eight motion with the butterbly swords.

[Green Cloud]

I prefer the even more effortless arm break after unconsciousness has set in from the back choke with the hooks in.


Actualy I like that move too

[Green Cloud]

Greek guy visits Scotland, gets taken on a tour by a local who, when espying a lost sheep runs up behind it, grabs it by the ears and does his thing to it; he turns to the Greek guy and is like "You wanna try it laddy?"; Greek says, "ok, but easy on my ears, ok?"

badumbump


LOL I never heard taht one before

[Green Cloud]

[QUOTE=cjurakpt]actually, the credit goes to Innocenzi on that one...[/QUO

That figures, he has some funny stories

[Green Cloud]

hey Chris you were right me and frank have been getting along famously. we call each other on the regular.

[hskwarrior]

i got a question for you.

you made a comment about modern teachers teaching less than modern training methods when it comes to sticks.

my question is ....what do you consider "MODERN" training for the sticks? i'm not talking about having an opponent, just the training.

I do Latosa Escrima and have been for some time. In our branch of stick fighting the sinawali can be done a few different ways. the first is just a right left right left simple type, but then you have the 3 strike combo which actually is performed in the "FIGURE 8" fashion. it is extremely interchangeable with butterfly knives, double sabers, double hatchets and so on which all have the pattern of the figure 8 in it.

so sinawali is a done as the figure 8 when done fluidly left to right.

[Green Cloud]

thank you, finaly a real kung fu guy knows what I'm talking about. Frank I think it's hard for some guys who have a linear thinking about they way stick fighting goes to think in the CMA way.

[TenTigers]

"No, the figure 8, or "snake" motion is the figure 8. Sinewali counts are done by the numbering system, i.e. 1/3/2/4 etc."
why does everyonoe think that their way is the only way? When I learned Kali,-the sinawali was taught just as is, then fluid and broken six and eight. Everyone has their own method. There is no right and wrong. If I call a move a figure eight, then for me, and all my students, it IS a figure 8, whether or not YOUR teacher calls it that or not.
This is the whole problem with this thread. People are taught, or exposed to total crap, and then they are demanding that we agree to his viewpoints, which are based upon false ideaology.
I am deeply sorry if I offend anyone, but it is VERY CLEAR that most of you have NEVER been exposed, or taught Traditional Chinese Martial Arts. You may have seen, or been shown, or taught a traditional FORM or two, but simply by your elementary understanding of the forms and movements,(or lack thereof) it is obvious that you are completely clueless about how TCMA is supposed to actually be taught
My suggestion to you is to go to different schools,and watch what they do. Don't simply go to one, or two, but (as you can plainly see) you will need to go to quite a few before seeing what is real. I am not saying that TCMA is better. I am just saying that most of what you have seen-heck-most of what we all have seen is utter garbage. Truth be known-out of a hundred people that claim to teach TCMA, you will be lucky to find a handfull that actually know what they are talking about.
btw-I don't claim to be one of them, I'm just tryin my best not to be those other guys. -y'know, the guys that suck!:D

[Green Cloud]

I love it when Sifu Rick get's mad but I hate it whe he gets all humble, he is truly a great teacher.

[TenTigers]

no,no, really,, I'm simply tryin....HEY! You set me up!!! Bastid!!:D

[hskwarrior]

ten tigers,

in the latosa branch the sinawali is done like this....... (maybe in your school its different)

you start out in normal position. left hand/stick on the bottom, right is up over your shoulder.

you start right left right (towards the left side) then going towards the right you go Left RIGHT LEFT ---ending up in your original start position.

in most stick fighting systems you have 12 angles of attack with the same amount of counters. in the Latosa system we cut that down to 5 strikes--cutting out the mess of having to rely on what number goes with what. we never demonstrate pre arranged routines. our way is to develop the natural instincts. "don't tell me what you're going to do, just do it and i will respond accordingly" that is our way.

not to say we are the only ones like that. but i do think the same techniques vary from teacher to teacher. especially since the hand systems amoungst the various stick fighting styles varies as well.

so we can all learn if we drop our guards and open our eyes a little. as stick fighters we all have some of the same techniques, abanico's is what we call fan strikes, someone else may call it something else.

sorry to differ with you tentigers.


hsk

[hskwarrior]

oops,

i may have misunderstood i guess you were quoting someone??????

hopefully.


if so, sorry.:o

[TenTigers]

BTW-if you can make your way downto my neckof the woods-we're playing at Albert's Manderin Gourmet in Huntington, at 730-8 ish, and there will be Ng Ga Pei afterwards! drinks are on me! Just as long as we don't end up at Chesterfield's afterwards! Too bad Sparks closed down.:D

[Green Cloud]

I'm there give me a call to confirm this drunken monkey tech.

[PangQuan]

When working my sets there are always specific techniques that stand out to me. Ones i am instantly comfortable with. These techniques are part of what i pull from a form. I will practice these on the heavy bag, or on pads, as well as drill them with a few of my kf brothers. Many of these techniques I would not have learned without learning a form or style that contains them.

There are always techniques in any style that will suprise you with their applicability if one were to drill the technique correctly and to the point of second nature.


A kid in class is very fond of wushu. he loves running on walls and doing back flips, hand springs, arials, twists and other stunning arial techniques. His flexability and conditioning is up to par with what he enjoys. I once saw him working on a new combo and at the end of the combo he was to jump up and do the splits in the air blocking his groin (you know the one) but instead his body automatically went into a back flip at the climax of his leap. He was so used to doing backflips out of a back handspring it just happened. He ended up landing on his neck. Mind you we practice on concrete with thin hardbound carpet and no padding.

I dont know about you but that would have hurt me. a six foot fall onto your neck. ouch eh.

he walked away fine and continued his practices.

dont get me wrong, he loves wushu but for a 17 year old kid his kung fu is pretty nice. totally natural, no mental blockages.

his body has been conditioned during his growth period to the point that injury is rare.

haveing the flexability, and strenght, mixed with proper conditioning, to be able to do many of the sets chinese martial art has to offer is part of the reason for many of the awkward and mishapen movements or techniques within many many forms. at first you will not be good at the form, but after time, you will be able to do the movements correctly. the strength, flexability and conditioning needed to be able to correctly do the movments in the form will come with practice. These benefits you get from form practice will follow you into any physical endeavor you choose to undertake throughout your day or life. even fighting.

many kung fu systems will have a very very large compilation of movements within its totality. once the system is mastered, you have gained its conditioning to the full. And this is JUST the form side of the teachings you will recieve from your master. there is much much more involved in traditional training than just forms, LOL.

[Green Cloud]

oh yea bring your girl so someone can drive us home:D

[Green Cloud]

When working my sets there are always specific techniques that stand out to me. Ones i am instantly comfortable with. These techniques are part of what i pull from a form. I will practice these on the heavy bag, or on pads, as well as drill them with a few of my kf brothers. Many of these techniques I would not have learned without learning a form or style that contains them.

There are always techniques in any style that will suprise you with their applicability if one were to drill the technique correctly and to the point of second nature.


A kid in class is very fond of wushu. he loves running on walls and doing back flips, hand springs, arials, twists and other stunning arial techniques. His flexability and conditioning is up to par with what he enjoys. I once saw him working on a new combo and at the end of the combo he was to jump up and do the splits in the air blocking his groin (you know the one) but instead his body automatically went into a back flip at the climax of his leap. He was so used to doing backflips out of a back handspring it just happened. He ended up landing on his neck. Mind you we practice on concrete with thin hardbound carpet and no padding.

I dont know about you but that would have hurt me. a six foot fall onto your neck. ouch eh.

he walked away fine and continued his practices.

dont get me wrong, he loves wushu but for a 17 year old kid his kung fu is pretty nice. totally natural, no mental blockages.

his body has been conditioned during his growth period to the point that injury is rare.

haveing the flexability, and strenght, mixed with proper conditioning, to be able to do many of the sets chinese martial art has to offer is part of the reason for many of the awkward and mishapen movements or techniques within many many forms. at first you will not be good at the form, but after time, you will be able to do the movements correctly. the strength, flexability and conditioning needed to be able to correctly do the movments in the form will come with practice. These benefits you get from form practice will follow you into any physical endeavor you choose to undertake throughout your day or life. even fighting.

many kung fu systems will have a very very large compilation of movements within its totality. once the system is mastered, you have gained its conditioning to the full. And this is JUST the form side of the teachings you will recieve from your master. there is much much more involved in traditional training than just forms, LOL.


Some people just can't apreciate how hard some manuevers are they are just simply focused on simple fighting tech. I guess it's out of insecurity that they only focus on simple fighting skill than learning how to exploit their bodies.

[ChinoXL]

I was having a talk with my sifu.
1. forms contain everything that can be applied more than one way it can be done 5-6 different ways depending on angle and range.
2. forms will help you establish a flow ex: so you can attack in a way where your enemies will be forced to react in the way you want them to.
3. If your forms have usless moves.. your form sucks
4. Everything in the form can be applied and used as you progress you'll learn and get better.
5. Hands down legit masters are rare and it's easier to train in anything else ie. muay thai// bjj// judo // boxing and progress
6. 80% of the population won't be able to grasp kung-fu's concept.. sorry but kung-fu is only for smart folks and due to this reason people have to train other styles. And will be trash talking kung-fu.
7. Kung fu takes alot of patience and dedication. In the U.S. no joke alot of people suck.
8. Most people learn forms and do things half assed. Do it correctily it'll give you alot of power and stability; my school trains us to fight in stances the bow & arrow stance.. well my teacher prefers that stance.. much better than the cat stance because it's more aggressive in his opinion.
9. Kung-Fu is not a overnight - 1 year thing; it's years man. If you want to be good asap I suggest you take a boxing sport, grappling sport or anything to that degree.
10. Oh yeah ex: you do Tan tuei, than you do mantis you'll realize it just synerigized your tan tuei, then you move to ba ji man you now have killer elbows but you're stiff.. and then you take pek kwar it looses you up .. and now you can change your flows in a fight EASILY when people pick up on it.

When it comes to kung-fu alot of people are not knowledgeable unless you're doing it for years. Obviousily training is outdated in alot of schools I see. But in the school I go to we're put to spar everyday and people do 2 or even 3 on 1's. My sifu hates grappling because if you do that in the street people will kick your head like a soccer ball.. especially in NYC how many FAIR fights had you ever seen? NONE~!!! everyone also brings their boys and outnumbers somebody else or brings weapons. I'm open minded in grappling though since I do like 1v1s.

Final statement .. it's for the streets. You won't be attacked by a guy whose jabbin backin up jabbin .. waiting to cross .. ur against a crackhead who wants your money.. wait no not 1 but him and his crack buddies. Ever been bummed rush by a crew? Street fight is totally different.

WELL THATS JUST MY 2 ****IN CENTS~!!

[Knifefighter]

my question is ....what do you consider "MODERN" training for the sticks? i'm not talking about having an opponent, just the training.
Having an opponent is definitely part of the equation. You have to train against an opponent to get the proper feedback.
You also have to fight regularly to see what things can actually be used and what cannot be used in that context. Things must constantly be tested, otherwise you end up with a variety of "theoretical" techniques that should work, but don't when the pressure is on. There are so many low percentage, "theoretical" techniques that have crept into the various stickfighting systems because so many "stickfighters" have never actually fought full force with the sticks.

As far as modern training:
1- Practice the techniques that are shown to be the highest percentage when actually fighting. Do this by using video to analyze a wide variety of fights. Throw out or signficantly cut down on the low and zero percentage moves.
2- Analyze the specific movements and energy systems used when fighting. Train these movements and train the specific energy systems used.
3- Add significant amounts of grappling, both standing and on the ground. Stick fighting, more often than not, ends up with some type of grappling, either in the clinch range or on the ground. Stickgrappling is a whole art unto itself.
4- Get rid of the fancy disarm techniques. Disarms are usually accidental or incidental and are usually very simple.
5- Get rid of or significantly downplay "senstivity" drills such as hubud. Work more on clinch, takedown, and throwing drills because that's what normally happens at "hubud range".
6- Teach how to both hit and miss with full power. Many stickfighters never learn this and end up out of position when hitting and then missing with full power shots or never develop the ability to hit with full power against a moving opponent. Too many systems never teach how to "miss with full power", the importance of which cannot be overstated.

[Knifefighter]

Hands down legit masters are rare and it's easier to train in anything else ie. muay thai// bjj// judo // boxing and progress
Much easier to learn forms that to do muay thai/bjj/judo/boxing. That's why you will see so many senior citizens praciticing forms, but it will be a rarity to see a 70 year-old muay thai or boxing practitioner.



Kung-Fu is not a overnight - 1 year thing; it's years man. If you want to be good asap I suggest you take a boxing sport, grappling sport or anything to that degree.
And if you want to be even better, keep up the boxing and grappling for years. Do you actually think that the kung fu guy who sucks at the one year mark compared to the boxer/grappler is magically going to become much better than the same boxer/grappler after each has trained for 15 years?



My sifu hates grappling
And that's exactly the reason many TMA people get their a$$es handed to them when they face a grappler.



because if you do that in the street people will kick your head like a soccer ball.. especially in NYC how many FAIR fights had you ever seen? NONE~!!! everyone also brings their boys and outnumbers somebody else or brings weapons.
And how much of a disadvantage do you think you will be at when the grappler brings his grappling buddies and they outnumber you and you know nothing about grappling?
I have yet to see the standup guy who can keep two or three grapplers from taking him down and wrecking him.

[green_willow]

ChinoXL,

You're funny, you basically said that bjj/ muey thai/ boxing is easier to learn and you can fight with it better in less time. So why do you bother learning kung fu when you have alot more years when you can't defend yourself from when you're a beginner to when you're good ?

Personally, I don't think what you said about kung fu taking more time to learn is correct. It's either the style you do is no good or the teaching is poor.

[monkeyfoot]

excellant posts people

sevenstar - I would have left this in 2001.....if I was indeed here in 2001

no additional comments - Im enjoying watching you all argue :D

craig

[TenTigers]

HSK=yes-you misread what I was quoting-we are in agreement. I was basically saying that each teacher has his own method. It seemed that the other guy was stuck in his"My teacher says this is so, therefore anything outside of my experience,belief system, is incorrect" mentality. This is common with beginners, who lack outside experience, or who worship their teachers, or who's teachers might have a cult-like mentality.
You are right=-Latosa teaches differently than Gaje, who teaches differently than,Presas, who teaches differently than Sayoc. Yet all teach similar techniques in the end, simply different methods to get there, or to translate it to their students.

[hskwarrior]

i'm happy that Rene Latosa already took care of that for us.

but i agree with most of what you said. but having a training partner is nothing modern. except that sinawali is actually done in the figure 8.

other than that we're cool.

[hskwarrior]

chinoXL (extra large chinese?)

thats why you always have your boys there with you.

i remember many fights where i refused because i was alone and there were at least 4 of them urging you to fight.

my student was jumped by 6 guys with screw drivers and knives --they tried to kill him but because of our choy lee fut training he took them out. but they were dirty. as he threw a shot at one of them the other would stab my student. but because i make them spar each other in a 3 on 1 free for all it gave my student the confidence to make it through that ordeal.

so yes, out on the street TCMA can and already has proven to be effective regardless of how many MMA people say differently. we know----they don't.

hsk

[TenTigers]

HSK-I wasn't the one who said anything about training partners, nor did I dissagree about sinawali being figure eight-I think you are confusing me with that other guy. Our sinawali is exactly as you said-like the butterfly knives flowers.
In fact, we also do it with fists, and elbows. Now, if I can figure out how to do it with kicks, ,,,I'd probably cripple myself!

[hskwarrior]

sorry bro. quick on the draw.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

A common mistake is made by most of us.. we compare high levels of training and competition as though the average student is equally comparable.. TCMA offers the average student an advantage in average situations.. The wisdom we often fail to give our "average" students is that of knowing when to yield to an aggressor's intentions vs. when to go down fighting.. the value of clarity when determining the appropriate responses in a conflict.. negotiation is an essential part of self-defense.. Sure, it's great to pose the macho "i'll just kick their butts" attitude, but.. sometimes that's just not going to happen, any of us can be out matched or out numbered.. bringing great martial arts skills to a gun-fight lacks clarity and wisdom.. "discretion is the better part of valour"..

A fight avoided is a fight won.. if that option is not apparent, then suck it up and go for the gusto.. trust your training and give a good accounting of yourself and your school.. if you don't trust your training, find some training you do trust.

Be well..

[Becca]

you're missing his point. He's saying that you should not have to extrapolate the application of a technique from a form; it should be shown from the get go, as opposed to being hidden in the form.


No, I'm not missing the point. He's right, you shouldn't have to extrapolate the technique from BS, but a form being taught from a good teacher doesn't need to be. It is a string of stylized combos, when taught right. I agree with some of what he is saying. My point is that I doubt he has actually seen forms being taught practically. His lack of experience with a teacher who is capable of teaching them practicaly does not make him qualified to critisize forms.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

Forms, in their correct context, are the encyclopedias of a system.. linking the techniques, applications and transitions in a manner to be passed from generation to generation.. Applications should not be shown from "the get go", once a student has the form's foundations worked out, then.. the applications are appropriate.. i don't want students out there with weak or undeveloped forms trying to utilize the applications.. they could get hurt and it makes the system look weak.. Forms are a systemized development of a particular style, a history of developed applications linked by transitions.. Forms are never intended to replace appropriate responses in actual combat, they are intended to give the student an arsenal of responses to be linked by appropriate transitions.. routinely, several elements of several forms may reassemble themselves into the current situation.. but, these are familiar trained responses that should flow effortlessly depending on the immediate situation.. I have been in more than one situation where i got my bell rung and could only push the most elemental form into the opponent's attack, but.. it was the repetition and training of those foundations that saved me from a defeat.. instinctive training of forms gave me time to recover and get back into the match.. likewise, i have been too attached to forms and followed one technique with the next from a form.. only to find the opponent didn't do what was expected, suddenly i was trashed from an unexpected angle.. oh well, everything has its Yin and Yang..

Most people that trash "form work" do some sort of drills.. and, drills are just forms by another perspective.. in the end, it is repetition that hones the instincts, whatever you call it..

Be well..

[gabe]

Hey KF, why shadowbox? What's the point? There's no live opponent. There's no feedback. Is that the intention of shadowboxing- resistance training, feedback? Cuz it fails miserably in providing those things. So why do boxers, muay thai fighters train it? Are there no real, not incidental, benefits to training forms?

It's a tool with a purpose. I don't care for the arguments favoring forms because they are part of an artform or they are fun to do. I hate them, but I had to do them. They simply train muscle memory and good mechanics. Do you disagree on this point?

Now, why waste time arguing how you can't drink soup with a fork. Forms are not meant to provide resistance or feedback training. That's not the purpose of this tool. If you want soup, use a spoon. If you want aliveness, resistance training- go spar. Nobody here is saying that sparring is unnecessary or that forms are all you need. It's really annoying to see this brought up so often.

Back to shadowboxing. When I first started, they were set forms. First jabs only. Then set combinations. My coach always specified which directions he wanted me to train- off the ropes, moving backwards, twisting off angles- all predetermined. When my mechanics improved, then I freestyled. All tma as I understand them are supposed to progress like this- set patterns to freestyle. There is no difference in dynamics.

Now when I got sloppy sparring, guess what my coach made me do. Hours of shadowboxing before he let me get in the ring again. He also made me do it when I was completely exhausted after sparring. I wonder why.

We shadowboxed. We drilled pads. We sparred. Different tools for a sound curriculum. You train those tools in proper proportions according to your level. That's what a good tma program does. And good tma programs do exist. It's easy to use poor tma programs as your strawman, there are plenty of them. Soon there will be plenty of poor mma programs as well as mainstream commercialism and insurance fears creep in. And then you might end up defending your good mma programs.

[Knifefighter]

Hey KF, why shadowbox? What's the point? There's no live opponent. There's no feedback. Is that the intention of shadowboxing- resistance training, feedback? Cuz it fails miserably in providing those things. So why do boxers, muay thai fighters train it? Are there no real, not incidental, benefits to training forms?

1- Shadowboxing is much more alive than forms. There are no "preset" movements. You decide which ones you are going to do as you go along.
2- Shadow boxing is much more specific to fighting. The specific movements in boxing very closely resemble the exact things that happen in a fight. Throw a combo and move. Throw a punch and move. Throw a couple of combos and reset. On the other hand, fighting against a resisting opponent who is fighting back usually looks nothing like forms practice.
3- Shadow boxing utilizes fakes, feints, and other set-up movements all done in a random, non-preset order... this is much closer to what happens in a real fight.
4- There are definitely improvements that could be made in the way many people do shadow boxing that could utilize more modern training knowledge.

[Knifefighter]

They simply train muscle memory and good mechanics. Do you disagree on this point?.
Forms do train muscle memory- unfortunately it is not the right kind. Fighting usually looks nothing like the forms. Based on modern training principles, this means you are training the wrong kind of "muscle memory" and developing habits that will not help you much when fighting.

[Chief Fox]

1- Shadowboxing is much more alive than forms. There are no "preset" movements. You decide which ones you are going to do as you go along.
2- Shadow boxing is much more specific to fighting. The specific movements in boxing very closely resemble the exact things that happen in a fight. Throw a combo and move. Throw a punch and move. Throw a couple of combos and reset. On the other hand, fighting against a resisting opponent who is fighting back usually looks nothing like forms practice.
3- Shadow boxing utilizes fakes, feints, and other set-up movements all done in a random, non-preset order... this is much closer to what happens in a real fight.
4- There are definitely improvements that could be made in the way many people do shadow boxing that could utilize more modern training knowledge.
Actually, a person doing forms training should also go through the above steps or stages when making the transition from forms to actual combat.
1. At first the forms are a preset group of movements.
2. Then they are broken down into individual techniques or small combinations for drilling.
3. At this point, you have to make the techniques your own which includes a random non preset order.
4. The next step is free sparring using the techniques that you have made your own.

I really don't think that anyone thinks "I know a form, now I can fight". The training is much like you described above. At least it is for me.

[ChinoXL]

No knife fighter he doesn't hate grappling because of that reason. He thinks it's not okay for people to develope the mentally and think it's okay to go on the floor. For a street purpose not tourny (even though I've disagreed sometimes). I've seen so many street fights never had it been on the floor WHEN it's a rumble or jumped, people prefer stomping. The thing about grappling is that it takes a few seconds to get anything to work.. say a choke for example (rear naked or gi choke) it takes a few seconds for the guy to feel it and then pass out.. as in kung fu i want to strike somebody on the neck so they feel it that second at the same time they'll gag. Try it .. ask somebody to strike you with a edge hand blow to the thoat, wait do it yourself.. u can feel the instantily oppose to the choke.. and the purpose in kung-fu is do as much damage in a little time period as possible

[ChinoXL]

you can't do muay thai at a old age because it puts too much stress onto your body. Does that answer your question knifefighter? Old people do tai chi; and it's not for fighting purposes more like a work out and they don't understand anything about kung fu. Like I've stated before it's hard for people to be good.. only 20% can understand it INSIDE the kung fu community. While the rest claim they know.

[Knifefighter]

No knife fighter he doesn't hate grappling because of that reason. He thinks it's not okay for people to develope the mentally and think it's okay to go on the floor. For a street purpose not tourny
He thinks that by learning some grappling that people automatically think that it's OK to take the fight to the ground in all situations?
Um...OK.

[hskwarrior]

about forms let me put it this way.

forms and shadow boxing are basically the same if you utilize the mindset of shadow boxing, using a pretent opponent in front of you. in forms we don't just do them like robots. at least i pick out the combo's in the form and practice them as if i'm fighting someone.

a boxer learns as a beginner to jab, right cross, hook, etc etc. he is to practice that over and over to develop all the right things. Later he is taught to use the punches in succession combo's just like TCMA. TCMA has jabs, uppercuts, and our own versions of hooks, overhead shots, and etc etc. but, we also got back hands, sow choys, panther fists, tiger claws and such that MMA people don't use too often.

so what i'm saying is that forms are great to learn how to use our stuff our way. but the key is how to make it work against the rest of the world. not just gung fu people. MMA isn't really using anything new and improved, its still the same old stuff that has been taught for centuries. MMA is just the "TODAY" version. thats great.

the one thing NOT mentioned here is the TWO man hand or weapons forms where the two performers are each using different techniques. that teaches us how to move when a punch is thrown, when a kick is thrown yaydydydydyayayayaddaa.

the repetition of forms basically is Muscle memory. i recall back in my beginning days of gung fu i would get into a fight and used certain techniques. i would tell my sifu what happened and ask where and how did i do that. then he would point out what did was in this form or that form.

knife fighter i think you just need to delve into learning some forms before you start shooting them down. i believe you would change your mind.

[Knifefighter]

Like I've stated before it's hard for people to be good.. only 20% can understand it INSIDE the kung fu community. While the rest claim they know.
And I'm guessing your school is among that rare 20%... how did I know that? and how does everyone who posts here somehow manage to find the rare schools and instructors that teach the "real deal" when there are so many schools and instructors out there who don't.

[hskwarrior]

street fighters do not typically want to take the fight to the floor.

typically a street fighter wants to knock you the F out. They could care less about tapping someone out. on the streets thats a punks way out. like it or not. it is what it is. don't believe me, ask some real street fighters who have no interest in the ufc, or mma.

a street fight DOES NOT always go to the ground. sometimes its over in a few seconds. most of the people here are only talking with the frame of mind that EVERYONE is a professional fighter. NOT EVERYONE IS.

there is a difference with street fighting and the ring. a street fighter has nothing to lose and if the person he's fighting happens to die, oh well. that's the name of the game. in the ring you can rest assured you will be completely safe (in most cases) and will not die in a match. you have ref's and all the streets have is spectators (and a few cheap ass participants).

and just because someone is good at grappling isn't assured 100% victory. that was proven by Chuck Lidell who tossed the grappler around and never allowed him to take him down.

peace

[Knifefighter]

but, we also got back hands, sow choys, panther fists, tiger claws and such that MMA people don't use too often.
And that is part of the problem with forms. Unless you are fighting regularly with these techniques, you have no idea which ones are high percentage and which ones are not. So your forms practice gives just as much emphasis on the low percentage moves as the high percentage moves. If you really wanted to make forms more useful you would regularly be testing out all the techniques included in them and getting rid of, or severely restricting the practice of, the low percentage moves.

[MasterKiller]

I really don't think that anyone thinks "I know a form, now I can fight". The training is much like you described above. At least it is for me.

I've met a lot of people who think that, including a few people from my old school.

[Knifefighter]

MMA isn't really using anything new and improved, its still the same old stuff that has been taught for centuries. MMA is just the "TODAY" version. thats great.
MMA is not the same old stuff. In the past, most arts concentrated mostly on grappling or striking. MMA works both equally. The more progressive MMA training facility also use more modern training techniques.


the one thing NOT mentioned here is the TWO man hand or weapons forms where the two performers are each using different techniques.
The problem with this is that they are usually using pre-set techniques.

[hskwarrior]

i agree with your last comments because that is how we approach our gung fu.

i come from a school where most of the students were hard core fighters. some were even known to handle bruce lee.

in my school we have an 8 foot bananna bag (about 100 lbs) and we practice our sow choys full blast with the intention to cause the most damage with that blow.
if not done correctly you will break your arm, elbow, or hyperextend.

i've been practicing my choy lee fut for 25 years and still going, and have always approached it with the mindset of what works and what doesn't. and when it doesn't we try to modify to MAKE IT WORK.

i will admit that there is not much difference in techniques when it comes to boxing and gung fu. you just have to have a teacher who has actually used his gung fu in real street fight situations and he will pass on what works.

[WinterPalm]

I have to disagree with the beauty thing. Real applicable Kung Fu techniques, at least what I've seen and know, does not look like a form. To me the ideas, mechanics, and intentions are there, but sparring is not two guys doing forms against each other. It is using the techniques for a fighting environment. If you also study the style or know it, then you will easily pick out the techniques but they won't look exactly like the form.

It seems to me that the more I learn the more everything seems natural in sparring. I lean a new technique or self-defense approach and it is like...wow!...that is so straight forward, not simple to conceive, but simple in that it just fits right in there. If you train TCMA then when you fight you put that person you are up against into your world...the advantage comes in your mental toughness to carry out that mentality. We are thinking about ending the fight quickly and using a huge assortment of tools to get the job done. Use strength if it works, retreat when necessary, speed, agility, stamina, hand technique, grabbing techniques, kicking, and they are all put together and when you can use them you use them.

I would argue that TCMA doesn't specify, at least in the style I do, we train to hit hard, but we also train in ways to put somebody down without seriously hurting them or to evade and regroup.

Forms are very useful as is stance training and qi gong. Take MMA for instance, what if people were pointing at them skipping rope and laughing: that's going to make you fight? Look at how open your body and face are. You have no root to hit hard. Your center of balance is way up there, I could trip you or tackle you from that position...It is ridiculous, but it persists in the argument against TCMA with balance and root training. Or how about training with boxing gloves and wraps on while hitting the bag. While I'm doing Iron Palm...Ha! You think that on the street you'll magically have those giant gloves on? Or how about those wraps and the tape, sure it protects you, but if those paws of your's aren't toughened up by a good conditioning program, you are going to bust something up. Even if you discredit the striking advantage of Iron Palm, it gives you at a base level the strength and conditioning to prevent breakage and spraining or fracturing.

This argument is silly to me. If you train for the street, fine, if you train for the ring, fine. And yes there is some cross-over, but not everything for the street is in the ring, and vice-versa.

Someone also made a comment about intelligence levels and I think that is just silly as well. I agree that Kung Fu takes a lot of work and thought to put together, at my level after five years it is incredibly tough and you really have to think about it. Why? Because that lunatic with a screwdriver (and screwdriver attacks are all the rage here now), is going to do me in but how? Maybe with an overhand, a cross, a jab, a grab to control me, a kick to startle me, a blindsided attack, a lunge, a tackle...I don't know. Fortunately my sparring partners do all sorts of crazy attacks and this prepares me for the street. I have to think real hard about what might or might not happen, how to deal with it conceptually, use those techniques in sparring where mistakes can potentially hurt, and refine them and then put them up against other technique. This goes on for a long time...
But then we see Chuck Liddell, Rich Franklin, and I believe Randy Couture all have significant scholarly achievements and they are the top of the heap of MMA. Definately smart.

I also agree with the guy saying that afte sloppy sparring his coach wouldn't let him spar but only do shadowboxing. Often we go for quite awhile sparring very often and then we stop for awhile and really work on forms in class and training movements an concepts for fighting. You don't have to be always directly fighting to become a better fighter...but I think you still need to spar just not everyday!

So, to sum this up, keep training in what you do, I wouldn't advocate that a boxer stop skipping, nor would I advocate a Kung Fu guy to stop doing stance training.

I would suggest that if people are worried about what they are learning you can always do the Shaw Brothers thing and challenge a Sifu and if he wins become his student...do this to your boxing coach as well, many of which don't train at all....;)

[Knifefighter]

They could care less about tapping someone out.
I don't think anyone thinks you're going to tap someone out on the street. The idea is to break something.


a street fight DOES NOT always go to the ground.
But it often involve some type of grappling. Non-grapplers do not understand this
and think that grappling means groundfighting.



there is a difference with street fighting and the ring.
In the ring, you are trying to damage your opponent as much as possible in the context of the rules. The street is just an extension of the ring. You simply remove the rules and end up with more ways to damage your opponent.



and just because someone is good at grappling isn't assured 100% victory. that was proven by Chuck Lidell who tossed the grappler around and never allowed him to take him down.
And just because you know a martial arts system does not assure that you can successfully take on multiple opponents, especially if they are commited to taking you down and wrecking you on the ground.

[hskwarrior]

a jab, a hook, an uppercut, an overhead shot are all preset moves.

throwing combo's in boxing are pre-set moves just like the combo's in TCMA.

[Becca]

And that is part of the problem with forms. Unless you are fighting regularly with these techniques, you have no idea which ones are high percentage and which ones are not. So your forms practice gives just as much emphasis on the low percentage moves as the high percentage moves. If you really wanted to make forms more useful you would regularly be testing out all the techniques included in them and getting rid of, or severely restricting the practice of, the low percentage moves.
An smart person does spar regularly with all of thier techniques. But why throw out the stuff that doesn't work for you all the time? Do you only use small words because they are the easiest for most people to understand?

[Knifefighter]

Take MMA for instance, what if people were pointing at them skipping rope and laughing: that's going to make you fight?
Not all boxers and MMA fighters use state-of-the-art training methods. Skipping rope is probably one of the things that could be replaced with more efficient training.

[hskwarrior]

actually no, the idea is not to break something. that by law is only if your life is being threatened. you as a martial artist know the laws of using what you have and how far you can go before going to jail.

yes, street fights involve a low level of grappling. this is done instinctally because most are not taught to do this, they learn by trying and if it works they keep it in the arsenal. because most charge in to try and take you down, or get you in some form of a head lock to choke you, twist your neck forcing you to the ground, or even the guillatine. these things are natural when two people get to be a hair away from each other. sometimes grappling is a form of control because they know they are at risk of losing and are desparate not to lose so they grab on for dear life.

and the rest i agree with you kf, and thanks for keeping it cool.


hsk

[hskwarrior]

knife fighter,

what would you replace skipping rope with thats more advanced? although it does help with keeping rhythym.

[Knifefighter]

a jab, a hook, an uppercut, an overhead shot are all preset moves.

throwing combo's in boxing are pre-set moves just like the combo's in TCMA.
Boxing has single moves (i.e. jab, cross, uppercut, bob, weave, etc.) that are strung together differently each time the boxer does shadowboxing. The only thing that is "preset" is the single move.
Are you saying that the forms have these single moves that are strung together differently each time you do a form?

[Knifefighter]

knife fighter,

what would you replace skipping rope with thats more advanced? although it does help with keeping rhythym.
Replace it with additional training that is more specific to fighting. One can always use more clinch, takedown, throwing, or striking work and can get more specific fight conditioning with these things.

[hskwarrior]

knife fighter,

actually yes. the basic moves in the choy lee fut system that i teach has these single techniques.......

chop choy= a straight linear jab with the exception that instead of a boxers punch we had the thumb side point towards the sky.

we have an uppercut just like boxing with the exception that the upper cut starts pretty low and the power doesn't stop until the fist reaches my own eye level so that everything in its path gets crushed. but his uppercut can be used different ways different angles.

we have what boxers call the overhead punch or even similar to a hay maker but we call it Sow choy (sweeping punch) and Cup choy which is a circular/linear technique which when follows the path of a clock goes from 12' o'clock to 6 o'clock. the sow choy if landed (the same goes for any punch) is actually a very devastating strike that can easily break the neck of the one on the receiving end.

we have something called a kwa choy which is a backfist technique.

now, let my put it like this.

you and i are fighting and i am able to land a kwa choy right on your nose. you happen to close your eyes from the pain of your nose breaking and then suddenly you get hit with an uppercut throwing your head back a little then when you thought nothing else could happen you get hit with the sow choy knocking you out cold.

so to answer your question as best i could, yes, no question that in TCMA we have single techniques just like anyone else and we string them together in the most effective combos' that would cause the most damage.

[hskwarrior]

knife fighter,

but i thought skipping rope was more for endurance and rhythym training and has nothing to do with fighting.

you're not saying that a person shouldn't do things to increase their endurance and such. it does have one little thing to do with fighting, it gets you in shape to go the distance.

thanks

[gabe]

"Boxing has single moves (i.e. jab, cross, uppercut, bob, weave, etc.) that are strung together differently each time the boxer does shadowboxing. The only thing that is "preset" is the single move.
Are you saying that the forms have these single moves that are strung together differently each time you do a form?"

Those single moves are strung together differently in shadowboxing after you've mastered them in preset combinations. That's how I learned it. Those preset combinations emphasized different punch combo's, different angles, different directions. Then we freestyle in shadowboxing.
The high level tma masters never do the same form twice, they often freestyle their workouts. Not sure if you know that.

What do you mean it's the wrong muscle memory? When you throw a kick or a punch in a form, you've got to have the right mechanics, the right torque, the right rotations- how is that not applicable or beneficial or not necessary with a live opponent?

I think you just don't want to believe that shadowboxing is the same as forms. Neither work without sparring or taking individual movements and trying to make them work against live opponents. High percentage movements depend on the individual. Different people can make different things work. All tma people eventually pick and choose what works for them; they may continue to add to their arsenal but they eventually specialize.

Oh, and if I choose to jumprope to increase my endurance, and it works, what are you preaching about?

[hskwarrior]

forgive me knife fighter,

but it is plain to see that you have never trained in a TCMA.

that is very unfortunate, becuase if you were to open you mind and come across a school that you may be interested in, you may take whatever skills you currently have to higher levels but studying a TCMA.

there is more to it than what you see, that is why there are more TCMA than there are MMA students. typically.

i mean you shoot it down but you've never tried it. so how would you truly know it doesn't work.


hsk

[Chief Fox]

I've met a lot of people who think that, including a few people from my old school.
Well now that I think of it, I see many beginner students who have a few forms under their belt who think that they can fight. All it takes is one sparring session with a more advanced student to open their eyes in most cases. For all of those people who think they can fight because they know a form, all I can say is I hope they never have to.

[SevenStar]

My point is that stance training builds endurance AND strength (at least enough for you to hold your body up in a lowered position)..... this isn't just some kind of general strength and endurance....its for a very specific purpose.

My point is that stance training develops the strength and endurance that allows you to do the kung fu foot work correctly....ie to be mobile/agile and yet keep your center of gravity low. In virtually all kinds of martial art when the center of gravity comes up you become more vulnerable.

(Incidentally some internal style fool ya with a high stance but often they're actually more sunk into the ground then the external styles.)

This isn't the same kind strength that is required for "explosiveness"....for that you need to do something akin to plyometric type exercises....which incidentally many styles of kung fu contain by virtue of the movement in their forms (ie quick direction changes, dropping into and exploding out of low stance.)

Do you understand what I'm saying now or would you like to discuss this further?

discuss further. I understand what you are saying, but endurance is endurance and strength is strength. Once you hold that stance for a prolonged period of time, it stopped being a strength exercise. the only way stance training builds leg strength is if you had really weak legs to begin with.

[gabe]

Forms do train muscle memory- unfortunately it is not the right kind. Fighting usually looks nothing like the forms. Based on modern training principles, this means you are training the wrong kind of "muscle memory" and developing habits that will not help you much when fighting.


Sorry dude, you've never seen fighting that looks like what is some of these forms, I guess. First, real fighting often is a matter of seconds. You only use a couple of techniques cuz that's all the time you have. But I did spar a hung gar guy once, and he shocked me. He pressed me from all angles looking for a way to nail me. No different than any kickboxing or tae kwon do strategy- in- out, bob weave angles--all in hung gar stances and techniques. Never saw it "live" and freestyle like that. When he was just doing forms- it looked exactly the same way.

But can't convince you unless you experience it. But it does exist.

[hskwarrior]

seven star,

can you explain why after a prolonged period of time does horse stance training stops being strength training?

the reason i asked is because i am sure you know about my spinal cord injury, and i literally started out from scratch. i couldn't sit in a horse at first after my accident for 10 seconds without fear of falling down. over time it was the horse stance training that eventually got my legs stronger and stronger. because of horse stance training i am able to use my legs more and more closer to prior to my accident.

My sigung is in his 80's or later 70's and lives on the 3rd floor of a building which has no elevators. my sigung walks up and down those regularly. and it is because of the horse stance training that allowed him to do this.

horse stance training NEVER stops becoming strength training because to go further and challenge you current longest time you will need to have more strength and by pushing the time you build more strength.

i love to challenge most high ranked runners to sit in a horse for 30 minutes. none can do that but their legs are really strong from running.

but the only time we would use our horse in real life combat is when we would lock down to deliver a blow, or when someone is trying to take us down.

i await mr 7* you words sir.

hsk

[SevenStar]

has anyone watched a gymnastics routine??? Is it just flipping around or just proper form in action. Forms are part of the beautiful ART of Kung FU, forms also teach the practitioner proper movement.

that's personal preference. To me, the art in ma is in the personal expression of fighting. two people can train the same style under the same instructor, yet fight in two totally different ways. THIS, is the art of MA.


You learn how to cunduct your self in a gracefull maner when in a sressful situation. Forms teach constant refinement in movement. As far as I'm concerned if you can't look good when you fight then your just a brawler not a Martial Artist.

fighting is not pretty - plain and simple. Besides, who cares how you look? you should be more worried about whether or not you live.


Kung Fu atracts people that are looking beond the external. Fighting is easy, looking good in a fight that's onother story.

surely you don't believe this...



If I lose I won't care because I'l be too busy looking pretty (Jim Kelly)

and of course, he said that in a movie...

[PangQuan]

you cannot pin point what the art is in a martial art.

as was once said.

art is the ultimate expression of the soul.

with this in mind, you cannot say exactly what the art is within any one ma.

it depends on what the individual expresses through thier own personal martial art studies.

it is personalized.


I find too much narrow minded ness being displayed on this forum.

[GreenCloudCLF]

I think we can all agree that Bas Rutten is one of the top examples of MMA, yes?

I wish to respond to KF's dislike of preset moves.


The problem with this is that they are usually using pre-set techniques.

Bas Rutten has a training plan in which he throw a series of preset techniques to a round timer. This is how he trains for his fights. He has released a training kit, found on his website, using these preset combos. So are you saying that Bas Rutten's training methods suck because he uses preset combos?

Seems to serve him pretty well...

[MasterKiller]

that's personal preference. To me, the art in ma is in the personal expression of fighting. two people can train the same style under the same instructor, yet fight in two totally different ways. THIS, is the art of MA.


He who works with his hands is a laborer.
He who works with his hands and his head is a craftsman.
He who works with his hands and his head and his heart is an artist.
-- St. Francis of Assisi

[PangQuan]

He who works with his hands is a laborer.
He who works with his hands and his head is a craftsman.
He who works with his hands and his head and his heart is an artist.
-- St. Francis of Assisi

Amen MisterKiller :p

this is precisely what is meant when said that art comes from the heavens. it is the idea that we use all that was granted to us to create art.

the sages of old really did have an idea of what its all about. thier dust is all thats left, but can really create some profound effects.

[ShaolinTiger00]

I think we can all agree that Bas Rutten is one of the top examples of MMA, yes?

I wish to respond to KF's dislike of preset moves.



Bas Rutten has a training plan in which he throw a series of preset techniques to a round timer. This is how he trains for his fights. He has released a training kit, found on his website, using these preset combos. So are you saying that Bas Rutten's training methods suck because he uses preset combos?

Seems to serve him pretty well...

you are completely and hopelessly mistaken..

Bas does not use the tapes to "TRAIN for fights"

He uses the Tapes to TRAIN his conditioning in a very sport-specific manner.

There is a huge difference. (and I also use the tapes to train conditioning..)

*in Napoleon Dynamite voice*

Christ you people are ****ing retarded!

[SevenStar]

This is a mute point, Kung fu people train the same way MMA people train, that icludes circuit training, weights, cardio and all other aspects of conditioning. The only difference is In Kung fu we have a larger variety of training tools available to us.

no, not really. similar in some cases, but not the same. Why? because you have more tools and you try to use them all. It breaks things up; makes them take longer. qigog, forms, weapons, etc...


Some say weapons training is antiquated, I say it's just another for of conditioning hand eye coordination. Oh yea lets not forget that in kung fu the focus in the training is street fighting. Give me a broom and I'l house you with it.

okay, so your focus is street fighting. How is it any more realistic? It's not.


Not to mention that certain individuals that I refuse to adress directly practice stick fighting, wich is taught by teaching set patterns (forms) and two man sets. I guess anyone who has had formal training would know that.

neither of us has said that drills are bad. the heaven and earth sets, sinawali, etc. are all two man drills. no problem there. you are drilling against a live opponent, not air.


For instance the sinawally patern. Oh ask the guys that run the dog brothers events they can explain if you don't know what that is.

of course we know what it is, even if you did spell it wrong...

[SevenStar]

you cannot pin point what the art is in a martial art.

as was once said.

art is the ultimate expression of the soul.

with this in mind, you cannot say exactly what the art is within any one ma.

it depends on what the individual expresses through thier own personal martial art studies.

it is personalized.


I find too much narrow minded ness being displayed on this forum.


whoa. re-read the first part of what I said:

"that's personal preference. To me, the art in ma is in..."

notice the 'TO ME' part. That suggests it is my opinion and is not stated as fact.

[GreenCloudCLF]

you are completely and hopelessly mistaken..

Bas does not use the tapes to "TRAIN for fights"

He uses the Tapes to TRAIN his conditioning in a very sport-specific manner.

There is a huge difference. (and I also use the tapes to train conditioning..)

*in Napoleon Dynamite voice*

Christ you people are ****ing retarded!


So you're saying he derives no skill benefit from that type of training? his punches don't get better everytime he throws one...

If you truly believe that it's you who is ****ing retarded...

But even if your overstated fact is right, then you could say that forms could be used in the same manner as the tapes...for conditioning...

[SevenStar]

1. forms contain everything that can be applied more than one way it can be done 5-6 different ways depending on angle and range.

correct. Now, as I said earlier, how would you expect a newbie to figure all that out? It needs to be shown to him, not hidden until he figures it out.


2. forms will help you establish a flow ex: so you can attack in a way where your enemies will be forced to react in the way you want them to.

the flaw there is that you can do anything you want to when there is no opponent in front of you. however, yeah, this will teach the basic idea.


5. Hands down legit masters are rare and it's easier to train in anything else ie. muay thai// bjj// judo // boxing and progress

that's BS. the training takes longer by design - there are added elements that the styles you mentioned don't bother with - which makes it take longer to learn, but it's by no means harder.


6. 80% of the population won't be able to grasp kung-fu's concept.. sorry but kung-fu is only for smart folks and due to this reason people have to train other styles. And will be trash talking kung-fu.

If that's truly the case (which it's not) then all of the old masters are retards for creating a style most people wouldn't understand. If only half of the smart people
of a given generation wish to train, then eventually, the style will die out - which may actually be what happened, now that you mention it...


7. Kung fu takes alot of patience and dedication. In the U.S. no joke alot of people suck.

newsflash - people in china suck too. that's universal. Heck, isn't CMA practice dying out in china? Also, being good at ANY style takes those things.


8. Most people learn forms and do things half assed. Do it correctily it'll give you alot of power and stability; my school trains us to fight in stances the bow & arrow stance.. well my teacher prefers that stance.. much better than the cat stance because it's more aggressive in his opinion.

it also leaves you with a much wider base leaving you open for several takedowns. everything has it's drawbacks. the heavybag will also give you power and stability.



9. Kung-Fu is not a overnight - 1 year thing; it's years man. If you want to be good asap I suggest you take a boxing sport, grappling sport or anything to that degree.

I see a problem there. You will not master the styles you mentioned in a year - it takes a lifetime - but you can be proficient in a year. If you can't in your style, then there is a problem.


10. Oh yeah ex: you do Tan tuei, than you do mantis you'll realize it just synerigized your tan tuei, then you move to ba ji man you now have killer elbows but you're stiff.. and then you take pek kwar it looses you up .. and now you can change your flows in a fight EASILY when people pick up on it.

or, you can train and fight. you will learn the same things.


My sifu hates grappling because if you do that in the street people will kick your head like a soccer ball.. especially in NYC how many FAIR fights had you ever seen? NONE~!!! everyone also brings their boys and outnumbers somebody else or brings weapons. I'm open minded in grappling though since I do like 1v1s.

I have a night job as a bouncer. I use bjj and judo all the time. he's buying into the propoganda. don't believe the hype.


Final statement .. it's for the streets. You won't be attacked by a guy whose jabbin backin up jabbin .. waiting to cross .. ur against a crackhead who wants your money.. wait no not 1 but him and his crack buddies. Ever been bummed rush by a crew? Street fight is totally different.


true - and your forms don't prepare you for that any more than our training does.

[PangQuan]

whoa. re-read the first part of what I said:

"that's personal preference. To me, the art in ma is in..."

notice the 'TO ME' part. That suggests it is my opinion and is not stated as fact.

my bad home slice, but i should have specified. that comment was not directed at your post. :D

p.s.

it was more of an elaboration.

[SevenStar]

excellant posts people

sevenstar - I would have left this in 2001.....if I was indeed here in 2001

no additional comments - Im enjoying watching you all argue :D

craig


LOL, sadly, we were having these same debates years ago here...

[hskwarrior]

seven star,

are you saying that as a bouncer you are rolling around on the ground grappling these guys you bounce or do you just use contol moves?

what is it exactly that you use while on the job. can you give us an example of one of the times you've used your BJJ or judo at whereever you bounce?

[hskwarrior]

but seven star,

our choy lee fut is geared towards multiple attackers. although its all stand up.

there's not much you can do but grapple when you're on the floor and ground and pound.

[hskwarrior]

hey chris

do you know much about fencing?

if so, have you ever heard of DR. William O'brien and the LetterMan's fencing club?

[SevenStar]

my bad home slice, but i should have specified. that comment was not directed at your post. :D

p.s.

it was more of an elaboration.


oops - my bad :D

[SevenStar]

but seven star,

our choy lee fut is geared towards multiple attackers. although its all stand up.

there's not much you can do but grapple when you're on the floor and ground and pound.


regardless of what it's geared toward, chances of success are still slim. Grappling isn't necessarily about GnP. If you ever attend a gracie self defense seminar, you will see that most of it is stand up.

[PangQuan]

no biggie.

[SevenStar]

An smart person does spar regularly with all of thier techniques. But why throw out the stuff that doesn't work for you all the time? Do you only use small words because they are the easiest for most people to understand?

because it increases the chance of success. it's called specializing. If you watch or ask a competitive judoka, they typically for competition train 8 throws of their choice - one for each direction. Of those 8, they may only master like three. These are their bread and butter throws. Besides, not everything works for everyone. Case in point, I hate the axe kick. However, one of my training buddies has a tkd background and uses it well.

[hskwarrior]

i mean this may be an individual instance,

but i train my students to fight multiple attackers, and for one of them who have never learned any martial arts in their past put it to use in a life and death situation and came out victorious against 6 attackers.

there are eye witnesses to Buk Sing Choy Lee Fut's Shane Lacey whiping out 6 guys before they knew what was happening.

now i'm not saying that our style is fool proof, things can go wrong. but when we train for as long as we have with the mind set that we are fighting against multiple attackers the only out come would be positive.

[Fu-Pow]

discuss further. I understand what you are saying, but endurance is endurance and strength is strength. Once you hold that stance for a prolonged period of time, it stopped being a strength exercise. the only way stance training builds leg strength is if you had really weak legs to begin with.

I see your point. So yes if you have weak legs to begin with it will increase your strength. If you had strong legs to begin with then it will increase you ability to maintain a certain depth of stance over an extended period of time ie your endurance.

Both are important to moving in a lowered stance. Which is important to the strategy of many kung fu styles.

Also, forms often require that you move through different depths of stance. This builds strengths because your muscles are moving a distance against the force of gravity.

Do we now have mutual understanding? I think we do.

[ChinoXL]

knife fighter; it's simple like this, we have joint locks and quick take downs to a elbow or knee to the head//groin. Of course standups can lead to some kind of grappling but you don't want to be in a floor when you're outnumbered period. Okay well my school is not commericalized for one. Another thing is that on mon & weds training starts from 7:30-12 am and the first 2 hours involved running, horse stance training, and long grueling cardio, applications, forms + form application, spar. I've been to a few other kung-fu schools (no offence choy lay fut) buh it was commericalized and we're in and out in a hour can't even stay longer. I use to do bjj and I'm just as tired from that and this kung-fu i'm taking. Another thing is you're right kung-fu guys don't like weight lifting because it makes someone stiff. In order to do a few moves you need a rubberband effect. + the teacher in my school is not getting paid. He has a job on the side and just loves what he's doing. if you are in ny you should drop by knife fighter and just train a little; it's different from most other kung-fu schools. But yeah.. I have college lately so I can't train as much.. I want to join the mma club in my school if i can find whoevers in charge of it.. anyways I'm just saying real kung-fu proz are hard .. They have too many moves to drill but once they got it down it's a different story (rare to find good ppl).. unlike boxing (4) + combos, bob weave bag, punching bag, lots of cardio.

[ShaolinTiger00]

So you're saying he derives no skill benefit from that type of training? his punches don't get better everytime he throws one...

If you truly believe that it's you who is ****ing retarded...

But even if your overstated fact is right, then you could say that forms could be used in the same manner as the tapes...for conditioning...


YES. That's exactly what I'm saying! There is no "benefit" to his striking skills simply by shadowboxing. If you haven't formed good technique and started to build the neuro-musular link in the first 6 months of your training you are learning crap. Drop it immediately and find a real fighting school!

This is exactly why forms are total B.S.! You get better at striking by SPARRING! SPARRING SPARRING!! GET THIS THRU YOUR STUPID HEADS YOU TRADITIONAL MORONS. YOU HAVE TO FIGHT TO BE A BETTER FIGHTER THERE IS NO SUBSITITUTE!! FIGHT! FIGHT!! FIGHT!!!!

*SMASHES HEAD INTO KEYBOARD*

sport specific conditioning is the only thing this type of drill is good for. That is the only benefit of any drill that is not against a resisting opponent. focus mitts, heavy bags, thai pads etc included.


I can't for the life of me figure out why I still bother with this site. It's like spying on lepers.. You look at them and know they have a horrible disease and there is nothing you can do for them.

It is totally pointless for guys like myself, 7star, Merryprankster, Knifefighter.. to be here because it does not matter how many times we tell the truth, and it is the truth and you know it, deep down, you know it. You will never accept it. There is always an excuse, or a justification, or an obscure reference, or a strawman argument.. on and on.. The MMA guys are on here (myself included) for either ego purposes or self torture!!!!

[Ou Ji]

We're all wondering why you guys are here too. I'm sure there's a MMA forum around the Net somewhere for you guys.

Anyhow your last paragraph easily applies to you guys when looking from our perspective.

Just a thought.

[Knifefighter]

seven star,can you explain why after a prolonged period of time does horse stance training stops being strength training?
I'm not Seven, but I'll take a stab sicnce by background is in exercise science.

Muscular strength is the maximum force generated by a muscle.
Power is related to strength, but has a time component (Power =Force x Distance/ Time)
Endurance is the ability of the muscle to contract at submaximal tensions over a period of time.
Endurance training has been shown to negatively affect strength and power development, although the opposite does not seem to be the case.
Strength, power, and endurance development are all specific to the joint angle at which they are trained.

Strength training requires loads that fatigue the muscles in under 2 minutes.
Endurance training requires lighter loads and longer durations. This is why stance training becomes more of an endurance exercise as it is held longer and longer.
Strength, power, and endurance development are all specific to the joint angle at which they are trained. That is why holding stances during training will not help your running (or fighting, since you are not sitting in a stance while you fight) and why running (btw, distance running builds endurance, not strength- strength can be increased by sprint training, however) will not make you able to hold a stance for long periods of time.

Fighting requires a combination of strength, endurance, and power and is specific to the joint angles you would actually use when fighting. Efficient training in each of these areas would try to mimic these joint angles and movements as closely as possible.




the reason i asked is because i am sure you know about my spinal cord injury, and i literally started out from scratch. i couldn't sit in a horse at first after my accident for 10 seconds without fear of falling down. over time it was the horse stance training that eventually got my legs stronger and stronger. because of horse stance training i am able to use my legs more and more closer to prior to my accident.
In the beginning you would have developed some strength compared to what you had after your injury. After that, you developed endurance, at that specific joint angle. Those two things probably gave you enough functional ability to further improve your functional ability by doing other things such as footwork, kicking, etc.



My sigung is in his 80's or later 70's and lives on the 3rd floor of a building which has no elevators. my sigung walks up and down those regularly. and it is because of the horse stance training that allowed him to do this.
The main reason he can do this is because he regularly does it. The stair climbing provides the training stimulus to keep him in good enough shape to continue climbing the stairs. The stance training will also keep his endurance up for this activity because some of the stair climbing is done at close to the same joint angle as the stance training.



horse stance training NEVER stops becoming strength training because to go further and challenge you current longest time you will need to have more strength and by pushing the time you build more strength.
As mentioned above, stance training stops being strength training as soon as you get past the two minute mark (and once you can hold it for longer than two minutes it ceases being strength training at less than two minutes).


i love to challenge most high ranked runners to sit in a horse for 30 minutes. none can do that but their legs are really strong from running.
See above regarding running.



but the only time we would use our horse in real life combat is when we would lock down to deliver a blow, or when someone is trying to take us down.
And that is why holding stances for extended periods of time is not functional.

[ShaolinTiger00]

We're all wondering why you guys are here too. I'm sure there's a MMA forum around the Net somewhere for you guys.

Anyhow your last paragraph easily applies to you guys when looking from our perspective.

Just a thought.

No it's not "just a thought" it's another feeble attempt at a justification or comparison that TCMA is on the same level as MMA and that is a complete joke.

There are MMA fights going on every practically weekend in North America. If TCMA is so great, then why aren't they in there in large numbers dominating these sloppy strikers, poor grapplers, and pathetic submission artists?

Because you're all ****ing talk. It's "we're too deadly, or hey look at this ONE kf guy who entered (althought he was probably had wrestling or boxing or some other combat sport exp..) the excuses are endless.

Prove it. Facts. Defeating a person in front of the public is record. It's evidence. It is undeniable. MMA may not be your "deadly street fight" but it's the closest thing we have legally and althought this point has been made sooo many times it's ridulous, I'll say it once again, if you can't fight without eye gouges, groin biting etc.. then you don't stand a chance anyways. C'mon motherKF'ers if you're so highly skilled step up and show the world. (What could be a higher honor for your school/teacher/ etc????)

Smart people see the truth and they progress towards it. MMA gains more people every day.

[hskwarrior]

Okay You Already Have The Five Angles That Latosa Starts Out With.

The Way We Do It Is Like This.

first Strike (on A Clock The Angle Is 1 To 7 ) This Encompasses All Angles Ranging From The Collar Bone To The Waist.

second Strike (on The Clock Is The Angle Of 11-5 Or 10-4)

Third And Fourth Strikes Are The Reverse Of 1 And 2.

the Fifth Strike Is The Stab. From Whatever Angle.

We Approach Our Stick Fighting With The Mentality Of "bahalana!" Or Whatever Happens. We Don't Bog Our Selves With Numbers And Angles, We Just Respond Naturally And Instinctively To What Ever Comes Our Way.

We Have Abanico's As Well As Stick Butting.

Our Blocking Is Roof, Left, Right And Down Block. Simple As That.

I Remember Rene Latosa Telling A Story About These Two Escrimador's Who Came Into His School Asking To Spar Some Of The Students. Each Of These Guys Held The Guru Title And Rene Put Them Against Two Of His Own Students.

Needless To Say Rene's Students Wiped These Escrimador's Out Easily. The Pair Of Defeated Guru's Then Said His Students Were Very Good And Asked How Long They've Been Practicing.

Rene Tells Them "only 4 Months" And These Escrimadors Left All Red In The Face After That.

[Knifefighter]

Another thing is you're right kung-fu guys don't like weight lifting because it makes someone stiff.
Another example of TMA guys disregarding modern execise science which show that training with weights actually increases flexibility.

[hskwarrior]

The Point Of Gung Fu Guys Not Wanting To Lift Weights Is Because Of The Lou Ferrigno Types. Thats Not What We Want To Achieve.

But Having A Nice Build From Lifting Weights Is Good, And Should Be Done In Moderation. Not Body Building Competitions.

I'll Be The First To Say That Regaining My Leg Muscles, I Say That Lifting Weights During Gung Fu Training Is Good Because You Will Feel The Result From Being Physically In Shape.

[Knifefighter]

The Point Of Gung Fu Guys Not Wanting To Lift Weights Is Because Of The Lou Ferrigno Types. Thats Not What We Want To Achieve.
Lou Ferrigno types= 2 to 3 x day hypertrophy workouts + steroids + many years.

[green_willow]

YES. That's exactly what I'm saying! There is no "benefit" to his striking skills simply by shadowboxing. If you haven't formed good technique and started to build the neuro-musular link in the first 6 months of your training you are learning crap. Drop it immediately and find a real fighting school!

This is exactly why forms are total B.S.! You get better at striking by SPARRING! SPARRING SPARRING!! GET THIS THRU YOUR STUPID HEADS YOU TRADITIONAL MORONS. YOU HAVE TO FIGHT TO BE A BETTER FIGHTER THERE IS NO SUBSITITUTE!! FIGHT! FIGHT!! FIGHT!!!!

*SMASHES HEAD INTO KEYBOARD*

sport specific conditioning is the only thing this type of drill is good for. That is the only benefit of any drill that is not against a resisting opponent. focus mitts, heavy bags, thai pads etc included.


I can't for the life of me figure out why I still bother with this site. It's like spying on lepers.. You look at them and know they have a horrible disease and there is nothing you can do for them.

It is totally pointless for guys like myself, 7star, Merryprankster, Knifefighter.. to be here because it does not matter how many times we tell the truth, and it is the truth and you know it, deep down, you know it. You will never accept it. There is always an excuse, or a justification, or an obscure reference, or a strawman argument.. on and on.. The MMA guys are on here (myself included) for either ego purposes or self torture!!!!

But some traditionalist feel that their technique is too deadly to spar with. Have a read of a post in the shaolin forum which talks about why eagle claw is not used in the UFC.

some believe that the crane beak strikes to the eyes and leapord paws to the kidneys will cause permernant injuries.

So they resprt to forms which they train for 15 to 30 years. They also have 2 person drills which is adequately scripted so that nothing goes wrong and no one gets killed.

to some traditionalist, playing with kung fu is like playing with a loaded gun. Therefore they will show utmost respect for their seniors, ther sifu, ancesteral shrines and different schools of kung fu. The last thing you one is a misunderstanding that causes world war 3 in China town.

Because they believe that once you unleash the spirit of the tiger or if you're feeling more powerful that day - the dragon, there will be lots of dismembered UFC players in the Octogon. When push comes to shove, what chance does flesh, blood and bone stand against an Iron body with iron palms. some traditionislt believe that their hands and legs are WMD

[MasterKiller]

But some traditionalist feel that their technique is too deadly to spar with. Have a read of a post in the shaolin forum which talks about why eagle claw is not used in the UFC.

I use Eagle Claws in MMA when I'm trying to control the arms of my opponent on the ground. The jiu-jitsu guys use them too, but they don't call it Eagle Claw.

[TenTigers]

This thread is useless. Both sides are arguing from a point of total ignorance. It's like third graders arguing about quantum physics. After reading these posts. I have come to the diecision that one, the MMA guys haven't a freakin clue how and what TCMA is or is trained . And two-most of the guys who are arguing FOR TCMA are just as clueless. This is why this argumant continues.

TCMA when trained correctly-hits bags, spars hard, does conditioning, also grapples. The forms are not a substitute for any of this, they are simply a textbook for passing the system down intact. Within the forms are catalogued the techniques of the system, along with methods of strength development and strenghtening of the immune system-BUT not simply by doing the sets will this be achieved. The moves MUST be taken out of the forms and expanded on and extrapolated upon. Many times a move while performed once in the set, is actually meant to be isolated and done in reps.
Two-man sets are only the first step-you then break free from the set. Each move counters another-because otherwise the set is over in two moves. Again, the set is simply a single step. The TCMA guys who told you that they will make you into a KUNG-FU FIGHTER also don't get it.
Most forms of TCMA also have many supplementary training, such as weights, plyometric, specialized exercises to develop the ging-power. most have a form of Iron Body training-nothing mysterious-but it includes a great deal of hard body contact.
HSK, Tai Chi Bob and a few others-I MEAN A FEW seem to know what they speak of. Sorry, but the other 98% of the "TCMA" guys who are arguing with you-are just as ignorant. If they weren;t, then they wouldn't be arguing, because the bottom line is, we are in aggreement. The only things we do not agree with is that ground grappling is not the be all end all, however it does have its place. Real Kung-Fu IS MMA, and has ALWAYS been MMA. My style-Hung-Ga is known for being this super tradityional, pure style. Reality is, we are the original mutt style. Any Shaolin style is. Shaolin was a melting pot.
All styles were developed by Martial Artists, who fought with others, and adapted to their methods. MMA is nothing new. The only reason it seems new is because for the last century, everyone has changed the way they teach TCMA, except for a few.

[Ou Ji]

No it's not "just a thought"

Sure it was. It took about a whole 30 secs to think it, then type it. You want to read more into it then go ahead.

Seems a little insecure to me. Why does CMA bother you so much?

[Becca]

correct. Now, as I said earlier, how would you expect a newbie to figure all that out? It needs to be shown to him, not hidden until he figures it out...

That's a sign on a McDojo or BurgerKwoon there. They shoudn't be able to pass a rank test without being able to use what they've learned.


that's BS. the training takes longer by design - there are added elements that the styles you mentioned don't bother with - which makes it take longer to learn, but it's by no means harder...


I agree with this 100%. It is d@mn hard to earn a black belt in Pai Lum; most people never do, but there is so much material that you can study the style for a lifetime and keep finding more to learn.

If that's truly the case (which it's not) then all of the old masters are retards for creating a style most people wouldn't understand. If only half of the smart people
of a given generation wish to train, then eventually, the style will die out - which may actually be what happened, now that you mention it...

It's not so much they can't understand it; it's that they keep expecting it to be a quick fix or a color-by-numbers thing. The first time they have to actually work at it, they quit saying it is "too hard."


I see a problem there. You will not master the styles you mentioned in a year - it takes a lifetime - but you can be proficient in a year. If you can't in your style, then there is a problem...

As stated above, if you can't use your stuff, then you shouldn't be able to pass a rank test. This is also a great big noen flashing sign saying "McDojo";)

[YMC]

It is totally pointless for guys like myself, 7star, Merryprankster, Knifefighter.. to be here because it does not matter how many times we tell the truth, and it is the truth and you know it, deep down, you know it. You will never accept it. There is always an excuse, or a justification, or an obscure reference, or a strawman argument.. on and on.. The MMA guys are on here (myself included) for either ego purposes or self torture!!!!

So why are you here? :) I suspect your last sentence is very insightful.

Oh, I don't disagree with the perspective that modern training methods are much more efficient in producing peak effieciency of the human body (although many things that we know about human physiology will change as more research is done so ten years from now I'm sure the next crop of exercise physiologist will be laughing at half of what you are saying today; I'm involved in medical research by the way so no need to attack me from the position that I'm a ludite), and I don't disagree that proof is in the pudding; where are the current UFC champs that use TCMA as their main style?

But again, why are you here? You are right, you aren't going to convince old time TCMAists who actually find that their stuff works from emperical life experience. You aren't going to convince the fantasy prone who think that working on techniques in form only will make them a decent fighter. You aren't going to affect me because I myself am not particularly interesting in sport fighting or hard fighting in general (too many years invested in my noggin to risk keeling over from a subdural bleed whilst on the job and all that; that just happened to an acquantance who did san shou; last time I heard the person is fine after two surgeries). My interest in TCMA is based on other reasons, including cultural interest.

This isn't a rhetorical question, I'm rather curious why you guys do keep banging your head against the keyboard.

[MasterKiller]

Today everyone knows a little about everything the drugs problem is getting worse. So it is a crude thing, understand? There's nothing beautiful about it. I would prefer to watch a beautiful K-1 fight rather than an ugly Vale-Tudo. All of the MMA fighters today are at a low technical level. There aren’t any stand outs. And that is something that takes the beauty away from Vale-Tudo, because there is no artist of the type of Cassius Clay that there was in boxing, for example

--Rickson Gracie

http://www.geocities.com/global_training_report/rickson_gracie_2005.htm

Somewhat on topic.

[Becca]

I'm not Seven, but I'll take a stab sicnce by background is in exercise science.

Muscular strength is the maximum force generated by a muscle.
Power is related to strength, but has a time component (Power =Force x Distance/ Time)
Endurance is the ability of the muscle to contract at submaximal tensions over a period of time.
Endurance training has been shown to negatively affect strength and power development, although the opposite does not seem to be the case.
Strength, power, and endurance development are all specific to the joint angle at which they are trained.

Strength training requires loads that fatigue the muscles in under 2 minutes.
Endurance training requires lighter loads and longer durations. This is why stance training becomes more of an endurance exercise as it is held longer and longer.
Strength, power, and endurance development are all specific to the joint angle at which they are trained. That is why holding stances during training will not help your running (or fighting, since you are not sitting in a stance while you fight) and why running (btw, distance running builds endurance, not strength- strength can be increased by sprint training, however) will not make you able to hold a stance for long periods of time.

Fighting requires a combination of strength, endurance, and power and is specific to the joint angles you would actually use when fighting. Efficient training in each of these areas would try to mimic these joint angles and movements as closely as possible.




In the beginning you would have developed some strength compared to what you had after your injury. After that, you developed endurance, at that specific joint angle. Those two things probably gave you enough functional ability to further improve your functional ability by doing other things such as footwork, kicking, etc.



The main reason he can do this is because he regularly does it. The stair climbing provides the training stimulus to keep him in good enough shape to continue climbing the stairs. The stance training will also keep his endurance up for this activity because some of the stair climbing is done at close to the same joint angle as the stance training.



As mentioned above, stance training stops being strength training as soon as you get past the two minute mark (and once you can hold it for longer than two minutes it ceases being strength training at less than two minutes).


See above regarding running.



And that is why holding stances for extended periods of time is not functional.
Dang! I can't believe I'm agreeing with you on something...:eek:

But your right; once you can hold a horse stance, or any other stance, for two minutes, you must change it up to get any more functional gains. Adding variouse weight vests, holding a cinder block in your arms to change up your center of ballence, ect, becomes a must or you become the worst thing in CMA- Stagnant.:(

[PangQuan]

This thread is useless. Both sides are arguing from a point of total ignorance. It's like third graders arguing about quantum physics. After reading these posts. I have come to the diecision that one, the MMA guys haven't a freakin clue how and what TCMA is or is trained . And two-most of the guys who are arguing FOR TCMA are just as clueless. This is why this argumant continues.

TCMA when trained correctly-hits bags, spars hard, does conditioning, also grapples. The forms are not a substitute for any of this, they are simply a textbook for passing the system down intact. Within the forms are catalogued the techniques of the system, along with methods of strength development and strenghtening of the immune system-BUT not simply by doing the sets will this be achieved. The moves MUST be taken out of the forms and expanded on and extrapolated upon. Many times a move while performed once in the set, is actually meant to be isolated and done in reps.
Two-man sets are only the first step-you then break free from the set. Each move counters another-because otherwise the set is over in two moves. Again, the set is simply a single step. The TCMA guys who told you that they will make you into a KUNG-FU FIGHTER also don't get it.
Most forms of TCMA also have many supplementary training, such as weights, plyometric, specialized exercises to develop the ging-power. most have a form of Iron Body training-nothing mysterious-but it includes a great deal of hard body contact.
HSK, Tai Chi Bob and a few others-I MEAN A FEW seem to know what they speak of. Sorry, but the other 98% of the "TCMA" guys who are arguing with you-are just as ignorant. If they weren;t, then they wouldn't be arguing, because the bottom line is, we are in aggreement. The only things we do not agree with is that ground grappling is not the be all end all, however it does have its place. Real Kung-Fu IS MMA, and has ALWAYS been MMA. My style-Hung-Ga is known for being this super tradityional, pure style. Reality is, we are the original mutt style. Any Shaolin style is. Shaolin was a melting pot.
All styles were developed by Martial Artists, who fought with others, and adapted to their methods. MMA is nothing new. The only reason it seems new is because for the last century, everyone has changed the way they teach TCMA, except for a few.

Im glad someone else sees things the way I do. The first paragraph here is hits the spot just right.

[Chief Fox]

Another example of TMA guys disregarding modern execise science which show that training with weights actually increases flexibility.
Not all of us are in the dark on the benefits of weight training. I personally like the Crossfit workout. I bet you have a lot in common with more people here than you think.

[ShaolinTiger00]

This thread is useless. Both sides are arguing from a point of total ignorance. It's like third graders arguing about quantum physics. After reading these posts. I have come to the diecision that one, the MMA guys haven't a freakin clue how and what TCMA is or is trained . And two-most of the guys who are arguing FOR TCMA are just as clueless. This is why this argumant continues.

TCMA when trained correctly-hits bags, spars hard, does conditioning, also grapples. The forms are not a substitute for any of this, they are simply a textbook for passing the system down intact. Within the forms are catalogued the techniques of the system, along with methods of strength development and strenghtening of the immune system-BUT not simply by doing the sets will this be achieved. The moves MUST be taken out of the forms and expanded on and extrapolated upon. Many times a move while performed once in the set, is actually meant to be isolated and done in reps.
Two-man sets are only the first step-you then break free from the set. Each move counters another-because otherwise the set is over in two moves. Again, the set is simply a single step. The TCMA guys who told you that they will make you into a KUNG-FU FIGHTER also don't get it.
Most forms of TCMA also have many supplementary training, such as weights, plyometric, specialized exercises to develop the ging-power. most have a form of Iron Body training-nothing mysterious-but it includes a great deal of hard body contact.
HSK, Tai Chi Bob and a few others-I MEAN A FEW seem to know what they speak of. Sorry, but the other 98% of the "TCMA" guys who are arguing with you-are just as ignorant. If they weren;t, then they wouldn't be arguing, because the bottom line is, we are in aggreement. The only things we do not agree with is that ground grappling is not the be all end all, however it does have its place. Real Kung-Fu IS MMA, and has ALWAYS been MMA. My style-Hung-Ga is known for being this super tradityional, pure style. Reality is, we are the original mutt style. Any Shaolin style is. Shaolin was a melting pot.
All styles were developed by Martial Artists, who fought with others, and adapted to their methods. MMA is nothing new. The only reason it seems new is because for the last century, everyone has changed the way they teach TCMA, except for a few.


I love this kind of kungfu guy. It's almost a stereotype now. it should have a name and classification.

"98% of people do it wrong, but I'm in the 2% that do it the correct way!"

What amazing luck you have.. to find the one true kung fu that actually works while everyone else is learning ****.. amazing!

funny thing is that every single person you ask thinks that his school is the 2%...

LMAO...

and also falls into another subclassification, "We do MMA." No you don't you're no more MMA than TKD, at least they have the balls to stand by their traditions and admit that they do not train a complete system of combat.

10tigers- Getting in the cage to prove your skills anytime soon? Any students/members of your school entering MMA fights? - Proof that everyone can see how good you are can shut up the talking real quick...

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

Chris Heintzman claims TCMA AND Taiji as his main style(s) and has a great record.. but, he trains as it should be, from a total perspective..

TCMA or any other styles that don't include fight training are diminishing the spirit of Martial Arts.. If you're not fighting, it's not a "Martial" Art.. it's performance art..

Be well...

[TenTigers]

Shaolin Tiger-I really don't think you read my post correctly, or understood the point I was trying to make. The point I am making is that there really is no argument here. If you are training Martial Arts for self-defense, then you are doing conditioning, hitting bags and pads, hitting,sparring, and yes, grappling as well. There is a false idea that the forms, and two-man sets are taught, and miraculously, one becomes adept at movement and can go out and defend themselves against a real opponent. Forms, and two-man sets-which are forms as well, were never meant to be seen as this. This mentality is why people start becoming forms collectors, searching for that new form that will transform them. They watch way too many movies.
There is a falshood that has been perpetuated in TCMA. We were all looking for that Chinese Master (when I say 'we" I am not actually referring to everybody) Well, in the 70's, there sprang up many, many Masters, many have great names, big schools, head up organizations, are featured in articles, books, videos,etc Many belong to a 'good ol boys' club. They might know something,maybe alot, maybe not, but they all have that oath-"You lie, and we'll swear to it." and have taken people for a ride. If they really had the sh!t-well, they kept it to themselves. Because the next generation doesn't seem to have it, Did you ever ask why so many TCMA guys fight like kickboxers? They will all be quick to talk about how their techniques are too deadly, or that when you put on gloves, and can't strike or lock joints, or stick etc, all you are left with is kickboxing.
But there is so much more technique in TCMA that they can do with the gear on that they are not doing. Why? Because they adapted their fighting and teaching methods for tournaments-(in the 70's,80's and 90's etc everyone was in point tournaments) they wanted to keep their students from leaving them and going to a school that sparred, awarded belts, whatever, they didn't do the hard conditioning because they were concerned with liability-or perhaps they simply didn't know it themselves?
Sure there are guys out there who are the real deal. It is the same way with Karate. There are schools on every corner, but how many Kanazawas, Nishiyamas, Oyamas, Ninomiyas, Nakamuras, Ray Dalkes,and Tonny Tullenners are there? Have you ever seen these guys? And mark my words, you will soon see it with MMA. Where there is a need...
I am certainly not saying I am the only one, or even one of the best. I am,
however saying that I am trying to turn out the best TCMA students I possibly can, and am constantly trying to seek out and find the best people, and methods to accomplish this as possible. My cup is certainly not full, but I also have a
bullsh!t meter, just as you do. It rings whenever I hear TCMA people make excuses, or see their students point-sparring, and kickboxing.

btw-I am training some of my guys for full-contact MMA events, so give me some time, but you will see us there as well. Any advice and pointers on preparation for such events is always welcome, so feel free.

[Ford Prefect]

ST,

We could call them 2%'ers. I was a hardcore 2%'er a couple times before I stopped kidding myself and realized I was a 98%'er. Thank god I came from a boxing background, or else I may have stayed a 98%'er for good instead of going back to combat sports. Now I still do a little kung fu, but it's for fun and not fighting.

[hskwarrior]

Ten Tigers,

At First I Saw Your Post And Was Like Man Thats Long......but I Decided To Read It Anyway, And I Applaud You. That Is Some Real Truth You Shared With Us Just Now. I Am In Total Agreement With You.

Pls Continue...........;)

[hskwarrior]

Thanks For Your Comments On That Subject Taichi Bob. That Is The Whole Reason I Don't Like My Students Sparring With Equipment. If They Get Hurt They Understand That Thats Their Fault. THEY WILL LEARN FROM THEIR MISTAKES. PLUS IT TEACHES THEM NOT TO BE AFRAID OF GETTING HIT.

[TenTigers]

wow, a 2%er! I'm gonna put that in a diamond patch and wear it on my uniform!:D
(kinda sounds like lofat milk)

HSK-yeah, I usually skip the wordy posts too. Guilty as charged! Thanx for the read and the comments.
BTW-ford- I grew up in old school-no pads, hard contact-Kyokushin, and old tKD, and a little boxing as well.when Idid Tang Soo Do, we had a few PKA fighters in our gym, and I was their sparring partner. I'm no stranger to contact. Our students spar hard body contact-no gear, once they have learned sam jien kuen, as part of their overall training. So, in actuality-we are in agreement.
not fer nuthin, but are you guys are so caught up with trying to prove something that you honestly don't read the posts you reply to, or are you guys really young?
I understand your point, but it honestly seems to me that you haven't really been out there. What TCMA have you studied?

[Ou Ji]

TenTigers
Like you I started out old school. Back when you got hit, went home bruised and sore, and never considered suing or leaving over it.

About 20 years ago I trained at a school that was big on full contact competition. One instructor was even a 7 time PKA champion.

Apparently something happened between then and now since MMA peeps are the only real fighter these days. :p

[green_willow]

HSK, Tai Chi Bob and a few others-I MEAN A FEW seem to know what they speak of. Sorry, but the other 98% of the "TCMA" guys who are arguing with you-are just as ignorant.

I don't doubt what you say woill make your kung fu effectively. But still you're in the 2% catagory which makes you and others like you the minority. Given that majority 98% of TCMA guys don't train like you do - how can you call yourself TCMA. Majority rules?

[TenTigers]

"Given that majority 98% of TCMA guys don't train like you do - how can you call yourself TCMA. Majority rules?"

Hey! That ain't fair!:D

[PangQuan]

In an instance like this, majority only rules if the majority is correct. For this, its a matter of circumstance. The majority may have the larger of the voicing opinions, however that does not make them correct.

thats not to say that the majority here is wrong. its just a matter of fact when dealing with any highly developed skill trade.

remember the majority used to think the world was flat...i wouldnt want to be in that majority.

[WanderingMonk]

I don't doubt what you say woill make your kung fu effectively. But still you're in the 2% catagory which makes you and others like you the minority. Given that majority 98% of TCMA guys don't train like you do - how can you call yourself TCMA. Majority rules?
oh, that is easy.

It is like the protestants. Catholics were originally really solid and the dominant western church. then, there was the whole indulgence and multiple popes, ex-communication of popes, etc, etc. then, this martin luther guy came up and said, you know that you guys ain't practicing the faith right. then, the protestant movement got started. then, the protestants claimed that they were the real christian because they going back to the roots.

TT is saying that he is going back to the roots. I say ex-communicate all those sissy kung-fu heretics :D

[SevenStar]

We're all wondering why you guys are here too. I'm sure there's a MMA forum around the Net somewhere for you guys.


there are plenty of mma boards. we post there too. But there is a lot of interest here, since I (speaking for myself) have conflicting views with many of the traditional guys here... even though knife, ST, ross, pork chop, sun tzu, mutant warrior and myself all have a traditional background. The difference we have is something we all have in common though - competition.

[Green Cloud]

Oh realy what competitions do your students go to. I'm just wondering that's all

[YMC]

TCMA or any other styles that don't include fight training are diminishing the spirit of Martial Arts.. If you're not fighting, it's not a "Martial" Art.. it's performance art..



I hope this isn't off topic (I tend towards irrelevancies sometimes), but isn't this part of the argument? How are people defining fight training? Am I right in my understanding that one of the pillars of the MMA arguments here is that few TCMAists have a proven track record in the professional fighting world and thus have no verifiable empirical evidence that TCMA training methods are all that efficient or efficacious against a comparable MMA training regimen? When you say fighting and MMA'ers say fighting are you saying the same thing?

When I started my "training" in Boston my school's san shou program was still being run by what Coach Ross refers occassionally as the "Boston Group." So I have seen what it takes to produce championship caliber sport fighters. I spar (and by my definition, very lightly), and when I do, I try to use at least two techniques from the forms that I know in addition to the standard bread and butter stuff, but there is no way that I can train those two techniques (e.g. buterfly hands or eye gouges, etc) with the same speed and intent that those san shou guys did with their skill sets and I do with the basic punches, kicks, elbows, and knees. So what I do isn't really training to fight in the context of those san shou guys in terms of working all my skill sets or in intensity (although the intensity part for me has nothing to traditional vs more modern, but rather my desire not to experience coup counter coup damage to the grey matter first hand :D )

[Green Cloud]

That's cool

[green_willow]

oh, that is easy.

It is like the protestants. Catholics were originally really solid and the dominant western church. then, there was the whole indulgence and multiple popes, ex-communication of popes, etc, etc. then, this martin luther guy came up and said, you know that you guys ain't practicing the faith right. then, the protestant movement got started. then, the protestants claimed that they were the real christian because they going back to the roots.

TT is saying that he is going back to the roots. I say ex-communicate all those sissy kung-fu heretics :D

But few christians from either side ever go back to the text pre-Constantine days to see what had been ommited and for what reason. The clear cut foundation of christianity exist only in the minds of the believers.

Fortunately with martial arts you can actually do some simualted games to test the effectiveness of deadly techniques. Lets say some crane guy says he can peck the eyes out of an opponent but too deadly to use in the UFC.

ok get him to hit a couple of pressure sensitive pads on a moving speed ball -lets see his success rate compared to a boxer hitting the speed ball.

there are ways of testing whether things work besides poking each other's eyes out.

[Fu-Pow]

I think its more a matter of intensity vs. content.

I think if TCMA guys trained with the same intensity as professional fighters it would be no contest against these "hybrid" arts ie kickboxing/Judo/BJJ.

But not very many do...and I'll include myself in that category. Hardly reason to discount kung fu as ineffective however.

[Knifefighter]

I think if TCMA guys trained with the same intensity as professional fighters it would be no contest against these "hybrid" arts ie kickboxing/Judo/BJJ.
If it would be "no contest", then somebody should do it. There's a lot of money to be made in Japan competing in the Pride events and even bigger money over there in endorsement deals.
It would be easy money, right?

[green_willow]

If it would be "no contest", then somebody should do it. There's a lot of money to be made in Japan competing in the Pride events and even bigger money over there in endorsement deals.
It would be easy money, right?

If enuf money is thrown at it - ppl will find a way. It's interesting that it was only in the early UFC days when kung fu ppl entered the scene. Now you don't see them anymore. Why?

[Knifefighter]

It's interesting that it was only in the early UFC days when kung fu ppl entered the scene. Now you don't see them anymore. Why?
Probably because, like the other "pure" stylists, they learned they couldn't compete.

[green_willow]

Probably because, like the other "pure" stylists, they learned they couldn't compete.

You're saying that TCMA is inferior to MMA? Wasn't TCMA a form of MMA sometime in the past, why did it stop developing?

[Knifefighter]

You're saying that TCMA is inferior to MMA? Wasn't TCMA a form of MMA sometime in the past, why did it stop developing?
Somewhere along the line, the majority of people quit fighting with it, assuming they fought with the empty-handed version of it in the first place.

[SimonM]

the typical definition of tradional is people who train stances and forms as opposed to more "modern" things like bagwork, mittwork, weight training, etc. for example, karate and tkd are considered traditional. wrestling and thai boxing are not, even though wrestling is older than both tkd and karate, and tkd really isn't traditional at all.



So... what if we do both?

I do practice forms... It's hard to find partners who will practice sword sparring with me since the man I'm training under now in China doesn't know the jian... So I do practice forms with my jian. I also hit the heavy bag.

Back at my kwoon in Canada we'd often do a warm-up. Then we'd hit the focus pads and mits for a bit. Then we'd do forms for a while and then we would spar. Is this school TCMA or is it MMA?

I saw it as TCMA - just using a fight-focussed training regimen.

[hskwarrior]

Simon,

TCMA which not only practices the traditional forms, but does pad work, bag work, trains their knee strikes, elbows, and single and multiple handed combinations, spar, or train with the mentality to hurt with our gung fu just doesn;t exist in the minds of MMA people here. even when its right under their noses.

as you can see, all they complain about is we practice forms. they are so blinded with what they do they overlook the similarities and latch on the one small aspect of what we do. thats why when we know out shet works, we just stay quiet and let them raise all the dust.

[Wood Dragon]

What differentiates TCMA training from BJJ or MMA training?

Aside from the Speedos and skinhead motifs.

[hskwarrior]

according to mma folks its the forms. aside from that they are clueless to how gung fu schools who train to fight for survival purposes train. thats why they think tcma sucks, they think that forms is how we train to fight.

[Knifefighter]

What differentiates TCMA training from BJJ or MMA training?

BJJ and MMA training does a lot of work on the ground. Most TCMA clubs do no or very little ground work.

BJJ and MMA do no preset forms. Most TCMA has many preset forms.

BJJ and MMA spar at very high level of intensities. Most TCMA clubs do not.

Most BJJ and MMA clubs have many members who regularly compete against resisting opponents in open competitions. Most members of most TCMA clubs do not.

Most BJJ and MMA practitioners are open to "whatever works". The majority of TCMA practioners believe that their particular arts have all the answers.

Most BJJ and MMA practioners look to the newest advancements in training methods. Most TCMA practioners believe in following tradition, believing that having been around for hundreds or thousands of years proves it to be the best way to train.

Most BJJ and MMA people train and compete with the same things that they would use with just slight modifications on the street. Many TCMA practitioners believe that many of their techniques are "too deadly" to actually practice full force or use in competitions.

[Knifefighter]

according to mma folks its the forms. aside from that they are clueless to how gung fu schools who train to fight for survival purposes train. thats why they think tcma sucks, they think that forms is how we train to fight.
Actually the forms practice is just the most glaring example of the many problems with the way most TCMA clubs train.

[Knifefighter]

TCMA which not only practices the traditional forms, but does pad work, bag work, trains their knee strikes, elbows, and single and multiple handed combinations, spar, or train with the mentality to hurt with our gung fu ...
Didn't you recently post about how you don't spar at high intensities because your techniques might cause undo damage to each other?

[SimonM]

Still home sick eh KF? ;) :D :cool:

[TenTigers]

Well, the good news is we seem to actually be making some headway.
KF and the others of th" MMA etc side" have started saying "Most" when referring to TCMA. Hey, it's a start, and I have to agree with them. Most "TCMA" schools are guilty as charged. The reason I put "TCMA" in quotes is because I really don't consider them traditional. If they were traditional-then they would be drilling, hitting, conditioning as priority over forms, which TRADITIONALLY are not emphasised as traing first, but in most cases taught only after the student is proficient in the fighting aspects as sort of a diploma. Truth be known, for the most part, forms are NOT neccesary-but are taught as a vehicle to pass down the techniques, methods, and concepts of a given system intact.
Look at history-if you are training for battle-which would you teach first-forms or drills, conditioning, and fighting? It's a no-brainer.
BUT-fast forward to the last hundred years-now schools are battling for students/ They do public demonstrations. What will they show? drills? Heck no. They will show all the flamboyant cool stuff. What keeps alot of these guys in class? They are looking for that next cool form. The emphasis has changed.
This is why there are so very few real TCMA schools. For the most part, the ones who are actually training for fighting are the schools that have been involved in street wars in HK and carried over to the states. CLF, Wing Chun, Hung Kuen,Bak Mei,Southern Mantis, LAma/Hop Ga, to name a few. This is not saying that ALL schools of these styles are "hardcore"-for lack of a better word, but only the specific schools that were part of this, or were developed and influenced by those who were. For example-Aln Lee and Duncan Leong's Wing Chun is a fighting Gym, Buk Sing Gwoon is a fighting Gym, from what HSK says, I assume he is also of that ilk as well. I cannot speak for others, as I have not seen them train.
But they are out there. They are definately the exceptions rather than the rule, and if you go into these schools, not only will you see them drilling, hitting, and fighting, but you will also see them grappling as well. Perhaps not to the extent that MMA do, but people who fight, and teach fighting, are well aware of the neccesity to be able to handle themselves on all fields of battle.
It's not MMA/BJJ vs TCMA
It's REALITY-BASED TRAINING vs NON-REALITY-BASED TRAINING
whether you teach forms or not has nothing to do with HOW and What you teach. Only the emphasis does.

[Ou Ji]

I don't think it's the last 100 years, more likely the last 50 or less. The thing with butting heads with these guys is the extremist viewpoints, on both sides. As usual the truth is somewhere in between.

But whenever you attack you will get a defensive response, and most of the time the viewpoint is worded as an attack.

MMA seems to want to distance themselves from forms as far as they can. Hence they will not admit to any value of forms.

Forms, among other things, are individual training. How do you train when there's no partner and you don't have a gym handy?

Taking the worst case scenerio, forms only, and holding it up as the norm is a strawman argument.

Knifefighter is at the extreme end of the MMA spectrum. That's a very western attitude. If one is good then two is better. The eastern view is to balance.

So the westen view would eliminate everything that isn't EXACTLY what you do in a fight. Anything other than that is a waste of time that's could be spent fighting.

The extreme view goes as far as not practicing kicks beyond the range need to fight (whatever that is).

In the eastern view, which looks beyond the primary focus to the whole, would see anything related as beneficial. Therefore running (not directly used in fighting), stretching (not directly used in fighting), weights (not directly used in fighting), etc. are part of the training. The belief is that overall health is beneficial to fighting.

Look at western medicine compared to eastern. Western isolates the exact chemical compund where eastern will use the whole part of the plant. Which is better remains to be seen.

Most likely, as stated above, the best (truth) is somewhere in between. Which is tha balanced view.

[Ou Ji]

Who says CMA isn't good for fighting?

Look at this!

:D ;) :p

[Ou Ji]

Brandon Vera dropped his opponent with a roundhouse kick to the head. So much for those useless high kicks in a real fight. :p

Grapple that!

[hskwarrior]

see, knife fighter is not (at all) well versed in what TCMA schools teach, train, or what the schools main focus is. all he can do is give his perspective from his view point, which is up in a crows nest half way around the world. he can't say a word about how most of train becaus he has never train with any of us.

i take his comments with a grain of salt because he doesn't know me, ten tigers, greencloud, or anyone else here for that matter. all he can do is shoot down others training because it doesn't match his own. thats cool. it think he's a little bothered about the comments people have made in the past about mma and such so he feels he has to put down tcma.

for someone to hate tcma so much you know theres an underlying problem. if there wasn't why doesn't he just ignore tcma people and keep doing what he's doing? he has to down us for whatever reason it makes him happy. i've been practicing one style for about 25 years and have never felt that it was useless not one bit. the choy lee fut system is an incredible striking, and defensive system. mixed with a little mma for ring fighting we would be that much more effective.

there are two types of people here, ring fighters and street fighters. In most of the ring fights usually both ring fighters have some ground skills, and both have the same agenda. but to think you are invincible because you are able to ground fight you are delusional.

you seem to forget that a person not willing to roll around on the ground to see who can tap each other out is not in any way shape or form realistic to a combative situation on the street. mma will not survive against multiple attackers and have never never never shown to prove that wrong.

so for those schools who train realistically against unwilling multiple attackers have a little leverage over mma fighters because when you spar against 3-5 people at the same time you will be the stupid fock for trying to grapple someone while the other 4 use your head and body for street soccer practice.

and guess what, knifefighter......my forms do teach us to fight agains multiple attackers. how many people does your training teach you to deal with?

[hskwarrior]

see, what most don't realize is that grappling is great, but it is not the end all of fighting and is so very far from it. the same can be said about tcma, but at least we try to cover all combative aspects for real life combat instead of ring fighting.

in my experience alot of ring fighters are those people who are frustrated with their martial arts because they are limited by law to use what they learned.
ring fighting is a good tool to keep your skills sharp, but i am still one of those who feels the real threat is out in the streets where someone is more likely to kill you if your skills are not sharp.

i agree that mma training is better focused than your average ma training center. but that doesn't mean there aren't any real good street fighters who have trained all their lives while using the stuff they learned on the streets. for some the ring is their world, while mine is right outside my apartment.

[hskwarrior]

i'd like to see a raise of hands from the mma people here who train against a person intending to either cause you great physical harm or even trying to kill you, or how many people at a time do you grapple at one time? has there been any real training in that respect? no! MMA say they are more realistic than tcma, but in the ring i don't see royce gracie, matt hughes, chuck lidell, or anyone for that matter grappling in a free for all against many unwilling folks. until the day one person takes on 3 in a no holds barred ring match and he can win the match, only then will i leave TCMA and learn MMA from onw on.

from what i understand is both ring fighters or while training are not really trying to end the others life. so i think mma is only half way full.

people like knife fighter who are clueless to how many TCMA people train has put many of us in the same boat he thinks is full of useless tcma exponents. WRONG.


but i have a class to go teach now, so im out.

[unkokusai]

LOL

It's fun to watch folks try to convince themselves of something! :rolleyes:

[Ou Ji]

Ah, more smugness from the extreme ends of the issue.:(

I think Vera just convinced me not to buy into the 'high kicks are useless in a real fight' viewpoint.

But that was a sport fight, not a real fight.

Or is a sport fight a real fight? Does it work in sport but not real or does it work in real and not sports?

Or maybe it just doesn't work against grapplers?

I think I'll keep trainning it anyhow, just in case. Flexibility keeps you young even if it doesn't help you fight better. But it does help you fight better.

:p

[monkeyfoot]

high kicks are great. My favourite is a side kick with a feint. You feint low and them power up high into the face/chest.

They work in fights too. A good roundhouse can knock someone down easily, just gotta be quick. My mate showed me a Muai Thai kick today, kinda like a roundhouse, but you keep the leg straight all the time and simply swing it into your opponent.

I blocked it with a scissor block......and it ****ing cained!

craig

[Wood Dragon]

In Karate systems (I come from a Shotokan and Kyokushin background, with Judo as a near second), Kata are strictly regarded as:

A) A decent warmup, before beginning drills or sparring.
and
B) An analogue to shadowboxing.

Kata is one leg of a the triangle that makes up the basis of a karateka's training.

Kihon: "Basics". Drills and technique-sharpening work.
Kata: Shadowboxing.
Kumite: Force-on-force training. Sparring.

Four kinds of kumite:
1)Prearranged sequences of techniques.
2)No contact freefighting. Control is the goal.
3)Light contact freefighting.
4)Full contact. No hand techniques to the face, unless wearing gloves*.

Of the big 3, I'd say Kata gets the least attention (except for the newbies who have never seen one before. They need some time to get used to it.) Kihon occupies the bulk of training time, with Kumite a distant second.

This is in addition to a regimen of Physical Training oriented towards allowing you to be ABLE to perform techniques. Fat people arent fast, weak people don't hit hard, neither has decent balance, etc. That gets done on your own time.



*-Gloves are often unused, as they interfere with non-punching hand techniques. I know several karateka who hit the Police Athletic League, once a week, to box. IMHO, very few -good- martial artists are uninterested in what other systems have to offer.

[hskwarrior]

high kicks are effective if thrown with perfect timing, opportunity i think is the best way, but high kicks are not something you can do when someone is too close to you. that is when you should use lower kicks if any at all.

before my accident i was about 135 lbs, and i loved to kick. especially high. until my sifu saw me one day and asked me which is a more powerful kick and told me to try it out. i said the lower one, and he asked me why use a less powerful kick then? since then i try not to kick any higher than the waist. once you got only one foot to stand on you could be in big trouble with someone who is still fresh mentally.

but if you can still kick high, then keep it up, they have their place.

[Ou Ji]

Vero rocked his fresh opponent in the first round. I posted it because recent discussions about kicking ended up with everyone claiming anything above the waist is way too risky, high kicks are not good against a fresh opponent, and some claimed they were useless in a real fight.

All proven untrue in a MMA venue.

Just proves what you learn in an online forum from self proclaimed fighters and experts is not always correct.

[Knifefighter]

from what HSK says, I assume he is also of that ilk as well.

…we almost never spar full blast because some of the techniques we have can seriously or even gravely injure your partner.

…you seem to forget that a person not willing to roll around on the ground to see who can tap each other out is not in any way shape or form realistic to a combative situation on the street.
Let's see... he doesn't spar full contact and he ignores groundwork, mistakenly thinking it is people rolling around on the ground trying to get each other to tap.
I'd say he is of the "non-reality" based camp.

[Knifefighter]

Brandon Vera dropped his opponent with a roundhouse kick to the head. So much for those useless high kicks in a real fight. !
I don't think anyone is saying high kicks cannot end a fight... just that they are lower percentage than many other techs. Quite a few MMA fights have been ended by high kicks over the years, but not nearly as many as with other techs.

[Knifefighter]

i'd like to see a raise of hands from the mma people here who train against a person intending to either cause you great physical harm or even trying to kill you,
Every time two MMA fighters step into the ring, they are trying to do everyting in their power to do as much harm as possible to each other. Chokes, arm locks and leg locks are all applied with full intention of doing as much damage as possible. The only thing that makes it different from the street is that the hold is released when the opponent submits... if he doesn't submit in time, the joint is broken or the opponent is choked unconscious. Punches, kicks and elbows are thrown as hard as possible and continue to be thown until the referee steps in to stop the bout.

I'd say the average MMA training program is much closer to someone trying to kill you than is the type of training you are doing. By your own admission, you don't even spar full contact.


from what i understand is both ring fighters or while training are not really trying to end the others life. so i think mma is only half way full.
Please do tell me how, in your so-called realistic training, do you practice having someone actually trying to kill you?


or how many people at a time do you grapple at one time? has there been any real training in that respect?
Actually, yes, it's done enough to see how screwed you are if you end up having to go against two or more grapplers who know what they are doing.


MMA say they are more realistic than tcma, but in the ring i don't see royce gracie, matt hughes, chuck lidell, or anyone for that matter grappling in a free for all against many unwilling folks.
When I trained with Royce, we often did multiple opponent sparring. The thing is, if you don't know how to grapple, you are going to have a much harder time keeping multiple people from swarming and wrecking you.
You are living in a fantasy world if you think your light contact/forms/two-man drills training is somehow making you more prepared for multiple opponents.

[hskwarrior]

im done with you knife fighter. i honestly believe you only have part of the equation, and plus, i don't think you are who you claim to be because i saw the very same person wallking out into some area wearing that same outfit on his head and he didn't look like he has a lot of time on the world left so,,,,peace.

if that really is you, then thanks for you opinions they were very entertaining. as for myself, i am of the secretive type so just FYI, i have never not once told you or anyone here my extent of my training. you said i don't hard core spar....but have you ever sparred with a choy lee fut person who knew how to use the style, i'll answer that for you.......FOCK NO. if you did you would know the effectiveness of the systems hand techniques. even the legendary bruce lee admitted the greatness of the system.

have you ever been hit with a sow choy, once again i'll say FOCK NO. cuz if you did and it was landed properly it is something you will never forget for the rest of your life. a good sow choy when done properly can flip your ass over.

do you know how i train? once again.....FOCK NO. you only know what i tell you.
according to you i fabricated a story about my student getting jumped by 6 guys with knives and screw drivers. however, i can easily prove you wrong and show you you only talk out of the side of your neck. There is a police report about the incident and i suppose you will say that somehow i fabricated that as well.

still, then there are the hospital records that show what he was admitted into the emergency room for. oh yeah, what about the ambulance records?

so mr fabricated knife fighter to answer a comment you made earlier about me either turning out some good fighters or i'm telling a great story or wish it was like that...........i guess you are right, i guess i must be turning out some good fighters. because regardless of your old skeptical arse, the truth is the truth and theres nothing in the world you can say to alter that truth.

i may not be done, because i do thank you knife fighter because of you i have had some time to get some thought together. thanks old man. or maybe you're not really an old man. maybe some of us would know the truth if you would have returned a phone call, huh?

[hskwarrior]

so to reiterate,

if the account of my students ordeal is completely correct, then by your book......


YES, I GUESS I AM TURNING OUT SOME GOOD FIGHTERS.

because in the end, my student started out the victim and proved to himself that the gung fu he has been learning was never a waste of time.

so actually i do teach efffective traditional chinese martial arts.

now what?

[Knifefighter]

im done with you knife fighter. i honestly believe you only have part of the equation, and plus, i don't think you are who you claim to be because i saw the very same person wallking out into some area wearing that same outfit on his head and he didn't look like he has a lot of time on the world left so,,,,peace.
maybe some of us would know the truth if you would have returned a phone call,
Huh???? Are you on some kind of medication or something? Or did you just forget to take your usual dosage today?


you said i don't hard core spar....
Um...you said that- "we almost never spar full blast because some of the techniques we have can seriously or even gravely injure your partner."


have you ever been hit with a sow choy, once again i'll say FOCK NO. cuz if you did and it was landed properly it is something you will never forget for the rest of your life. a good sow choy when done properly can flip your ass over.
Uh, these punches are somehow magically much more powerful than a "regular" punch, is that what you are saying?


do you know how i train? once again.....FOCK NO. you only know what i tell you.
That's true. Maybe most of the things you have been telling me are untrue because you don't want me to steal your training methodology. Maybe you are just telling me about stupid training to confuse me, but your actual training is much more along the lines of what I have been advocating... in that case you would be a much better fighter than I think you are.



according to you i fabricated a story about my student getting jumped by 6 guys with knives and screw drivers. however, i can easily prove you wrong and show you you only talk out of the side of your neck. There is a police report about the incident and i suppose you will say that somehow i fabricated that as well.
I can't really debate this point with you. I'm not saying something didn't happen in some way or another where your student had an altercation. Let's just say that I have my doubts that it really happened the way it was spun out. Six guys with knives and screwdrivers who were trying to kill him... maybe they were all first-graders.

[Knifefighter]

BTW, are you going to answer my question about how you train with people actually trying to kill you for real?

[hskwarrior]

i never said to train with people who are out to kill you. i don't know about you but where i come from the people here if the fight you they intend to kill you. this is no hollywood. people here will kill you over a parking spot, over the shoes or color you wear. lets not forget what happened to the founder of FAIRTEX alex gong, may he rest in peace. he was a great fighter, and was killed over someone hitting his car. hitting his car and he got killed.

no you have your doubts that it went down that way because my student was never killed. although there are eye witnesses, it wasn't my student told me this, or that. i got the call in the middle of the night and was told by the people that were there what went down. so as his sifu interested in what i am teaching him worked for him i asked the eye witnesses first what the saw him do. they showed me and they have never seen my classes before or the style i teach.
so how would they know unless they saw him do what he did.

you are entitled to your doubts. i have no problem with that. if you wanted proof of what went down along with police reports and personal statements i have problem getting that. but first, do i really need to do that just for your satisfaction? NO. it went down as it did, and was still going down as the cops got there so the cops were also eye witnesses as well.

sorry no fabrications here.

[Knifefighter]

i never said to train with people who are out to kill you.
I'm wondering why you would put the same question to MMA practitioners then.