Pure in style????

[Water Dragon]

Or effective in combat? Which is more important and why?

Yes, I know you can be pure in style AND effective in combat but it's a hypothetical question.

Although there are many styles, they all depend on the strong beating the weak and the slow falling to the quick. These are not related to the power that must be learned -- Taiji Classics

[count]

Shouldn't this just be a poll?
I'll cast my vote for effective in combat!
:D S

[Internal Boxer]

Effective in Combat.

I am a firm believer that the Gung-Fu whatever the style should build a strong body to be able to take a high degree of punishment, fuelled by the augmentation of chi.

The higher levels of any of the internal arts creates "No style" when fighting, as the speed of the Fa-jing strikes cannot be defined as this or that style because they almost looked ragged and executed from no distance at all.

Although there are differences such as Bagua men deliver the powerful strikes always on the move where a Taiji man would root before discharging Fa-jing. However many internal martial artists often practice a few internal styles therefore they may fight with a mixture of both

The properties the form develops are internalised ie. Peng or upward expansive energy just looks like the practioner is shaking a bit, but to the reciever they feel they have been hit by a juggernaut. The attacking portion of Peng energy can be from any part of the body. This is because the whole body is used in the motion.

I do not know why I have bothered to answer this question I got to get training !!

[Kevin Wallbridge]

So what is the best way to learn "effective in combat?" Is this really different from "pure in style?" Of course in the end you are free, but at what end? Free from what? Free within what?

"The heart of the study of boxing is to have natural instinct resemble the dragon" Wang Xiangzai

[joedoe]

There is a reason why it is called martial ARTS. What does pure in style mean? As an art, whatever style you do should be evolving. This doesn't mean you should necessarily change it, but the way you practice and interpret your art is your own way.

Ultimately the martial arts are about fighting. Yes there are the health and spiritual aspects, but the core of the martial arts is fighting. Combat effectiveness must be the focus of training the martial arts. Purity of style is secondary.

Guns don't kill people, I kill people

[Water Dragon]

I do not turn on the heel of the bck foot any more. I prefer to grind out on the ball. It is a very small change, but has deviated from the tradition. For me, grinding on the ball provides more power and stability and keeps me in a better position to follow up.

I am not above stealing a method and infusing it into what I do. With the availability of knowledge in today's martial arts world. I often wonder why this is not more common. After all, everything is available if you approach with sincerity and a pure heart.

Although there are many styles, they all depend on the strong beating the weak and the slow falling to the quick. These are not related to the power that must be learned -- Taiji Classics

[Braden]

WD - That's good in theory. The risk you run is that there might have been a really good reason why we're told to turn on the heels but that it takes a few years of hard practice before you figure it out.

BTW, I think "infusing a technique" you like is extremely common. Classically, it always has been. The only constructive definition of a style is one of principles and strategy, not techniques.

[Water Dragon]

Braden, I've done 3 1/2 years in Taiji and have been told I have decent skill. I just started "grinding" about a month ago. I have some other things I'm working on now that will take a year or two before I "understand" them. Maybe they will come in, maybe not.

Although there are many styles, they all depend on the strong beating the weak and the slow falling to the quick. These are not related to the power that must be learned -- Taiji Classics

[Braden]

WD - it wasn't intended to be a specific statement or criticism, but rather an illustration of the danger in general of that approach. I perhaps should have used an unbiased example.

[Water Dragon]

It's cool. If you haven't picked it up by now, I use this board as a sounding board for whatever I'm doing at the moment. If my point stands up to the criticism, it may be valid and deserves further research. It is totally blown apart and I cannot defend it....

That's how I use the board anyway. There's a group of about 5 people I post for. I generally listen to what they say. You're not on it yet but are definately marked for "further research" I haven't gone through your old posts yet. ;) I DO consider deeplt what you say however. PEACE

Although there are many styles, they all depend on the strong beating the weak and the slow falling to the quick. These are not related to the power that must be learned -- Taiji Classics

[Braden]

It's all good. Just making sure I wasn't coming off like I really know what I'm talking about. ;) I hope I've got a good head on my shoulders, but I don't have the experience of other people around here.

I mostly use this board to stay sane while writing papers. I have gleaned some useful info off a handfull of peeps though. :)

[Destrous9]

How about:

Practice forms, stance, etc pure in style.
Practice applications for combat (based on style)

"Deep down inside of all of us is the power to accomplish what we want to, if we'll just stop looking elsewhere."