TUF Season 4 question

[Yao Sing]

So, on season 4 of TUF when they brought Chuck Lidell in what was that whipping punch he was showing them?

We all know that CMA is useless in the ring so it couldn't have been a cop choy or sow choy right?

[Mook Jong]

So, on season 4 of TUF when they brought Chuck Lidell in what was that whipping punch he was showing them?

We all know that CMA is useless in the ring so it couldn't have been a cop choy or sow choy right?

It looked like a gauch (sp) choy. It is thrown from the shoulder in a downward arc across the body and hits with the top of the fist near the thumb. The thumb can be placed on top to aim for the jaw to cause more damage.

[Charles T Rose]

It is also similar to the Russian boxing technique known as casting.

[SevenStar]

So, on season 4 of TUF when they brought Chuck Lidell in what was that whipping punch he was showing them?

We all know that CMA is useless in the ring so it couldn't have been a cop choy or sow choy right?


considering that he doesn't train CLF, I can guarantee you that it was none of the above techniques. However, that doesn't mean there isn't a similar one found in other styles. It sounds like you are describing the way some people throw an overhand.

that said, it's the training methods seen in much CMA that prompt people to say it's useless, not it's techniques. A punch is a punch.

[SiuHung]

considering that he doesn't train CLF, I can guarantee you that it was none of the above techniques. However, that doesn't mean there isn't a similar one found in other styles. It sounds like you are describing the way some people throw an overhand.

that said, it's the training methods seen in much CMA that prompt people to say it's useless, not it's techniques. A punch is a punch.


I don't get it. If a CMA person uses a punch and it's "real close" to what Chuck Liddel uses, it still sucks because of how they train? So hitting pads, timing drills, and sparring sucks because it's CMA? This is really confusing.

[Mook Jong]

I'm with sihung, if i throw the punch basically tthe same and work on it with pads and timing drills, what difference does it make if i'm a CMA fighter or an MMA fighter? Does CMA by default make it worse training? If that's what you think, i say go and train with a shaolin warrior-monk for a year.

[The Xia]

The effectiveness of TCMA training methods is proven. Much of it isn't useful for the ring since you wear gloves. It’s useful for the streets though. In the ring, what good are conditioned hands if you can’t use many of the techniques they were conditioned for (such as fu jow)?

[David Jamieson]

cma training methods suck?

which ones?

weak curriculums are a problem, not the methods.
many methods are exactly the same.

plus, there is no denying that mma type training is setup from the outset to attract more aggresive type people who know that there will be full contact this and that in a relatively short term.

most people in society ain't into that because they don't have that dive but, they still want to learn a martial art. Over time, intention is developed through the methods of cma that will bring about an open door to the fighting spirit that is within the student if it needs to be drawn on. sometimes they win, sometimes they lose.

all martial arts is not mere competitive fighting. there is a lot of it that has little to do with competitiveness. The methods are pretty sound. Please list those methods that are not. And if you choose to state that forms are useless, please denote why exactly you might think they are useless.

otherwise there is sparring, bag work, mitts work etc etc. and even mma has compliant patrner drills when learning a technique's application.

i think a lot of people think and say a lot of things, but not many people get right to it and thoroughly demonstrate what is lacking. Most time that the point is attempted to be proven, the example used is sub par even in mediochre practitioners views.

anyway, feel free to make the list of ineffective tcma training methods. I only have one on my list about why mma training is not always as good.

a) incidence of injury that prohibits optimum training is higher due to to much emphasis placed on contact fighting.

go! :p

[Mr Punch]

I don't get it. If a CMA person uses a punch and it's "real close" to what Chuck Liddel uses, it still sucks because of how they train? So hitting pads, timing drills, and sparring sucks because it's CMA? This is really confusing.Obviously Seven is not referring to or addressing the people who do this.

Do we have to go through this again?

[BruceSteveRoy]

i don't think seven* is saying the methods suck. he said that (other) people say they suck. and its true. ppl who are just looking in and not actually doing it often dont get it. they think its all for show. its not until ppl actually go in and train that they realize the value and effectiveness of the training in TCMA.

[SiuHung]

Obviously Seven is not referring to or addressing the people who do this.

Do we have to go through this again?

No, there's no point in rehashing the same debate that occurs over and over again. I get the message...there's a lot of CMA that trains poorly, or has completely omitted the martial aspects and that does suck (i.m.o.). But not everyone, and lets not forget that there's crappy mma training too...A thing that will become more and more evident over the next few years as people attempt to cash in on it.

A while back, I purchased the DVD's for the first season of TUF. On the last one, the coaches go over a few of thier favorite techniques. Chuck Liddel shows his whipping overhand. It looked just like a "cup choi" to me, common in many Southern systems. It made me smile to see a good 'ol CMA technique on the list of Chuck's bread and butter moves.:)

[David Jamieson]

Chuck's a kempo guy as well as all else and naturally has copped some moves outta that to use on the circuit. Kempo borrows heavily from cma.

so , it's chuck's, but the move is in cma.

It is not a traditional western boxing strike anymore than a whipping back hand is.

mma guys, at least the internet warrior types take real offense when you point out where cma has influenced an mma fighters attributes and techs for some reason. It's like they are desperate to be something different.

fighting is fighting. there's nothing in mma that you can't get anywhere else so long as there is an open format for that type of competition.

and yes, we will see a lot worse mma garbage coming around as time goes and people capitalize on all the kips and napoleons out there.

[SevenStar]

I don't get it. If a CMA person uses a punch and it's "real close" to what Chuck Liddel uses, it still sucks because of how they train? So hitting pads, timing drills, and sparring sucks because it's CMA? This is really confusing.

where did I say the punch sucked?? All I said was that it wasn't a sow choy.

[SevenStar]

Chuck's a kempo guy as well as all else and naturally has copped some moves outta that to use on the circuit. Kempo borrows heavily from cma.

so , it's chuck's, but the move is in cma.

It is not a traditional western boxing strike anymore than a whipping back hand is.

mma guys, at least the internet warrior types take real offense when you point out where cma has influenced an mma fighters attributes and techs for some reason. It's like they are desperate to be something different.

fighting is fighting. there's nothing in mma that you can't get anywhere else so long as there is an open format for that type of competition.

and yes, we will see a lot worse mma garbage coming around as time goes and people capitalize on all the kips and napoleons out there.

who's taking offense? I know about his kempo background. But I bet you won't find a technique called sow choy, which is my point. several styles have similar techniques.

[SevenStar]

The effectiveness of TCMA training methods is proven. Much of it isn't useful for the ring since you wear gloves. It’s useful for the streets though. In the ring, what good are conditioned hands if you can’t use many of the techniques they were conditioned for (such as fu jow)?

Oh no.....

[Knifefighter]

cma training methods suck?
which ones?

1- Ones that instill thinking along lines like this:

The effectiveness of TCMA training methods is proven. Much of it isn't useful for the ring since you wear gloves. It’s useful for the streets though. In the ring, what good are conditioned hands if you can’t use many of the techniques they were conditioned for (such as fu jow)?

2- Forms, because they have nothing to do with fighting.

3- All the schools that do no sparring.

4- All the schools that do "sparring" with no gear. Sparring with no gear means that you can't go hard enough to get halfway decent.

5- All the practitioners that never spar hard enough to incur injuries. Injuries come with the territory of becomming a good fighter.

6- Ineffective techniques such as backfists that are included in forms and drills but hardly ever actually work against skilled oppoents.

7- Instructors who never fight or spar full force, but have "reputations" of being good, most of whom have never beaten a skilled opponent in their lives.

8- The same instructors who make brainwashed students believe that ineffective techniques are useful by demonstrating them at high force on the students while the students are complying.

[Green Cloud]

who's taking offense? I know about his kempo background. But I bet you won't find a technique called sow choy, which is my point. several styles have similar techniques.

The punch Chuck was throwing is not a sao choi, a Sow Choi is basicaly an extended hook. The punch that he was doing is called a Fon gok or a curved 45% downward punch. Or like you said before an over hand right.

That punch is done quite frequently in CLF but I've also seen Jhon Waine do it in the movies. Who cares what it's called if set up correctly it will knock a muther out.

[The Xia]

Oh no.....
Yes?

(10 character limit is annoying)

[Green Cloud]

1- Ones that instill thinking along lines like this:


2- Forms, because they have nothing to do with fighting.

3- All the schools that do no sparring.

4- All the schools that do "sparring" with no gear. Sparring with no gear means that you can't go hard enough to get halfway decent.

5- All the practitioners that never spar hard enough to incur injuries. Injuries come with the territory of becomming a good fighter.

6- Ineffective techniques such as backfists that are included in forms and drills but hardly ever actually work against skilled oppoents.

7- Instructors who never fight or spar full force, but have "reputations" of being good, most of whom have never beaten a skilled opponent in their lives.

8- The same instructors who make brainwashed students believe that ineffective techniques are useful by demonstrating them at high force on the students while the students are complying.

Once again who cares, lets discuss techniqe not wether it's CMA or MMA that's just counter productive unless youre trolling.

If the rest of this thread is going to turn into a **** a fest well we might as well kill this thread now.

Knife give me a break, come up with knew material every time it's the same thing CMA is not effective, we should all beat the tar out of one another to prove we aren't gay.

Your comments on this forum toward CMA are not objective, there more subjective,, based on your personal interest and prejudices.

[Knifefighter]

... lets discuss techniqe

OK... here are just a few common ones:

1 The backfist- seen in many CMA styles... next to worthless as a fighting technique.

2. The "windmill" flailing arms techniques- seen in Hun Ga and other CMA styles.... very low percentage and will get most practitioners KO'ed against people who know effective and efficient striking techniques.

3. Most of that jumping around like a dying bug cr@p shown on the video clip on your website... again extremely low percentage and next to worthless.

[Green Cloud]

Forms are forms and fighting is fighting what does that have to do with the tech. that Chuck was throwing:rolleyes:

[Flying-Monkey]

OK... here are just a few common ones:

1 The backfist- seen in many CMA styles... next to worthless as a fighting technique.

2. The "windmill" flailing arms techniques- seen in Hun Ga and other CMA styles.... very low percentage and will get most practitioners KO'ed against people who know effective and efficient striking techniques.

3. Most of that jumping around like a dying bug cr@p shown on the video clip on your website... again extremely low percentage and next to worthless.

Talking snack about kung fu on a kung fu forum....

You have never went up against a true CMAist.

[Knifefighter]

Forms are forms and fighting is fighting
And therein lies one of the main differences between the majority of CMA and MMA. MMA leaves out the BS things that are unrelated to fighting, such as forms and standing holding stances.

[The Xia]

If you feel TCMA sucks, what are you doing on this forum?

[SevenStar]

The punch Chuck was throwing is not a sao choi, a Sow Choi is basicaly an extended hook. The punch that he was doing is called a Fon gok or a curved 45% downward punch. Or like you said before an over hand right.

That punch is done quite frequently in CLF but I've also seen Jhon Waine do it in the movies. Who cares what it's called if set up correctly it will knock a muther out.

an extended hook? I thought it struck with the forearm? Or are you referring to the trajectory.

As for the name - I agree. Like I said in the initial post, a punch is a punch. But if you ask chuck, he won't call it a fon guk. That is what prompted my response. He wasn't using good cma. He was using a good punch. period.

[SevenStar]

If you feel TCMA sucks, what are you doing on this forum?


1. Ming Yue

2. because we can be

3. because regardless of how we feel about cma, there is some interesting stuff here

4. we don't feel cma itself sucks, just that there is a lot of BS out there. several cma guys here feel the same way.

5. in my case, I was a a cross training CMA guy when I joined here 5 years ago.

6. I am a moderator, so it's my job to be here

7. I still get something of a kick seeing people use the " too deadly" thing when it comes to CMA.

8. it's great talking to the cma guys with experience who know better and consequently don't use the "too deadly" phrase.

9. the training forum here is awesome.

10. Ming Yue.

[SevenStar]

Talking snack about kung fu on a kung fu forum....

You have never went up against a true CMAist.


He used to train CMA... does that mean his teacher and whole school sucked?

[Knifefighter]

That punch is done quite frequently in CLF but I've also seen Jhon Waine do it in the movies.

And John Wayne punching someone in the movies has what to do with whether or not a technique is viable?

[SevenStar]

..........
Yes?

(10 character limit is annoying)


7. I still get something of a kick seeing people use the " too deadly" thing when it comes to CMA.

[Ben Gash]

And John Wayne punching someone in the movies has what to do with whether or not a technique is viable?

Now you're just being facetious. That wasn't the point of that statement as you are well aware. Stop playing at being an unpleasant little troll.
As for your assertion that backfists don't work, what a complete joke. I know several martial artists from different backgrounds who've ended fights with backfists of various descriptions.
As for the windmilling stuff, it works IN CONTEXT. If you stand there and windmill then you're going to get KTFOd, but if you use all of your combat skills and attributes effectively, closing, entering, bridging then it works perfectly well.

[Knifefighter]

As for your assertion that backfists don't work, what a complete joke. I know several martial artists from different backgrounds who've ended fights with backfists of various descriptions.
The only backfist that will even come close to ending a fight is a spinning backfist and that is still a very low percentage tech.

Without the spin added to it, a backfist is just about the weakest and most ineffective strike there is.


As for the windmilling stuff, it works IN CONTEXT.
"Windmilling" punches are almost as stupid, but at least they can generate power.

[bodhitree]

I've actually seen a lot of boxers (and do it myself) turn a missed jab into a backfist or hammerfist. It will land to get you the point, disorient your opponent and make them more vulnerable to more strikes, and makes them think you are faster than you really are. This doesn't look like a backfist, and isn't thrown from way back at the face (like I said it usually starts out as a jab)

[bodhitree]

Chuck is a great example of how unconventional striking can work. I personally don't think large circluar movements are good for striking, but my old tongbei sifu used to say you have to make things smaller when you are fighting, you exaderate the movement for practice purpose. The best way to see what can work is to practice hard and then to test it. I have tried to use some boxing combos that some swear by and don't land anything and I've made stuff up thats worked really good for me. Test everything then, yes I'll quote Bruce (as much as I don't think he's anything special)
"keep what is useful, dicard what is useless"

[sunfist]

Many moves you see now in kung fu were, back in the day, staple techniques of boxing. Much of what boxers do now was, back in the day, a core part of the kung fu curriculum. They resemble each other too much for one to be branded 'incorrect'.

Having said that, today the average boxer will make short work of the average kung fu player. Different demographics train the respective arts for different reasons, and theres nothing wrong with that. I myself feel kung fu is still very valid as a fighting art, I even feel that (gasp) it contains some material that has been lost in the more sportive arts. However, if you want to make your kung fu effective, you may want to consider sound investment in a pair of boxing gloves.

[Ben Gash]

My Backfist is easily as strong as my right cross.

[SevenStar]

I've actually seen a lot of boxers (and do it myself) turn a missed jab into a backfist or hammerfist. It will land to get you the point, disorient your opponent and make them more vulnerable to more strikes, and makes them think you are faster than you really are. This doesn't look like a backfist, and isn't thrown from way back at the face (like I said it usually starts out as a jab)

When have you seen a boxer backfist? the backfist has been illegal in boxing for years. These days, you may have seen a quick second jab after missing, but not a backfist.

[Yao Sing]

the backfist has been illegal in boxing for years.

Why is that?

[SevenStar]

my guess is because the glove has less padding back there. The majority of the padding is on the fist. the backfist is illegal, as is the pivot punch - a spinning backfist - and the bolo punch - which is a diagonal strike done with the bottom of the fist.

[Green Cloud]

an extended hook? I thought it struck with the forearm? Or are you referring to the trajectory.

As for the name - I agree. Like I said in the initial post, a punch is a punch. But if you ask chuck, he won't call it a fon guk. That is what prompted my response. He wasn't using good cma. He was using a good punch. period.

Yes I was referring to the trajectory. And did you ask Chuck where he picked it up or what it's called.

Maybe if you ever get to interview chuck that would be an interesting topic. Anyway I agree a good punch is a good punch I'm not disputing wether it's a CMA tech. I was only clarifying what it's called in CMA.

[SevenStar]

My Backfist is easily as strong as my right cross.

slower also, most likely. unless you are talking about a snapping backfist, in which case I'd call BS.

[Green Cloud]

The only backfist that will even come close to ending a fight is a spinning backfist and that is still a very low percentage tech.

Without the spin added to it, a backfist is just about the weakest and most ineffective strike there is.


"Windmilling" punches are almost as stupid, but at least they can generate power.

A back fist is just like a jab and meant as a distraction to set up a more powerfull tech.

As far as a spin backfist watch Spike TV Mat Serra gets nocked out by one in one of the clips from his past fights or should I say losses.

so much for the backfist argument.:D

[SevenStar]

A back fist is just like a jab and meant as a distraction to set up a more powerfull tech.

As far as a spin backfist watch Spike TV Mat Serra gets nocked out by one in one of the clips from his past fights or should I say losses.

so much for the backfist argument.:D


he said in his post that it sucked unless you add a spin to it... you just backed his argument.

Sonny liston was known for having a KO inducing jab, as have several other boxers. I don't know of anyone with a KO inducing snapping backfist, and any other variation would not be a set up...

[The Xia]

TCMA can be used without maiming or killing. We have San Shou. However, there are many things you cannot use. I used a Fu Jow as an example. Do you claim Fu Jow is useless?

[The Xia]

Did you miss this or are you ignoring the question?

If you feel TCMA sucks, what are you doing on this forum?

[SevenStar]

TCMA can be used without maiming or killing. We have San Shou. However, there are many things you cannot use. I used a Fu Jow as an example. Do you claim Fu Jow is useless?

actually, yes - initially. in order to have a claw strong enough to rip a tendon, how long does that take? To have the accuracy and presence of mind to do it in a fight, with heightened heart rate and adrenaline rushing, how long does that take? My guess is that no newbie could use it worth anything. palms and fists are great, but the actual claw wouldn't have much use beyond a rake to the eyes.

Later down the line, sure it may have use.

And that has nothing at all to do with the training methods, as I mentioned earlier. That is the main factor. the most conditioned hand on the planet does you no good if you can't use it. That issue though, I can't answer, as I don't know how the fu jow school that would be in question trained. You can't really just assume that fu jow is badass just because it's fu jow...

[WinterPalm]

In comparison to other striking arts, TCMA has an incredible variety of techniques and stand alone strikes. Many of them require/necessitate a set up of some sort or another that is based around position and superior leverage and vantage points. The bulk of what I understand thus far to be crucial is getting you into those positions to execute a superior strike/takedown. This is also important if you are unable to dictate the pace or position and find yourself losing it, that is when the odd angles and unconventional strikes (single knuckle, fu-jow, multi or single finger, etc) come into play. If you set up a good shot, regardless of a backfist or whatever, then you are going to place that advantage momentarily. A backfist can knock you out without a doubt but mechanics of yourself and your opponent, the angles, the set up, and the relative conditioning of yourself and the ability of your opponent to take a hit all come into play. A backfist can be a quick thing to the face to set something up, or a follow up that using a whipping strength to generate power.

I would never become close minded towards anything in a striking arsenal if it is based around sound mechanics/attribute deveopment and proper set-up. If I do not understand that technique that is one thing, but to dismiss it under the conditions lined out above, that is just silly.

I like Chuck Liddell simply because he uses a very weird/unconventional and unorthodox style that seems to work...that and the mohawk/moustache combo!
Any of you watch Anderson Silva. In terms of sport fighting I think he is probably the most technical and effective striker yet.

[SevenStar]

I don't disagree with anything you stated.

[WinterPalm]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnpUkneMSWE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0sirRdSLM0

Here's some interesting videos.

Enjoy.:D

[Ben Gash]

slower also, most likely. unless you are talking about a snapping backfist, in which case I'd call BS.

But in context speed is not necessarily the be all and end all. Timing is equally important, as are numerous other factors. Would I use a backfist in a situation where I'd use a right cross? No. I'd use backfists almost exclusively where I'd had to raise up or pull down my opponent's guard with my back hand, and where the dynamics of the situation would rob power from a lead arm straight.

[Green Cloud]

he said in his post that it sucked unless you add a spin to it... you just backed his argument.

Sonny liston was known for having a KO inducing jab, as have several other boxers. I don't know of anyone with a KO inducing snapping backfist, and any other variation would not be a set up...

Well thank you for clarifying that, I know my spelling is bad but I can read.

If you read my post I was just backing up the argument with an example and I also stated that the Back fist is used like a jab to set up another tech.

To say that the backfist is ulsess is an absurd statement, it's fuction is just like the jab and I have also seen people knocked out with it.

I guess it would be redundant for KF to rebuttle his statement since your answering for him, sometimes I get the feeling that you guys are the same guy:)

[SevenStar]

I guess it would be redundant for KF to rebuttle his statement since your answering for him, sometimes I get the feeling that you guys are the same guy:)


Did I forget to log off as SevenStar again? d@mmit.... :D

[The Xia]

actually, yes - initially. in order to have a claw strong enough to rip a tendon, how long does that take? To have the accuracy and presence of mind to do it in a fight, with heightened heart rate and adrenaline rushing, how long does that take? My guess is that no newbie could use it worth anything. palms and fists are great, but the actual claw wouldn't have much use beyond a rake to the eyes.

Later down the line, sure it may have use.

And that has nothing at all to do with the training methods, as I mentioned earlier. That is the main factor. the most conditioned hand on the planet does you no good if you can't use it.
It does have to do with training methods because a good fu jow is delivered by the most conditioned of hands as well as those with the skill to use it. The various hand-weapons in Kung Fu are also rather versatile. For example, you can grasp onto someone while throwing them instead of using the clothing. The thing about a newbie being not being able to use fu jow effectively can be said for almost technique. Someone that took a week of Muay Thai vs. someone who took a week of Hung Gar would be just as unlikely to use what he learned to fight. It also depends on the person. Some people will gain combat proficiency before others.

That issue though, I can't answer, as I don't know how the fu jow school that would be in question trained. You can't really just assume that fu jow is badass just because it's fu jow...
I was not referring to any particular style or school. Fu Jow is a common hand weapon in many styles.

[The Xia]

CMA is not effective, we should all beat the tar out of one another to prove we aren't gay.
LOL This pretty much sums up the sentiments of every TMA-bashing MMA-fanboy.

[SevenStar]

It does have to do with training methods because a good fu jow is delivered by the most conditioned of hands as well as those with the skill to use it. The various hand-weapons in Kung Fu are also rather versatile. For example, you can grasp onto someone while throwing them instead of using the clothing. The thing about a newbie being not being able to use fu jow effectively can be said for almost technique. Someone that took a week of Muay Thai vs. someone who took a week of Hung Gar would be just as unlikely to use what he learned to fight. It also depends on the person. Some people will gain combat proficiency before others.


you missed my point. like I said, a conditioned hand means squat if you can't use it. Not everyone who trains to conditions their hand trains to fight effectively. Many grappling styles teach you to grab the body instead of clothing, not just chinese styles. bjj features no gi grappling tournaments. Catch is done without a gi as well.

c'mon dude... I wasn't talking about a week. Take a 6 month boxer. Take a 6 month fu jow stylist.

1. I'd put any amount of money on the boxer.
2. how conditioned is his hand after 6 months, assuming that he IS good enough to use it.


I was not referring to any particular style or school. Fu Jow is a common hand weapon in many styles.

yeah, it is. When I see fu jow though, I think immediately of the style.

[David Jamieson]

knife, you're finger pointing at perceptions you hold and don't offer meat and potatoes about what is wrong with method.

you make a statement about alleged schools that do these things. In all honesty I have never encountered a kungfu school that does these things you mention and I am starting to wonder where they are.

is this a states thing? because I know there is a lot of cranks, whackos and looneys in almost every line of business imaginable down there. :P

see, that's my perception. and I expect someone to pipe in and say it aint so.

holding stances and forms is bad? why? why is it bad? what do you have to show that says it is detrimental to ones learning in a style of kungfu? specifically? I can tell you specifically what it has to do with kinesiological principles associated with the art being practiced. can you tell me specifically what is wrong?

[SevenStar]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnpUkneMSWE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0sirRdSLM0

Here's some interesting videos.

Enjoy.:D

that elbow KO was badass...

[Knifefighter]

Did you miss this or are you ignoring the question?
Doesn't matter why I post.

[Knifefighter]

Do you claim Fu Jow is useless?
Mostly. It's also a good way to expose your fingers and wrists for locks and breaks.

[Knifefighter]

knife, you're finger pointing at perceptions you hold and don't offer meat and potatoes about what is wrong with method.

you make a statement about alleged schools that do these things. In all honesty I have never encountered a kungfu school that does these things you mention and I am starting to wonder where they are.

Well, I'm guessing your school must do some of these things based on your misperceptions about injuries.

[Knifefighter]

A back fist is just like a jab and meant as a distraction to set up a more powerfull tech.

As far as a spin backfist watch Spike TV Mat Serra gets nocked out by one in one of the clips from his past fights or should I say losses.

so much for the backfist argument.:D

A jab sets up the more powerful rear hand. All a backfist sets up is a decrease in power for the rear hand.

[Knifefighter]

My Backfist is easily as strong as my right cross.
Considering the biomechanics of the human body predicate that power development from a cross will always have much more potential for power than a backfist, you must have one weak-a$$ cross.

[Knifefighter]

I've actually seen a lot of boxers (and do it myself) turn a missed jab into a backfist or hammerfist. It will land to get you the point, disorient your opponent and make them more vulnerable to more strikes, and makes them think you are faster than you really are. This doesn't look like a backfist, and isn't thrown from way back at the face (like I said it usually starts out as a jab)

The "backfist" you are talking about is not a backfist, it is more of a paw. It doesn't score points with the judges and it usually doesn't disorient the opponent. It is used to keep him from launching an offense on you when you miss your jab and can't follow it up with something better.

[Knifefighter]

holding stances and forms is bad? why? why is it bad? what do you have to show that says it is detrimental to ones learning in a style of kungfu? specifically? I can tell you specifically what it has to do with kinesiological principles associated with the art being practiced. can you tell me specifically what is wrong?

The basic training principle is known specific adaptations to applied demands, AKA specificity of training. In combination with Selye's General Adaptation Syndrome, it is the bedrock of all efficient training.

Unless your art is done holding an isometric stance while fighting, holding stances is pretty much worthless.

[Green Cloud]

A jab sets up the more powerful rear hand. All a backfist sets up is a decrease in power for the rear hand.

See that's the thing your idea of a backfist is based on the check and back fist from win chun.

When I throw a back fist (been choi) there is no recoil, it's coiled much like a spin back fist and then followed through with an over hand rt. If I do wip the backfist and recoil it that's just to distract the opponent and make him try to slip it while the same hand reverses the direction and is then turns into a hook.

Simply put a fake.

Not every MA tech. is designed for a knock out but to create options and illusions to decieve your oponent.

[Green Cloud]

The basic training principle is known specific adaptations to applied demands, AKA specificity of training. In combination with Selye's General Adaptation Syndrome, it is the bedrock of all efficient training.

Unless your art is done holding an isometric stance while fighting, holding stances is pretty much worthless.

Yes and no, stances are designed to develop endurance. Too much stance training without plyometrics and some impact training then you will lack stregth and power.

You have to train both fast twich muscles and the slow twich muscles. But any personal trainer can tell you that Dale.

As far as holding a stance and fighting who does that??? The more you talk about CMA the more I understand what a limmited understanding of CMA training you realy have.

But yet you are drawn to CMA like a moth to a flame aren't ya:D

[The Xia]

There is also stance training where you don't hold just one stance. You can shift stances, throw strikes, etc. You keep moving. That's good as is simply holding the stance. One of the many strong points of Kung Fu is that provides it a great variety of training methods.

[Green Cloud]

There is also stance training where you don't hold just one stance. You can shift stances, throw strikes, etc. You keep moving. That's good as is simply holding the stance. One of the many strong points of Kung Fu is that provides it a great variety of training methods.

That's right Xia, holding postures for long periods of time is only done with beginner students to develop endurance. Holding stances are done early in the training so that the student can memorize and develop proper techniqe.

In the old days stationary stance training was used for very practical reasons like,,, for punishment,,natural selection (to weed out the bad from the good students) and to develop stregnth and character.

Sure poke fun at stationary stance training all you want,, I've had the best of athletes try to hold a square horse for a few minutes and on many occasions the tears were flowing.

Personaly I don't know anyone that is a fan of stance training but it has it's porpous in building a strong foundation.

As I said this is done by beginers mostly than we move on to more active foot work.

As far as cross training with weights, cardio, or isometrics that's up to the indavidual. I'm sure in todays world of internet and media one would think that's part of the deal when training in any MA system.

[The Xia]

Mostly. It's also a good way to expose your fingers and wrists for locks and breaks.
If fu jow were useless why would styles such as Hung Gar use it so much? Historically, Hung Gar was used heavily by anti-Qing rebels. If you don't believe me, you can easily look it up. Look up the Hung Mun society (often spelled Hongmen), which, by the way, still exists. In general, TCMA was used by people who fought for life and death. Do you really think that these fighters had the luxury of practicing useless arts with ineffective techniques?

[Green Cloud]

For some reason open handed techniques and eye gougeing is illegal in the UFC,, I guess that's because their inaffective:rolleyes:

[Ben Gash]

Considering the biomechanics of the human body predicate that power development from a cross will always have much more potential for power than a backfist, you must have one weak-a$$ cross.

I will guarantee that my right cross is stronger than yours (largely due to me being twice the size of you), but my backfist is strong because of all that time I waste on developing my body mechanics :rolleyes:
Your ignorant comments about tiger claws betray the fact that you have no idea whatsoever of correct usage of this technique, and are just talking out of your a$$. How is a tiger claw any more vulnerable than any other grab? The claw should not be deployed until you've hit them with the palm. Let's ask Bas if palms are ineffective and vulnerable? No? And once you've grabbed it's to all intents and purposes a high pressure grab.

[Knifefighter]

If fu jow were useless why would styles such as Hung Gar use it so much? Historically, Hung Gar was used heavily by anti-Qing rebels. In general, TCMA was used by people who fought for life and death.

People who fought for life and death have pretty much always used weapons. The fact CMA practitioners think that these rebels fought emtpty-handed using their "windmill" techniques is just another glaring example of CMA brainwashing.

[Knifefighter]

I will guarantee that my right cross is stronger than yours ,
If it is a powerful as your backfist, I guarantee it isn't


but my backfist is strong because of all that time I waste on developing my body mechanics
If you really were spending your time developing proper body mechanics, your cross would be much more powerful than your backfist.

[Knifefighter]

That's right Xia, holding postures for long periods of time is only done with beginner students to develop endurance. Holding stances are done early in the training so that the student can memorize and develop proper techniqe..
Holding a stationary stance does nothing for fighting technique and there are much more effective and efficient ways for developing endurance.


In the old days stationary stance training was used for very practical reasons like,,, for punishment,,natural selection (to weed out the bad from the good students) and to develop stregnth and character.
And just another example of holding on the the "old ways" at the expense of better methods.


Sure poke fun at stationary stance training all you want,, I've had the best of athletes try to hold a square horse for a few minutes and on many occasions the tears were flowing.
Ballerinas can do the same thing on their toes for extended periods of time that would leave just about any fighter falling on the floor with agony. Doesn't mean ballerinas have any fighting ability though.

[Knifefighter]

You have to train both fast twich muscles and the slow twich muscles. But any personal trainer can tell you that
Actually, a qualified strength and conditioning specialist will know that you train the specific energy systems and movement patterns that are specific to the activity you are training for. Training the wrong ones are counterproductive to maximal performance.


As far as holding a stance and fighting who does that???
My point exactly. That is one of the reasons holding stances is a waste of time if your goal is to be able to fight.

[Yao Sing]

Guys like Knifefighter seem to be of the opinion that practice should ONLY include direct fighting movements. IOW, don't skip rope because you don't hop around like that when fighting.

I don't know how common that belief is in the MMA world but you'll notice on TUF the fighters are hopping with feet together over and on top of blocks. That just tells me that beliefs like KF's are not held by the serious professional MMA fighters.

[David Jamieson]

knife- you're typing stuff out, but you're not realy saying anything.

by your logic, weightlifting is bad for boxers. :rolleyes:

augmentation training is just that.

people who say train like you fight haven't a clue how to train properly.

That fight part is part of training. It's called sparring. The training that builds attributes in a fighter have little to do with actual tactics employed.

so, holding stance with correct structure physically strengthens tendon at the joint. the strongest part of a chain is it's weakest link. Correct stance training is an efficient and worthwhile way of building strength at your most vulnerable attack points. Neglect of it leads to injury.

You say I have a misconception on injury? whatever knife, I got my share of battlescars like anyone else who has any real intention in their kungfu.

I use gear head, gloves, mouthpiece, cup, shins. this allows for full blast, but even then, full blast doesn't often come out in sparring because we want to continue to spar and to train and to not have to forgo this aspect due to downtime from injury.

not to mention, injury can come from any number of things like a bad stretch or a sloppy punch on a heavy bag.

the fundamental aspects of tcma training build strength and co-ordination in a person, the fighting aspects come later.

there is nothing new under the sun and a bunch of new age sports ideas and rehashing and co-opting of older stuff and changing teh terminology to suit those who can;t get past the poetic aspects of information exchange as found in tcma changes nothing.

man, i don't know where you get this stuff knife. lol. and then to diminish others and coming across as such a stubborn pig headed individual doesn't win any points in your side of the ring if ya get my inference.

is there some useful stuff in modern approach? you bet.

I'm just kinda tired that because there are one or two schools out there that are total bull****, everyone goes off on them as "the" models of what tcma is. such hogwash really and nothing more than insecurity with ones own ability, or just typical armchair vaniloquence if you ask me.

anyway, you still haven't said what is wrong with stance training and forms.

[Yao Sing]

Ben Gash
In the MMA fanboy world their techniques ALWAYS work while your ALWAYS fail so your fu jow attempt would result in crippled fingers.

They will tell you if you try 'X' type of punch while in their guard they'll just armbar you with the assumption that they can successfully counter anything you do. Seems the only ones immune to this are other MMA fighters.

[Nick Forrer]

See that's the thing your idea of a backfist is based on the check and back fist from win chun.



There is no back fist in wing chun..a back fist has the elbow out, the power coming from the local muscles in the arm (the tricep)...we always hit with the elbow down to get a connection with our stance....Anyone doing a backfist and calling it wing chun has poor WC body mechanics.....there is only one punch in WC which can be used from different angles and in different positions...this is why we use the huen sau action so much in SLT...to develop a supple wrist allowing us to hit when the arm is already extended without first having to withdraw the arm (I forget the chinese name for this but it translates as 'developing power from a long bridge').

Its annoying to have to correct popular misconceptions about wing chun...still this is the price you pay for commercialisation i guess

[Knifefighter]

Guys like Knifefighter seem to be of the opinion that practice should ONLY include direct fighting movements. IOW, don't skip rope because you don't hop around like that when fighting.

I don't know how common that belief is in the MMA world but you'll notice on TUF the fighters are hopping with feet together over and on top of blocks.

Overload principles during conditioning often require that the exact movements are somewhat different than the specific ones that are being trained for. However, the movements should still be as close as possible to the ones of the activity. Additionally, one should always attempt to train the specific energy systems to be used.

And, yes, there are more efficient ways to train fighting endurance than skipping rope.


That just tells me that beliefs like KF's are not held by the serious professional MMA fighters.
MMA is still in its infancy. There are still some less than efficient training techniques being used . MMA does not have the means to support the level of training expertise that high budget sports such as the NBA and NFL do. Coaches in the latter sports know that you don't want your athletes spending limited training resources working on movement patterns and energy systems that are not specific to the activity.

[Yao Sing]

I've refferred to the TUF TV series a few times because I've never trained MMA and never even watched a class so my insight comes from the show.

You'll notice on the show they spar light and work on movement and position. They don't bash each other attempting to practice 'like real'.

They also workout doing things like pushups with one hand on a ball and alternating hands. Hopping with feet together over blocks. Actions that aren't found in a real fight.

This training is coming from top level fighters and trainers. These are the guys that peeps like KF aspire to be yet he bashes their training methods.

I mention Chuck Liddel teaching them how to use a cop choy which, regardless of what he calls it or where he learned it, is a CMA technique. Seems like Chuck like to use "swinging arms".

So why do we argue with someone who clearly is not knowledgeable about the subject and is probably just here to ruffle feathers.

[Knifefighter]

There is no back fist in wing chun.
Yeah, WC has its own version of inefficient striking.

[Knifefighter]

I've refferred to the TUF TV series a few times because I've never trained MMA and never even watched a class so my insight comes from the show.
Nuff said.


You'll notice on the show they spar light and work on movement and position.
Movement patterns that are specific to the activity.



They don't bash each other attempting to practice 'like real'.
Much of their practice is sparring close to "for real". Additionally, like Muay Thai fighters, their "for real" time also comes from their matches, something one doesn't get if he doesn't compete.



They also workout doing things like pushups with one hand on a ball and alternating hands. Hopping with feet together over blocks. Actions that aren't found in a real fight.
These are overload plyometric conditioning drills. Ideally, you make these movements as closes to the real ones as possible. Often the overload requires that you change the movement patterns somewhat.


This training is coming from top level fighters and trainers. These are the guys that peeps like KF aspire to be yet he bashes their training methods.
Top level fighters, yes.
Top level trainers, not necessarily.
Top level trainers have at least a four year degree in an exercise science related field and have certifications from nationally recognized organizations such as the American College of Sports Medicine or National Strength and Conditioning Association. These are the types of trainers hired by high budget sports such as the NFL and NBA.

[Nick Forrer]

Yeah, WC has its own version of inefficient striking.

Wow, you're really on a mission to troll today. Slow day at work?

[Knifefighter]

by your logic, weightlifting is bad for boxers.
Weightlifting is great for boxers, as long as you follow the principles I have been outlining. Do it wrong and its almost as bad as stance training.
Performing isolation preacher curls will be a very inefficient training method for boxers.
On the other hand, multi-joint explosive power lifts are great.




people who say train like you fight haven't a clue how to train properly.
People who think you train significantly differently than you fight don't have a clue.




so, holding stance with correct structure physically strengthens tendon at the joint.
Muscle and tendon are strengthened together. You cannot strenthen one without strengtening the other. Activities such as weight training are much more effective at developing strength of the tendons and muscles.



Correct stance training is an efficient and worthwhile way of building strength at your most vulnerable attack points. Neglect of it leads to injury.
Stance training is a very inefficient method of preventing injury.



the fundamental aspects of tcma training build strength and co-ordination in a person, the fighting aspects come later.
And that is one of the things that makes it inefficient.



anyway, you still haven't said what is wrong with stance training and forms.
Stance training develops almost none of the attributes needed for fighting.
Most forms have movements that can never be performed in a real fight. They are also done in set patterns which will almost never be done in the same order during a real fight.

[SevenStar]

Yes and no, stances are designed to develop endurance. Too much stance training without plyometrics and some impact training then you will lack stregth and power.

You have to train both fast twich muscles and the slow twich muscles. But any personal trainer can tell you that Dale.


Any personal trainer can, but not any MA teacher. I know way too many instructors who give bad training advice.

[SevenStar]

One of the many strong points of Kung Fu is that provides it a great variety of training methods.


Don't all styles?

[Yao Sing]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yao Sing View Post
I've refferred to the TUF TV series a few times because I've never trained MMA and never even watched a class so my insight comes from the show.


Nuff said.

Here's another rebuttal that's totally played out. Claiming someone can't make a judgement unless they spend time training that particular style.

If that were the case then why aren't the UFC judges UFC fighters?

Get real. If I go down the to local MMA club and watch a few classes I'll see exactly what and how they train. I don't need to sign up, I have eyes and a brain.

The TUF series is reality TV. Pete Spratt didn't puke because it was in the script. That's how they train for a top level match. That fact that you don't is probably the reason you aren't at their level. Get over it.

You remind me of a classmate in 5th grade. He ran around the playground with his head tilted back so the air would shoot into his nostrils. Technically that would be the optimum but you don't see Olympic runners do that do you?

[SevenStar]

I mention Chuck Liddel teaching them how to use a cop choy which, regardless of what he calls it or where he learned it, is a CMA technique. Seems like Chuck like to use "swinging arms".

and that's my point. It's not solely a cma technique. It's a boxing technique. it's a muay thai technique. it's seen in russan styles from what someone said earlier... it's semantical really, but something I see a lot of in CMA guys. You don't see the boxers screaming "wow, he taught an overhand right - who says boxing isn't effective?" but the CMA guys love to try and find anything resembling their techniques in the media. A while back, there was even a thread because someone saw wing chun techniques in the star wars animated series!!! It's ridiculous.


So why do we argue with someone who clearly is not knowledgeable about the subject and is probably just here to ruffle feathers.

surely that wasn't directed at me...

[SevenStar]

Here's another rebuttal that's totally played out. Claiming someone can't make a judgement unless they spend time training that particular style.

can you tell a fireman how to put out a fire? would you be more qualified than the fireman even though you are not one? that one is common sense. It's not played out at all. you can't make a judgement about mma from watching it on tv anymore than I could make one about tai tzu, as I've never trained it. Naturally, that doesn't stop you from having observtions, but since you aren't speaking from experience, then how educated would the observations be. In the case of KF and I, we have had CMA training, albeit not the same style as you, most likely.


If that were the case then why aren't the UFC judges UFC fighters?

I actually know a guy who has judged several UFCs. He has full contact fighting experience and teaches bjj. I'd imagine all of the other judges have some similar frame of reference. MMA may not have been around when some of the judges were training in what they train. How many football commentators never played football at some point?


Get real. If I go down the to local MMA club and watch a few classes I'll see exactly what and how they train. I don't need to sign up, I have eyes and a brain.

I bet the TMA who entered the early mma matches thought the same thing. But you're probably right. Heck, I learned iron palm by spying on the higher ranks training after class - I peeked through the window for months and tried it on my own at home...I combined that knowledge with what I learned from watching bugs fight.

[David Jamieson]

Weightlifting is great for boxers, as long as you follow the principles I have been outlining. Do it wrong and its almost as bad as stance training.
Performing isolation preacher curls will be a very inefficient training method for boxers.
On the other hand, multi-joint explosive power lifts are great.

the point was that augmentation training shouldn't be regarded as tactics development. It is attribute development. stance training develops the attribute of strength and root as well as leading to proper footing and grounding, which is part and parcel.





People who think you train significantly differently than you fight don't have a clue. so what is it then? no weights? no bag work? nothing that doesn't directly translate to hitting one another?





Muscle and tendon are strengthened together. You cannot strenthen one without strengtening the other. Activities such as weight training are much more effective at developing strength of the tendons and muscles. weight training can also strees the joints and can in fact weaken the joints when done improperly. There are many examples of improper weight training. probably moreso than incorrect cma training.




Stance training is a very inefficient method of preventing injury. This is not the primary focus, but nevertheless, i disagree. weight lifting is inefficient to preventuing injury, what's your point?




And that is one of the things that makes it inefficient. again, empty words with nothing factual to back it up despite the reems of information to the contrary that has been shown again and again for a very long time.




Stance training develops almost none of the attributes needed for fighting.
Most forms have movements that can never be performed in a real fight. They are also done in set patterns which will almost never be done in the same order during a real fight.

text book forms are text book. adaptation of techniques to fit the situation is next step from empty pattern. empty pattern becomes filled with jins and ultimately is extrapolated and translaes directly to fighting. think multiple drills strung into a longer drill. You are quite incorrect in your assumption here.

[SevenStar]

Ben Gash
In the MMA fanboy world their techniques ALWAYS work while your ALWAYS fail so your fu jow attempt would result in crippled fingers.

not true. punches miss all the time. somethings pose more of a danger when missed though, for example you try to gouge my eye, my head moves and you ram your fingers into my forehead. crap happens, regardless of style. We are just realistic enough to not just take everything at face value.


They will tell you if you try 'X' type of punch while in their guard they'll just armbar you with the assumption that they can successfully counter anything you do. Seems the only ones immune to this are other MMA fighters.

No, we won't. We will say If you claim it can work, come show us.

[David Jamieson]

"fan boys" of anything are generally in the category of nothing to contribute.

what mma has brought to the front is intentful application of martial arts in a format that hasn't been seen in a while. It has also cross bred a lot of arts and has in and of itself become a whole new sport.

it's a major modern day contribution to martial arts, there is no denying that.

there are poor attitudes on both sides of the argument because of the failure to realize that there are no sides. It is all dealing with martiality. period.

[SevenStar]

For some reason open handed techniques and eye gougeing is illegal in the UFC,, I guess that's because their inaffective:rolleyes:


actually....

In the first UFCs and many other venues, it was admissable. you would get a fine, but if your opponent couldn't continue, you still won the fight. It is now illegal because EVENTUALLY, a guy got eyegouged and blinded. BUT the blinded guy went on to win the fight, and I believe the one after that, so he is now blind for nothing, as his opponent didn't stop him with his eye gouge.

[SevenStar]

"fan boys" of anything are generally in the category of nothing to contribute.


I know, but he keeps throwing the term around.



there are poor attitudes on both sides of the argument because of the failure to realize that there are no sides. It is all dealing with martiality. period.

agreed.

[Yao Sing]

Sevenstar, that comment wasn't directed at you unless you feel it fits you for some reason. And yes, that punch is not unknown to other styles. I pointed it out to counter the claim that CMA techs are useless in the ring yet THE top MMA ring fighter is seen teaching what is essentially (but not exclusively) a CMA tech.

Your arguments are getting silly. So now a potential student can't just sit in on a class to see if it's what they want, they have to actually train in it for a given amount of time before they can make judgement on it?

Are you saying the training on TUF is not representative of MMA training? Considering that it's good enough for potential and possibly future MMA champs I would think that any serious MMA school should be doing similar.

Besides, I'm not making a judgement on the effectivness of MMA, I making a judgement on the training aspects which are clearly displayed on the show. The fact that some of these guys are hanging with the big boys in the ring speaks to it's effectiveness regardless of what KF says about it. He's wrong and your just trying to spin it in his favor.

So with your analogy, I'm not telling a firefighter how to put out a fire. I'm telling him how I saw top notch successful firefighters training to put out fires that conflicts with his view of how to do it. And considering they're much better than he is I feel they are right and he is wrong.

[Yao Sing]

For the record I'll take Chuck Lidddel's claim that a swinging arm (windmill) overhand right is effective and will knock someone out over Knifighters claim that "windmill" techniques are useless.

And your arguement amount the more experienced person being the better judge supports my belief.

[SevenStar]

If fu jow were useless why would styles such as Hung Gar use it so much? Historically, Hung Gar was used heavily by anti-Qing rebels. If you don't believe me, you can easily look it up. Look up the Hung Mun society (often spelled Hongmen), which, by the way, still exists. In general, TCMA was used by people who fought for life and death. Do you really think that these fighters had the luxury of practicing useless arts with ineffective techniques?

1. battlefield fighting was done primarily with weapons.

2. you never saw these fighters, and this occured WAY before we were even thought of. Consequently, you have no idea how good these fighters were or were not. Today, we tend to have an overly romanticized view of what the ancient warriors and masters were like.

3. you can't use fighting done hundreds of years ago to solidify your argument now. And besides, when you HAVE to fight, you use what you have. hungar was what these guys had. xingyi and shuai chiao was what some of the royal guards had. big deal.

4. even if using these old battles was plausible, they trained in a different era and with a different mindset than you. What you are doing is completely different from what they were doing.

5. assume I do think kung fu is useless. If two armies are battling in china and BOTH know kung fu, somebody has to win, right? would that make their style any less useless? No. It just means that they sucked the least on that day.

[Yao Sing]

not true. punches miss all the time. somethings pose more of a danger when missed though, for example you try to gouge my eye, my head moves and you ram your fingers into my forehead. crap happens, regardless of style. We are just realistic enough to not just take everything at face value.



No, we won't. We will say If you claim it can work, come show us.

Sorry, you missed the point. What I was talking about is the verbal sparring that goes on. I've seen many comments from MMA types where they dismiss anything thats said by saying "your just giving me an arm to trap" etc.

For instance, you can't say that I can't eye gouge you. You can say you've practiced the defense and fell confidant you can defend. But there no guarantee.

Now before you say that's true and nobody is saying that the reason I bring it up is because others in the past have said that. There have been discussion where anything you say the MMA guy says "I'll just choke you out" as if there's no chance you could ever hurt them.

See, in thier magical world their tech is flawless and a CMA guy could never do any damage.

These are the loonies I'm talking about. If you want to lump yourself in with them then fine but I think you're more levelheaded then that.

BTW, I believe KF is one of those loonies.

[David Jamieson]

I gotta agree.

the here and now is what is most important when it comes to martial training.
what came before has value and serves as a point of notice, but in actuality, to use the argument that so and so a few hundred years ago could do this ergo what i do right now is valid is faulty.

it would be like attrributing the skills you ahve devloped through hard work entirely to someone else. afterall you did the work and it is good to recognize the source, but ultimately, you stand alone as the model of what youare doing and whether or not it is valid or not.

to much deferance is an error. defer to the living models when necessary, and the rest is all you.

you are given an empty vessel. It is your sweat and work that msut fill the vessel to give it value.

would you fill it with dung? or would you fill it with ambrosia? that's up to you.

battle field tactics of an age gone by are irrelevant to the whole topic.
also, what works for one, may or may not work for another. hence you see so many who are quitre unorthodox in their approach to fighting. some like high mobility, others consider that a waste of energy and devote more time to eating it so they can get to range and make the big ones count.

time passes as do fighters, and it is rare that you will see fighters compared to each other in the sense of "he fights like dempsey" or "he fights like ali". Everyone has attributes. Some are weaker than others, but we must capitalize on our strengths and spend time devloping our weaknesses into strengths. In the meantime, continue to capitalize on what works and you'll find your kungfu right were it's always been. In your own hands.

[SevenStar]

Sevenstar, that comment wasn't directed at you unless you feel it fits you for some reason. And yes, that punch is not unknown to other styles. I pointed it out to counter the claim that CMA techs are useless in the ring yet THE top MMA ring fighter is seen teaching what is essentially (but not exclusively) a CMA tech.

like I said at the beginning though, we weren't saying cma TECHNIQUES were useless - some of the cma training methods leave something to be desired. that's completely different. However, I'd venture to say that all styles


Your arguments are getting silly. So now a potential student can't just sit in on a class to see if it's what they want, they have to actually train in it for a given amount of time before they can make judgement on it?

to judge whether they like it or not, sure they can. To judge anything beyond that, from training effectiveness to How well you can use your training to defend against their techniques, no, you cannot.


Besides, I'm not making a judgement on the effectivness of MMA, I making a judgement on the training aspects which are clearly displayed on the show. The fact that some of these guys are hanging with the big boys in the ring speaks to it's effectiveness regardless of what KF says about it. He's wrong and your just trying to spin it in his favor.

training in mma, like training in other styles will vary from trainer to trainer...I'm not trying to spin anything anywhere - I'm actually neutral. Heck, when shammy was coaching, he neglected the groundwork aspect, and we all know that's a mistake.

[Yao Sing]

I'd like to take a moment to clarify the 'fanboy' moniker.

To me, a fanboy is someone at the extreme end that has beliefs way beyond what most consider normal. Almost religeous.

The CMA fanboy is the guy that thinks he's a Shaolin monk and believes in Chi blasts and no contact knockouts.

The guy that thinks the old masters were untouchable and forms are something holy and contain vast wisdom on all aspects of fighting.

They usually worship all things Shaolin.

The MMA fanboy is the guy the believes anything traditional is automatically useless and anything not directly related to actual fighting is a waste of time (one has to wonder what they think about diet and nutrition, maybe they live on protein shakes and Xience supplements).

The guy that thinks everyone elses techniques are useless and if you tried them on him he would just choke you out.

They usually worship all things Gracie.

Now if anyone wants to defend these types, or feels they fit into these groups, then go for it but expect to be called on it.

Personally I'm into CMA but very interested in MMA and all types of fighting. What I don't care much for are fanboys of any type.

[Knifefighter]

For the record I'll take Chuck Lidddel's claim that a swinging arm (windmill) overhand right is effective and will knock someone out over Knifighters claim that "windmill" techniques are useless.
Chuck was showing an isolated overhand rear hand technique... he is in no way advocating the overall "windmill approach" (nor will you see him attempting to fight that way in his matches) advocated by some CMA styles.

[Yao Sing]

BTW, Sevenstar, I think you speak for a smaller number of regular guys. Why you jump to defend the fanboys is beyond me but your comments don't really address the fanboy claims.

Actually I meant the broader group of MMA guys while the fanboys are a small but vocal group. Doing too many things at once to get any of them right.

[Knifefighter]

The fact that some of these guys are hanging with the big boys in the ring speaks to it's effectiveness regardless of what KF says about it. He's wrong and your just trying to spin it in his favor.

Not saying it isn't effective.
It is very effective and is light years ahead of the majority of CMA training.

However, that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement. It will evolve and become better and more efficient, just as pro sports' teams programs have evolved as those sports have matured and have had more resources to devote to training their athletes.

[Knifefighter]

So with your analogy, I'm not telling a firefighter how to put out a fire. I'm telling him how I saw top notch successful firefighters training to put out fires that conflicts with his view of how to do it. And considering they're much better than he is I feel they are right and he is wrong.

Compared to what is actually out there in terms of the overall picture of performance and conditioning, what you saw was the equivalent of volunteer firefighters training to put out fires.
Professional, full-time, large metropolitan fire departments would have a more sophistated training methodology.

[Yao Sing]

Chuck was showing an isolated overhand rear hand technique... he is in no way advocating the overall "windmill approach" (nor will you see him attempting to fight that way in his matches) advocated by some CMA styles.

True, it was just a piece of the windmill pie. The windmill approach would be something like a gwa choy to open things up followed by a cop choy (overhand rear hand). He din't suggest what to use to lead it so why is a gwa choy so wrong? What would you lead with and if you think a gwa choy is a poor choice explain why.


Not saying it isn't effective.
It is very effective and is light years ahead of the majority of CMA training.

However, that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement. It will evolve and become better and more efficient, just as pro sports' teams programs have evolved as those sports have matured and have had more resources to devote to training their athletes.

So you think they need to step up to your style of training? Are you that far ahead of them? If so then why don't you compete in the UFC or train someone for the UFC?

In the words of MMA show me. Put your superior knowledge and training techniques on the line and win the UFC title.

[Knifefighter]

Technically that would be the optimum but you don't see Olympic runners do that do you?
No that wouldn't be the optimum because insufficient oxygen is not the limiting factor in running performance. Your thinking that is the case is the same as you trying to analyze their training techniques without the proper background.

[Knifefighter]

root as well as leading to proper footing and grounding, which is part and parcel.
There are much better ways to do this... the wrestling practice seen in any college program is an example of this.




so what is it then? no weights? no bag work? nothing that doesn't directly translate to hitting one another?
These should be included and the movements should be as close to possible as the movements to be used in the activity. At the same time, the specific energy systems should be trained.





weight training can also strees the joints and can in fact weaken the joints when done improperly.
Progressive resistance training is the most effective method for increasing strength and power.
Anything done incorrectly can cause injury.




weight lifting is inefficient to preventuing injury, what's your point?
Progressive resistance training is the most effective method for preventing injuries. That is why it is used in most pro and college level "prehabilitation" programs.




again, empty words with nothing factual to back it up despite the reems of information to the contrary that has been shown again and again for a very long time.
"...reems of information..." = heresay.





text book forms are text book. adaptation of techniques to fit the situation is next step from empty pattern. empty pattern becomes filled with jins and ultimately is extrapolated and translaes directly to fighting. think multiple drills strung into a longer drill. You are quite incorrect in your assumption here.
Text book forms are pure theory. Reality is quite another matter, however.

[Yao Sing]

See, this is my point about the MMA fanboys. No matter what they're right and you're wrong.

My style has windmill moves. Like I said, basically a gwa choy - cop choy or a gwa choy - pec choy (differences in hand formation). It's established that the cop choy (you don't mind me using CMA terminology, considering this is a CMA forum, do you?) is effective but of course a long looping punch really needs a setup. So does the setup move need to be non-CMA?

I guess because the MMA fanboys feel the gwa choy is ineffective that invalidates the whole thing.

The cop choy by itself works.

The cop choy preceeded by a gwa choy doesn't work.

I'm guessing the cop choy preceeded by anything Muy Thai would again work.

I'm having trouble following this weird logic that seems to only exist in MMA bizzarro world.

[Yao Sing]

No that wouldn't be the optimum because insufficient oxygen is not the limiting factor in running performance. Your thinking that is the case is the same as you trying to analyze their training techniques without the proper background.

Sorry, I meant optimum air induction.

So, are you now going to claim that hood scoops on funny cars is useless?

I say the sky is blue.















C'mon, waiting for the argument. Let's hear it.

[Knifefighter]

So you think they need to step up to your style of training? Are you that far ahead of them?

It's not "my" style of training. It is the style of training that the majority of professionals with a background in exercise science and sports conditioning would use. These are the same principles used by professional and collegiate athletic programs that have multi-million dollar budgets.



If so then why don't you compete in the UFC or train someone for the UFC?
MMA trainers don't really make much money and I already have two businesses to focus on.


Put your superior knowledge and training techniques on the line and win the UFC title.
Right now I compete primarily in BJJ and submission grappling and my training techniques serve me pretty well in those arenas.

[Knifefighter]

BTW, Sevenstar, I think you speak for a smaller number of regular guys. Why you jump to defend the fanboys is beyond me but your comments don't really address the fanboy claims.

Actually I meant the broader group of MMA guys while the fanboys are a small but vocal group.

LOL @ calling me a fanboy when I am offering critiques of the MMA training methodology and you are busy defending it.

[Knifefighter]

Sorry, I meant optimum air induction.

So, are you now going to claim that hood scoops on funny cars is useless?.
Human performance is completely different than auto racing. Oxygen intake is almost never the limiting factor in human performance, especially at sea level. The limiting factors are CO2 and lactic acid buildup. Neither of these will be improved by "inducting" more air. Once again you are proving that your analyses are based on lack of knowledge.

[Yao Sing]

Compared to what is actually out there in terms of the overall picture of performance and conditioning, what you saw was the equivalent of volunteer firefighters training to put out fires.
Professional, full-time, large metropolitan fire departments would have a more sophistated training methodology.

Somehow I missed this one. So, you're saying that the training on TUF is small potatos even though they bring in the best fighters in the world to coach and train them?

Tell me, why would these coaches not give them the best? Are they afraid someday they'll have to fight them so they want them to be lousy?

You seem to have a lot of negatives to say about the top peeps in your martial hobby. When are you going to show them all what you've got?

Maybe call Chuck or Tito and give them a few pointers on what they're doing wrong.

[Knifefighter]

It's established that the cop choy (you don't mind me using CMA terminology, considering this is a CMA forum, do you?) is effective but of course a long looping punch really needs a setup.

Actually, it's not proven to be effective as a high percentage move at all. It is rare to see that actaully land and do damage.

Let me make the same offer to you that you made to me. If you think the "windmill" approach is effective, start using it in MMA competitions... then get back to me with the results.

[Yao Sing]

Human performance is completely different than auto racing. Oxygen intake is almost never the limiting factor in human performance, especially at sea level. The limiting factors are CO2 and lactic acid buildup. Neither of these will be improved by "inducting" more air. Once again you are proving that your analyses are based on lack of knowledge.

Nice comment. Too bad we aren't talking about limiting factors. We're talking about optimal air induction.

Maybe if you could focus a little and make comments that actaully pertain to what you are responding to you look a little less silly.

[Knifefighter]

Somehow I missed this one. So, you're saying that the training on TUF is small potatos even though they bring in the best fighters in the world to coach and train them?

Exactly, the budget for TUF is small potatoes compared to a professional NBA, NFL, or NHL team. These teams employ a large staff of coaches, trainers, and conditioning specialists. The TUF teams have a staff of three or four. A professional sport team's equipment budget alone would probably dwarf the entire TUF budget.

[Knifefighter]

Nice comment. Too bad we aren't talking about limiting factors. We're talking about optimal air induction.

Optimal air induction is already achieved by normal breathing.

As far as limiting factors, these are the things you try to improve with any type of conditioning and training.

Once again, your lack of knowledge in things related to human perfromance is showing.

[The Xia]

People who fought for life and death have pretty much always used weapons. The fact CMA practitioners think that these rebels fought emtpty-handed using their "windmill" techniques is just another glaring example of CMA brainwashing.
Weapon combat as well as hand-to-hand combat was commonplace. Look into Leitai if you don't believe that hand-to-hand combat was used.

[Yao Sing]

Exactly, the budget for TUF is small potatoes compared to a professional NBA, NFL, or NHL team. These teams employ a large staff of coaches, trainers, and conditioning specialists. The TUF teams have a staff of three or four. A professional sport team's equipment budget alone would probably dwarf the entire TUF budget.

Huh? How did the NBA get involved in this? I thought we were talking about MMA. Is the NBA fighting full contact on the court now?

Dude, you can't even keep a conversation straight.

I must say, you've got your trolling down to a science. You're right up there with Neil and Ego_Extrodinaire (probably the same person).

[Yao Sing]

Weapon combat as well as hand-to-hand combat was commonplace. Look into Leitai if you don't believe that hand-to-hand combat was used.

I'm sure there were plenty of times where a weapon was dropped, broken or out of reach. Don't go upsetting his fantasy with reality.

[The Xia]

Doesn't matter why I post.
Alright, no need to say it. It’s easy to figure out why you post here anyway.

[The Xia]

I'm sure there were plenty of times where a weapon was dropped, broken or out of reach. Don't go upsetting his fantasy with reality.
There are plenty of instances of hand-to-hand combat being used by Kung Fu fighters in old China. Kung Fu fighters were tough guys that trained hard. All you need to do is read and everything I say will be confirmed. I don't think Knifefighter is willing to do that though.

[SevenStar]

There are plenty of instances of hand-to-hand combat being used by Kung Fu fighters in old China. Kung Fu fighters were tough guys that trained hard. All you need to do is read and everything I say will be confirmed. I don't think Knifefighter is willing to do that though.

like I said earlier, you really can't compare warfare and training of yesteryear to now and use it to validate cma. Also, as I stated, you really have no clue what fighters in old china were like. Need I even mention the fight between the white crane master and the founder of wu style taiji?

[Green Cloud]

like I said earlier, you really can't compare warfare and training of yesteryear to now and use it to validate cma. Also, as I stated, you really have no clue what fighters in old china were like. Need I even mention the fight between the white crane master and the founder of wu style taiji?

Youre right about today and yesrteryear, as far as the two old ****s in the ring they may have been masters in kung fu but back then these guys smoked a carton a day and they didn't train for optimal health or performance. Kung Fu was used to save ones life.

Once again that video was very old and we realy don't know the extend of damage that these guys sustained.

If you watched boxing vids from that erra it wasn't too impresive either so that wasn't a good example.

What you guys don't know is that the fight may have ended in a draw but the tai chi guy knocked the white crane guys teeth out with an open palm tech.

[SevenStar]

there was plenty of awesome boxing during that time period.

[Green Cloud]

but they weren't in their 50's when they fought.

[The Xia]

The styles of old are passed on to us. It is up to us to respect the lineage and train hard. Sure, many sifus modify their curriculum, but this is nothing new. It doesn’t become a problem unless the material is watered down. However, some styles are passed down unmodified. Hskwarrior stated that the teachings passed on to him from the Lau Bun lineage were the same as the Fotshan Hung Sing Kwoon. That says something. Not to mention, the 20th century had a lot of violence in China. Many sifus did fight for life and death. Take a look at the life of Green Cloud's late sifu. Also, you don't need to have lived in China to see real life encounters. Violence outside the ring is always a possibility. Therefore, Kung Fu is useful. Sure, there are many teachers that water down material or were taught watered down material. However, there is still good stuff out there. It's important to know what you are doing and where it comes from. It makes you realize what is necessary to achieve good Gong Fu.

[Knifefighter]

Weapon combat as well as hand-to-hand combat was commonplace. Look into Leitai if you don't believe that hand-to-hand combat was used.
Leitai matches were hardley life and death. The occasional person who died more than likely died as a result of complications from a broken bone after falling off the platform.

[The Xia]

Understanding TCMA history forces the practitioner to realize that TCMA fighters were tough individuals that trained hard. These individuals would likely be tough even without Gong Fu. However, these tough individuals pursued Gong Fu and trained to the extreme. You don't become good by slacking off and never breaking a sweat. You don't become good by never thinking about combat. Good Gong Fu doesn't come easy and it doesn't come instantaneously. You get what you put in. To achieve proficiency, you need to train hard. You also have to train with combat in mind. The meaning of the term "Gong Fu" says it all. "Time and Effort" is needed.

[Knifefighter]

I'd like to take a moment to clarify the 'fanboy' moniker.
I think being a 50-something white dude who posts under the moniker Yao Sing just might qualify one as a fan-boy

[The Xia]

Leitai matches were hardley life and death. The occasional person who died more than likely died as a result of complications from a broken bone after falling off the platform.
Look up Wong Yen Lum's leitai matches. This article mentions them. http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/magazine/article.php?article=661
In the above article, David Chin talks about Wong Yen Lum's leitai matches, "Either the challenger was maimed or killed," "He never let one challenger leave his school without injury. He was a master of using the technique of cruelty."
That is just one example. There are many others. If you want to know more, do some reading.

[Knifefighter]

I'm sure there were plenty of times where a weapon was dropped, broken or out of reach. Don't go upsetting his fantasy with reality.
Most people who lost thier weapon were probably quickly dispatched by someone with a weapon. You can pretty easily prove this for yourself. Try using your deadly kung-fu skills against someone who is trained in using a weapon. Have your opponent use a simple stick... it will be easy to extrapolate to understand what would happen if it were a bladed weapon.

[Knifefighter]

Look up Wong Yen Lum's leitai matches. This article mentions them. http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/magazine/article.php?article=661
In the above article, David Chin talks about Wong Yen Lum's leitai matches, "Either the challenger was maimed or killed," "He never let one challenger leave his school without injury. He was a master of using the technique of cruelty."
That is just one example. There are many others. If you want to know more, do some reading.
Don't you find it kind of strange that in the "days of yore" there were all of these deadly masters who were constantly proving themselves in "life or death" matches against other masters... but somehow all of these different CMA styles and various masters managed to survive. Don't you think that if this really happened there would have been a "survival of the fittest", rather than the hodgepodge of CMA styles that remain?

[The Xia]

The existence of a plethora of Chinese styles is no evidence for your belief.

[Knifefighter]

The existence of a plethora of Chinese styles is no evidence for your belief.
Don't you think if these guys were constantly fighting each other in life or death battles, a set of techniques would have evolved that were used by most of the fighters?
Instead you have this hodgepodge of styles and techniques... more than likely because they WEREN"T fighting each other to the death.

[The Xia]

If you are interested, read.
There was life and death combat. It is recorded in the annals of history. There is nothing wrong with there being many styles. Different styles suit different people.

[Knifefighter]

Youre right about today and yesrteryear, as far as the two old ****s in the ring they may have been masters in kung fu but back then these guys smoked a carton a day and they didn't train for optimal health or performance. Kung Fu was used to save ones life.
LOL... that's a great piece of reasoning. Kung Fu was used to save your life, but one didn't train for optimal performance.
I guess they must not have been very smart either, then.

[The Xia]

Kung Fu was used to save one's life. It was used to save one's life from thugs with meat cleavers, Manchu soldiers, and the like, not from lung cancer.

[Knifefighter]

Kung Fu was used to save one's life. It was used to save one's life from thugs with meat cleavers, Manchu soldiers, and the like, not from lung cancer.
LOL... try using your deadly kung fu against a guy with a meat cleaver and see what happens.

[Yao Sing]

Most people who lost thier weapon were probably quickly dispatched by someone with a weapon.

You're probably right, the key word being 'most'. That still leaves room for plenty of opportunities to use hand to hand combat. You think nobody ever survived a fight without a weapon? Over a couple hundred years what are the odds the weapon won every single time? I think you just like to argue.


Don't you find it kind of strange that in the "days of yore" there were all of these deadly masters who were constantly proving themselves in "life or death" matches against other masters... but somehow all of these different CMA styles and various masters managed to survive. Don't you think that if this really happened there would have been a "survival of the fittest", rather than the hodgepodge of CMA styles that remain?

What makes you think there wasn't? Do you have some insight into all the styles that didn't survive due to being ineffective? Now if China was the size of Thailand then maybe you would expect to see a handfull of styles dominate. Besides, a lot of the variety you see today are just offshoots of other styles. I doubt there was this much variety 500+ years ago.


Don't you think if these guys were constantly fighting each other in life or death battles, a set of techniques would have evolved that were used by most of the fighters?
Instead you have this hodgepodge of styles and techniques... more than likely because they WEREN"T fighting each other to the death.

Maybe if you knew more about CMA you would see the similarities and the consistent principles across the different styles. You're speaking from ignorance like you fault others for doing.


Kung Fu was used to save your life, but one didn't train for optimal performance.
I guess they must not have been very smart either, then.

No, they weren't. They actually thought smoking was good for their kung fu so in their minds they were training for optimal performance.

[The Xia]

There are people that survive weapons encounters. Even on this forum, I remember reading that one of hskwarrior's ex-students used his Choy Lay Fut to survive against armed attackers (screwdrivers were the weapons I remember mentioned).

[Yao Sing]

C'mon The Xia, you keep ruining his fantasy world. It's obvious he has a limited grasp of reality. He lives in MMA bizarro world (my apoligies to the real MMA guys that are open minded to fighting techniques).

I'm still waiting for the answer to my gwa choy - cop choy question.

[Knifefighter]

I'm still waiting for the answer to my gwa choy - cop choy question.
What was the question?

[Knifefighter]

It's obvious he has a limited grasp of reality. He lives in MMA bizarro world (my apoligies to the real MMA guys that are open minded to fighting techniques).

Really now? How many MMA fights have you had? How much have grappling experience do you have and how many tourneys have you done? How much full contact standup fighting have you done? How many full contact weapons fights have you had?

Maybe you can post your experiences in fighting. Then we can compare and see who is really living in fantasy-land.

[Yao Sing]

True, it was just a piece of the windmill pie. The windmill approach would be something like a gwa choy to open things up followed by a cop choy (overhand rear hand). He didn't suggest what to use to lead it so why is a gwa choy so wrong? What would you lead with and if you think a gwa choy is a poor choice explain why.

You responded to the rest of my post but skipped this part. You claim 'windmill' techniques are ineffective but the cop choy (a portion of the windmill) is effective.

I want to know why you think preceeding a cop choy (overhand whipping punch) with a gwa choy (backfist) makes it ineffective and what you would use to set up the cop choy?

As far as comparing fight stats I'm not a sport fighter. I've trained off and on in various styles over a 25+ year period but all my fights have been in the street.

Don't think I'm clueless when it comes to fighting. How many of your fights were real?

Oh and. seriously, I apoligize for the personal attacks. I don't like when others do that to me so fair is fair. It's just that your responses are really non-sensical at times and appear to be just for the sake of arguing.

One more thing. Sparring is practice, it's not fighting. Just so we're on the same page.

[Knifefighter]

You claim 'windmill' techniques are ineffective but the cop choy (a portion of the windmill) is effective.
I don't believe it is very effective at all. An overhand is much better and higher percentage, an even that is relatively lower percentage than jabs, crosses, hooks and uppercuts.



As far as comparing fight stats I'm not a sport fighter. I've trained off and on in various styles over a 25+ year period but all my fights have been in the street.

How many of your fights were real?

I've had about 250 sport matches and probably 25 or 30 real confrontations over the years.

[Yao Sing]

I don't believe it is very effective at all. An overhand is much better and higher percentage, an even that is relatively lower percentage than jabs, crosses, hooks and uppercuts.

If I understand you're saying the gwa choy - cup choy (backfist+overhand) is ineffective but the cop choy (overhand) is effective.

What I'm asking you is why does the addition of the gwa choy invalidate the cop choy?

See, the overhand is a slower punch so it should be preceeded by a setup like a jab or backfist. I see no reason why the addition of a setup move would turn an effective tech into an ineffective one.

Please explain.


I've had about 250 sport matches and probably 25 or 30 real confrontations over the years.

Ok, so you got me on the sport matches. Is the number of fights the determining factor in the quality of the fighter?

Your logic escapes me.

[Yao Sing]

Time for UFC Octagon Girl Search. Let's pick this up later. :) :)

[Knifefighter]

If I understand you're saying the gwa choy - cup choy (backfist+overhand) is ineffective but the cop choy (overhand) is effective.

What I'm asking you is why does the addition of the gwa choy invalidate the cop choy?
Like an uppercut, an overhand is best coming from inside range and is best set up other inside punches, slips and/or side steps.



See, the overhand is a slower punch so it should be preceeded by a setup like a jab or backfist. I see no reason why the addition of a setup move would turn an effective tech into an ineffective one.
It's not the setup move, per se. It's the type of set up. A jab comes from too far outside to set up a rear overhand. It's the same reason you wouldn't use a jab to set up a rear uppercut.

Backfists are usually bad setups for anything.



Ok, so you got me on the sport matches. Is the number of fights the determining factor in the quality of the fighter?
No, but it will help to determine who is more in touch with "reality".

[Green Cloud]

I don't believe it is very effective at all. An overhand is much better and higher percentage, an even that is relatively lower percentage than jabs, crosses, hooks and uppercuts.




I've had about 250 sport matches and probably 25 or 30 real confrontations over the years.

OMG you must live in a bad part of town, but then again a guy like you probably goes out every night in hopes of getting into a fight so you can prove your self to your self. I'm thinking we have some self esteem issues here:D

[The Xia]

No matter what anyone says, or what evidence anyone brings up, it will never convince Knifefighter. His mind is closed to all things Kung Fu. I mean come on, he even debates historical facts.

[Green Cloud]

OOOP has any one noticed something familiar about Seven star and Knife fighter's posting style??? You all know their one in the same,, KF is ST... Sorry I I just had to get that off my chest:o

[TenTigers]

ok, I understand. It's late, we're all hanging out on our pc's, drinking (well, art least I am...and probably GreenCloud-(ya lush) but really.couldn't we find something intelligent to discuss? This is the lamest,most adolescent crap I've ever seen. Start a new thread...somebody pleez!

[The Xia]

I did start one. Check it out.
http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=43537

[Green Cloud]

ok, I understand. It's late, we're all hanging out on our pc's, drinking (well, art least I am...and probably GreenCloud-(ya lush) but really.couldn't we find something intelligent to discuss? This is the lamest,most adolescent crap I've ever seen. Start a new thread...somebody pleez!

I'm on my third glass of wine and so what are we talking about?? What are we debating?? Oh yea KF hates CMA:p

[Yao Sing]

Yeah, I'm over it. I just wanted to counter the "CMA doesn't work" claims by pointing out an instance where a top MMA fighter is advocating a CMA move.

Then the fanboys jump through hoops trying to say it's effective but not when CMA peeps use it. Plus in bizzarro world the one with the highest number of fights is the best wich probably makes KF better than half the guys in the UFC.

My ex-brother-in-law had a lot of fights too. Probably more than me. And I think he lost about every one of them. He has scars all over from getting jacked up so many times. I've bbailed him out of beatings more than once.

He's currently in prison for beating on his last girlfriend and killing her. He's probably getting beat up as we speak. I don't think the number of fights means all that much.

[Knifefighter]

No matter what anyone says, or what evidence anyone brings up, it will never convince Knifefighter. His mind is closed to all things Kung Fu.
Not at all. Just the BS, doesn't work, never actually done against halfway skilled resisting oppoents techniques and training methods. It just happens that 95% of KF is made up of the BS stuff.

As a matter of fact, I think San Shou is a great venue for KF fighters to showcase their skills. However, when you watch kung fu guys fighting in San Shou, notice how you will see almost nothing in terms of windmill punching and straght backfists. Those matches look pretty much like boxing and kickboxing with wrestling and judo throws... because that's what works- something that the 1% of kung fu guys that aqtually fight learn very quickly.

[Knifefighter]

Plus in bizzarro world the one with the highest number of fights is the best wich probably makes KF better than half the guys in the UFC.
Really now? Can you go back and read my posts and point out any instance where I said the number of fights determines who is best?

[lkfmdc]

I've got a few minutes (and I'm bored) so why not respond to some of this :rolleyes:

1. Horse stance training, particularly holding stances for long time was to WEED OUT students... not really for conditioning... maybe, and it's a stretch, mental conditioning (do you really want to learn here?) but it has pretty much no place in modern training

2. Kahp Choih IS an over hand.....

3. MY school certainly produces fighters and we DO use what Knife would probably consider "windmill" punches like Kaph Choih and SO Choih... you have to know how to throw them, when to throw them and also have good "boxing" basics ....I use the quotation marks because to me, "boxing" also means elbows, level control, shouldering, etc... ie upper body striking

[Merryprankster]

Coach Ross...

So what you're saying is you have to have good basics down pat before you try to employ a "trick" move?

For anybody who is a tad slow on the uptake, notice that the trick is in quotation marks....

Say it ain't so!!! :D

[lkfmdc]

Do calculus and quantum physics "work"? Of course they do... but they aren't appropriate for grade school kids... both require a strong base and understanding of the math they are grounded in...

[lkfmdc]

Wouldn't you also add tendon, muscle, and joint strengthening? Also, wouldn't you add rooting?

pulling on your yum ging 12 hours a day may increase your grip strength ultimately, but is it efficient as a method of training?

You can get more, with less time invested, with something like a Hindu squat...

As for rooting, WRESTLE.... trying to develop rooting with horse stance is like holding a plate in both hands and "steering" it to learn to drive :rolleyes:

[The Xia]

oops I deleted that post because I wanted to add more. Anyway, this is all I wanted to add. Here is one explaination of stance-holding. http://www.hungkuen.net/training-stancetraining.htm

[The Xia]

trying to develop rooting with horse stance is like holding a plate in both hands and "steering" it to learn to drive :rolleyes:
Were you spying on me when I learned how to drive? :eek: :D

[Merryprankster]

Well, yeah Coach Ross, hence the giant smiley face.

Incidentally, I learned the calculus lesson deep down. I was always very fast at arithmetic, so even if I didn't know how to do an algebra problem, I could interpolate over and over again to get the right answer, well within the confines of the test time limits. Same basic thing with trig - although the use of tables and calculators greatly aided that!

Can't do that in calculus since the problems involve continuous change....and since my algebra was weak, I had a REALLY hard time with that class - until my algebra finally caught up...

[David Jamieson]

pulling on your yum ging 12 hours a day may increase your grip strength ultimately, but is it efficient as a method of training?

You can get more, with less time invested, with something like a Hindu squat...

As for rooting, WRESTLE.... trying to develop rooting with horse stance is like holding a plate in both hands and "steering" it to learn to drive :rolleyes:

to wrestle is to apply the root. and it's a good way to get the jins even more correct.

Dave, your analogy is not even relevant to stance training.

My personal view is it is simply a lack of patience. If you wrestle without foundation, you'll simply get pwned over and over again. hindu squats won't stop that, you have to train the entire base. Stance training provides that method of training.

But people can do and say as they please I suppose. i wonder how many critics of stance training actually do for real stance training or simply wrote it off because it hurts or is too much on the boring side of training. There is a lot of augmentation training that is boring, but it's necessary for the kungfu practitioner.

[Green Cloud]

Not at all. Just the BS, doesn't work, never actually done against halfway skilled resisting oppoents techniques and training methods. It just happens that 95% of KF is made up of the BS stuff.

As a matter of fact, I think San Shou is a great venue for KF fighters to showcase their skills. However, when you watch kung fu guys fighting in San Shou, notice how you will see almost nothing in terms of windmill punching and straght backfists. Those matches look pretty much like boxing and kickboxing with wrestling and judo throws... because that's what works- something that the 1% of kung fu guys that aqtually fight learn very quickly.

San Shou is based on CMA sport fighting and a lot of the tech. is in the forms like the majority of throwing and sweeping. As far as seeing fancy footwork and spin punching I've seen it done many times by more experienced fighters.

By adding rules and gloves and such the style has to be modified in the ring since most kung fu tech. employ open hands. Take Judo for instance it's just modified jiu jits and designned for sport.

Every style has its weakness take Gracie Jiu Jitsu, at one time peole thought it was the unbeatable system. Now we know it's not,,, without good stand up and ground fighting your gona loose.

Having an a one dimentional attidute about fighting hurt the Gracies in the end. My point being is that Kung Fu offers many avenues for enthusiast including the fancy dancy forms for peole that don't like to get there face bashed in.

Kung Fu also offers a fantastic arsenal of fighting like grappling, ground fighting, kicking, punching, and street defense.

In todays UFC mixed martial means what it means mixed all styles of fighting so to knock any one style just makes you sound like you have a closed mind.

I do Kung Fu because that's what I like to do end of story even if the Stuff didn't work who cares there is no argument that would convince me that I shoulnt do it.

It's simply my preference if I decided to do mixed MA I'd take what I know and adapt just like veryone else does in that sport.

Just a friendly reminder MMA is not the world

[cjurakpt]

some random thoughts regarding specificityof training:

it is commonly accepted in the filed of kinesiology that when you strengthen a muscle at a certain range of the joints over which it crosses, you will get "spill over" for about 20 to 30 degrees max in either direction; therefore, if you train isometrically, you have to do so at multiple ranges of the muscle in order to get the effect throughout the range (not saying anyting about the end ranges, where you are dealing active and passive insuficiency); therefore, isometrics at one point in the range do essentially nothing for the function of a muscle as it moves through the range; furthermore, if you train open chain (distal extremity moving) for skills that require closed hain recruitment (extremity fixed), you get pretty much no carry over and vice versa (same thing for concentric versus eccentric contractions); this also holds for dynamic / plyometirc versus static training; from that perspective, I would say that the contribution of stance training is essentially nil when it comes to actual fighting - in fact, it's the antithesis of it in every way

as far as training "in context": for a long time in the world of PT rehab, it was thought that the best way to achieve a complex, functional real-life skill, such as negotiating a crowded city street, was to break it down into the smallest, easiest component parts, master those and then reassemble them into the complete desired functional real life skill, which you would only spend time working on at the end of the course of rehab;

so, you would first work with them in a rehab gym, lifting weights (open chain, of course...:rolleyes: ), do a bunch of essentially "abstract" balancing drills, and, of course, "perfect" their gate pattern, because this would all ultimately make it easier for them to do this

unfortunately, this does not really hold true, based on something called the contextual interference effect (CIE), which is the net of all variables present when performing a skill, both intrinsically in the body and extrinsically in the environment, and which has been investigated in great detail by motor learning theorists for some time now; the bottom line is that by altering the CIE, you can create a situation where a the requirements for a skill such as walking can be radically altered by the environment in which you do it, to the degree that it almost becomes two different skills

the take home message is that, if I train their system to account for the variables present in a rehab gym, when they get out on the street, the actual transfer of training may be zero, meaning not only do they have to learn an entirely new skill, but they may innapropriately rely on strategies acquired for optimal function in an entirely different context

that said, based on the evidence based research, I actually would spend a very short amount of time with apatient in a rehab gym, maybe just making sure that the person can actually walk, but then as soon as possible, I want to get them out onto a crowded street and work the majority of the time with them there, so that they have to deal with all the variables that will always be part of that skill; THEN, if I identified a specific detriment that they were unable to compensate for (e.g. - aweakness of a specific muscle) I would go back into the gym and specifically train that muscle in as close of a functional context as i could, and frequently referencing them back to the actual context we were ultimately training for...

so regardless of what you want to believe, if you are talking about fighting in a high-level competative venue, and to a large degree on the street (the exception here being that you have many more random variables occuring than in a sporting venue, ones that could either nulify even the most hands-on, live training, or on the flip side serve to actually save someone who has been doing something less than real), the variability of what you do is necessarily limited to high percentage techniques practiced in context - same as in any high-level venue, from chess, to golf, to modern warfare - it's because there is a constant adaptative response on the part of the adversary, nothing more or less...

I think that what happened in TCMA, is that because there was less frequent contact in the "old days" between styles in general due to the distance between geographical zones (people travelled far distances a lot less even 100 years ago than now), there was less interraction on a regular basis - so essentially, if you were the only gig in town, you could keep doing your thing because there was less chance to be called on it; that, and you could probably make a deal with the other local teachers not to go around breaking anyone else's rice bowl (no, THAT never happenend...), and so several styles could get perpetuated side by side without ewver really proving themselves against each other... in general, i think a lot of the "training" methods (specificaly forms) were utilized more as a way to make it easier for the instructor to teach large numbers of people at one time, or to keep newbies busy for 10 + years before you taught them the stuff that really worked, namely fighting with weapons...

just some thoughts...

[Green Cloud]

Ahh yea what ever my training bro Chris said oh by the whay could you PM me and translate some of that Toi sanese in laymans terms;)

[LeeCasebolt]

Take Judo for instance it's just modified jiu jits and designned for sport.



No, it's not.

[Green Cloud]

No, it's not.

Ookay then, I guess I should respond to your three word post:rolleyes:

[The Xia]

You never gave any response to the fact that Kung Fu was used for survival. What about that do you dispute?

[Green Cloud]

Hey xia do you think you can dig some stuff up to support the historical fact that Judo is modified Jiu jits?? Just google proffesor Jigoro kano. I'm not sure if my spelling correct.

According to what I've read and what I was told by my Sensei when I trained in Judo The professor was concerned about all the joint locking being dangerous in so he modified his Jiu Jitsu and then later introduced it as a sport.

[The Xia]

Written by Phil Rasmussen
http://www.judoinfo.com/jhist4.htm


Around 1880 Kano started rethinking the jujitsu techniques he had learned. He saw that by combining the best techniques of various schools into one system he could create a physical education program that would embody mental and physical skill. In addition, he believed that the techniques could be practiced as a competitive sport if the more dangerous techniques were omitted.

So in 1882, having pulled from ancient jujitsu the best of its throws and grappling techniques, added some of his own, and removed such dangerous techniques as foot and hand strikes. Kano at the age of 22, presented his new sport--Judo. He called this sport Kodokan Judo. The term Kodokan breaks down into ko (lecture, study, method), do (way or path), and kan (hall or place). Thus it means "a place to study the way." Similarly Judo breaks down into ju (gentle) and do (way or path) or "the gentle way."

[Green Cloud]

Thanks Xia your so good at getting facts.

Leecasebolt do some research next time before you make such a claime:cool:

[Merryprankster]

Wow. That's a giant "sort of."

More precisely, what Kano wanted to build was a system that could be practiced at full speed. He eliminated potentially deadly and extremely injurious techniques on the grounds that those could not be practiced at full speed.

The Kodokan then challenged (and received challenges from) MANY jiujitsu ryus.

The Kodokan won almost all of them.

Kano certainly believed that competitive, full speed sparring and challenges had a place in the development of MA. But to flat out state that he wanted to develop a sport isn't precisely correct or true.

He wanted to avoid the paradox of "deadly" techniques - that you can't practice them full speed on a live resisting opponent. This certainly lends itself to sportive combat, which I won't deny, and which I think was certainly foreseeable. But I don't think Kano would have thought of it as a "sport," per se based on my understanding.

By way of example, somebody interested in creating a "sport," would have built with it a strong system of competitive rules, which I'm fairly certain did not happen. The point being that first there was Judo. Then, there was sport Judo.

If somebody can find solid evidence that Kano created Judo as a sport, or can point me to a rulebook of some sort that I was unaware of, I will gladly take that as evidence that a sport was actually in mind.

Judo isn't precisely modified Jiujitsu either. That would be like saying something is "modified Kung Fu."

Ok, which style are we talking about here? Jiujitsu is a broad term that encompassed many schools of practiced. Judo is more like a compilation of techniques from different ryu that could be practiced full speed.

I would argue then that Judo was in fact a new system of PRACTICE that relied on modifying/borrowing techniques from many jiujitsu ryu.

It might be "semantics," but definitions drive meaning and without them communication is useless.

[Green Cloud]

OK MP I'l take your word for it over what's written down in books. And San Shou is modified Kung Fu.

[The Xia]

Jigoro Kano himself talks about his creation.
http://www.judoinfo.com/jhist5.htm

[The Xia]

I like to think of San Shou as a rule set. You have rules and gloves. This means you cannot use everything. However, the techniques used are still from Kung Fu. Someone who practices a TCMA can do San Shou, but can’t use everything he knows. On the other hand, someone can just train what is allowable in San Shou. Either way, it’s still TCMA, albeit the latter is not training a complete Kung Fu style.

[Merryprankster]

OK MP I'l take your word for it over what's written down in books.

I've got a better idea - do thorough research and reach your own conclusions, instead of being a sarcastic ****head tonight. :rolleyes:

And San Shou is a competition format for Kung Fu styles. By evolution it has certainly become its own art.

[Merryprankster]

Xia,

I've read your article twice now. The main theme is two-fold:

1. Maximum efficiency, minimum effort - a Judo maxim!
2. Judo has displaced jujutsu

I didn't see anywhere that Kano said "Judo is a sport I designed to displace jujutsu."

Rather, he took a look at the underlying principles in jujutsu styles - modified techniques from SEVERAL ryus, which I have no problem stating, while rejecting other techniques, and built a training methodology to practice those techniques. He states this CLEARLY in his own writing.

I fail to see how that is different from anything I have posted. I fail to see how any reasonable person could read anything different into that article.

Again, if there is evidence that Kano created Judo with the intention of a sport - although (again) I allow that should/would have been a foreseeable outcome - I would be more than happy to read it.

[The Xia]

Written by Neil Ohlenkamp.
http://www.judoinfo.com/sport.htm

[Merryprankster]

Yes, I know it's a sport now. Thank you. Neil Ohlenkamp's article actually does not answer my question. Did you even read it before you posted it?

As it is, I may be in error. It seems that Kano's goal may have been to create a sport after all - there was a dream to get it into the olympics it seems. Looks like my research wasn't good enough.

Still, I wonder if that was a dream he had AFTER Judo became a full fledged sport?

[The Xia]

Judo was based on Jujutsu. Jujutsu styles are numerous so of course you cannot take everything from every style. You can find kicking and hand strikes in Jujutsu Ryu. You can also find things like eye gouges and techniques that would be illegal in sanctioned competition fighting. However, Judo does not have these. Various Jujutsu Ryu contributed techniques to the Kodokan. Jigoro Kano even contributed techniques from his own innovation. One should note that neck breaks and other lethal techniques are still in the Kodokan curriculum though. It seems that Kano focused in on grappling and dropped the other stuff. Of course, this does create an interesting combat sport. However, many Jujutsu training methods and techniques (such as the aforementioned striking) were omitted.

[The Xia]

Yes, I know it's a sport now. Thank you. Neil Ohlenkamp's article actually does not answer my question. Did you even read it before you posted it?
Nope, it doesn't answer it. It's one man's opinion on the debate. I posted it because it is a Judoka's opinion. My previous post is what I say on the matter.

[Merryprankster]

Various Jujutsu Ryu contributed techniques to the Kodokan.

Okay. So we agree.

Incidentally, it appears that Kano founded Judo in 1882. (First modern olympics were in 1896 -plenty of time at that point for it to have EVOLVED into a strong sportive emphasis) I have to question then, if he meant it to be a sport initially or if that was merely part of its potential (which he undoubtedly recognized).

I still can't find anything definitive - although Kano certainly supported it AS a sport, was that his original intent - to have it practiced as a full-fledged sport?

[Merryprankster]

Ah, I apologize Xia. It is late, and I am cranky :)

[The Xia]

We are having a fruitful discussion. Talking to you about Judo is not like arguing with Knifefighter or something. :p
I'd say it'd be insulting Kano's intelligence if we said he had no knowledge of it becoming a sport. He is too brilliant not to see that. Evidence that he was creating a sport exists in that he eliminated striking. If his goal was to create an art tailored for street fighting, he wouldn't have omitted striking. I'm not saying Judo doesn't work for street fighting, I'm just saying it seems to have been tailored for sport. Perhaps his goal was to create a sport that people can enjoy, but also learn fighting skills from.

[The Xia]

Grappling can be enjoyable for people that don't like getting hit. The average person wouldn't want to engage in a sport where he is going to get punched, kicked, etc. However, grappling may not be as scary for the average person. Another words, Judo competition appeals to a wide audience. I remember reading that Kano wanted his creation to be something that many people can enjoy. So if this is his goal, it would make sense to create a fun sport.

[Green Cloud]

Ah, I apologize Xia. It is late, and I am cranky :)

Interesting you appologize to Xia but not to me, After all have I ever spoke to you with that tone. I'm sure I never called you a sh!t head and have always kept my debates with you respectful.

Not sure what you got ****ed about but in the end my point was proven who cares how many styles of Jiu Jitsu went into the making of Judo.

I didn't feel like getting all analitical about it I was just offering a fact wich was backed up by Xia.

I swear some of you guys get down right fanatical about this sh!t.

[The Xia]

First, LeeCasebolt denied the validity of this statement with three words.

Take Judo for instance it's just modified jiu jits and designned for sport.
After this, I affirmed the validity of the statement with evidence.

After this, Merryprankster went into a long analysis of the situation and didn't really say anything that was counter to the evidence. He took issue with the fact that the blanket term "Jujutsu" was used. This was his main qualm. However, he stated that the validity of the dubunking of LeeCasebolt's statement is
a giant "sort of."
This changes what he was really taking issue with to something else. This changes it to taking issue with the debunking of LeeCasebolt's statement.

GreenCloud took issue with this and stated
OK MP I'l take your word for it over what's written down in books.
After this, Merryprankster then stated
I've got a better idea - do thorough research and reach your own conclusions, instead of being a sarcastic ****head tonight.
Name calling was uncalled for Merryprankster. However, we can clearly see that it was miscommunication that caused this. I say you two make up. :D

[SifuAbel]

The shoe never seems to fit as well when its on the other foot. :p

[Knifefighter]

According to what I've read and what I was told by my Sensei when I trained in Judo The professor was concerned about all the joint locking being dangerous in so he modified his Jiu Jitsu and then later introduced it as a sport.
One of the reasons for BJJ was to take the the best aspects of judo's sporting approach and reformulate it so it was less restrictive and more of a "street" system.

[Knifefighter]

3. MY school certainly produces fighters and we DO use what Knife would probably consider "windmill" punches like Kaph Choih and SO Choih...
But you don't base your entire fighting system around them, as some styles of KF do. You know from first hand experience that basing a whole fighting system around these techs is impractical. You know this because your guys actually fight. I think it is pretty obvious that someone who bases the majority of their training on these types of techs probably has an unrealistic view of fighting.


As for rooting, WRESTLE.... trying to develop rooting with horse stance is like holding a plate in both hands and "steering" it to learn to drive :rolleyes:
Exactly.

[Knifefighter]

You never gave any response to the fact that Kung Fu was used for survival. What about that do you dispute?
1- The fact that most KF "fighters" can't fight very well. Systems that really were used for survival would continue to produce a lot of bad-a$$ fighters.
2- The fact that anyone with halfway decent intelligence whose life was literally on the line has always relied mainly on weapons.

Of course, after reading the article you cited on stance training, I will say that maybe it really was used for survival. If everyone was buying into all the malarkie and spending thier first couple of years standing around holding stances and, maybe then, progressing to a few more years of forms training, most people were probably pretty cr@ppy.
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man would have been king.

[Knifefighter]

(truncated)
...therefore, isometrics at one point in the range do essentially nothing for the function of a muscle as it moves through the range....you get pretty much no carry over ...also holds for dynamic / plyometirc versus static training;
from that perspective, I would say that the contribution of stance training is essentially nil when it comes to actual fighting - in fact, it's the antithesis of it in every way... (emphasis added)


in general, i think a lot of the "training" methods (specificaly forms) were utilized more as a way to make it easier for the instructor to teach large numbers of people at one time, or to keep newbies busy for 10 + years before you taught them the stuff that really worked, namely fighting with weapons...
.
Excellent analysis from a KF practitioner who is knowledgeable about human performance.

[MasterKiller]

2- The fact that anyone with halfway decent intelligence whose life was literally on the line has always relied mainly on weapons.

Unarmed combat would not seem to be preparation for war, but the study of unarmed combat makes your body used to action, so in fact it is the basis for all further training.-- Qi Ji Gua (1584)

[Yao Sing]

But you don't base your entire fighting system around them, as some styles of KF do. (clip) I think it is pretty obvious that someone who bases the majority of their training on these types of techs probably has an unrealistic view of fighting.

Could you name one or two of these styles? Thanks.

[Knifefighter]

Could you name one or two of these styles? Thanks.
Hung Ga and Choy Lay Fut.

[David Jamieson]

Hung Ga and Choy Lay Fut.

man, you're a ****ing troll aren't you knife.

I don't know why you're compelled to be so, but don''t talk shyte about stuff you obviously have not a single clue about.

at least some of us give everything due consideration, you on the other hand spout crap all day long about what' right and what isn't right and what's worse is that you are doing it from a perspective of not even knowing at all.

:rolleyes:

[LeeCasebolt]

Thanks Xia your so good at getting facts.

Leecasebolt do some research next time before you make such a claime:cool:

I'm not the one who said judo was invented as a sport without actually knowing anything about judo.

Read something Kano wrote. In his book Kodokan Judo, he repeatedly decries the move towards "contest judo" at the expense of correct practice. Yes, judo has a sport element. Yes, that element is currently the dominant aspect of the art. No, that was not the original intent of the art.

The intention behind the creation of judo was towards a more efficient, less dangerous (to the practitioner) ryu of jujitsu, as well as a method of personal improvement. The jujitsu of the time was primarily kata (form) based, and "live" practice was invariably injurious to the student. By eliminating the techniques which could not be practiced with a degree of safety and introducing randori as a primary training method, Kano produced a superior system for training fighters.

Judo is primarily a grappling art because those techniques could most easily be modified for randori training. Striking techniques were retained at judo's founding, but since they could not be practiced safely against resisting opponents (lacking modern safety gear) were relegated to kata training. With the movement to a sport-dominated judo culture, those techniques are essentially non-existent now.

[SevenStar]

The styles of old are passed on to us. It is up to us to respect the lineage and train hard. Sure, many sifus modify their curriculum, but this is nothing new. It doesn’t become a problem unless the material is watered down. However, some styles are passed down unmodified.

How do you KNOW they weren't modified? I'm pretty sure you weren't training with any of the people who passed said material down.


Many sifus did fight for life and death. Take a look at the life of Green Cloud's late sifu.

and those guys are not you - what worked for them may not work for you, hence the value of competing.



Also, you don't need to have lived in China to see real life encounters. Violence outside the ring is always a possibility.

I've said this several times before, but don't mind saying it again. You guys train for a possibility, as you stated above. We train for an inevitability. Perhaps that's why you see such a difference in our training today. The old guys you always spek of trained for an inevitability, just as we do.

[Knifefighter]

I don't know why you're compelled to be so, but don''t talk shyte about stuff you obviously have not a single clue about.
Both of these styles rely heavily on what I describe as "windmill" type punches. Practitioners of these styles regularly promote their striking as being "whipping" or "clubbing" types of strikes.

Watch any demo of these and you will see these techniques throughout.

[David Jamieson]

Both of these styles rely heavily on what I describe as "windmill" type punches. Practitioners of these styles regularly promote their striking as being "whipping" or "clubbing" types of strikes.

Watch any demo of these and you will see these techniques throughout.

no. no they don't rely on any specific technique anymore than any striking art relies on a specific tech.

the meat and potatoes is straight punch, hooking punch, upper cuts, piston punches, elbows, knees shins, palm strikes, grabs and pulls and so on and so forth.

watch a hung stylist fight and you'll see low kicks and what would be regarded as boxing punches moreso than any other technique. why? because that's built into the system.

clf and hung aren't the same styl;e and they ahve some inherent differences in how tey are expressed shape wise, but the tactics used aren't really all that different from any martial art.

at higher levels of understanding, one fighter doesn't look much different than the next really. It's the time training in the various ranges of engagement that make a difference. And endurance and strength that is built from practice.

also, clearing and sweeping movements shouldn't be confused with strikes.

[Knifefighter]

no. no they don't rely on any specific technique anymore than any striking art relies on a specific tech.
Most striking styles rely on specific types of techs that are indicative of the styles, i.e.-

Boxing = straight and hooking type punches instead of windmilling, whipping or backfist types of punches.
Muay Thai = Front push kicks and "bludgeoning" types of round kicks instead of snapping types of kicks.

These techniques evolve over time based on actual fighting and what works and what doesn't. MMA is currently evolving specific types of ground striking techniques that are specialized for striking someone on the ground.



watch a hung stylist fight and you'll see low kicks and what would be regarded as boxing punches moreso than any other technique. why? because that's built into the system.
Can you point me to a clip of a HG practioner fighting against another resisting opponent where I might see this?

Actually... forget that, since we know that anyone who actually fights will hit with punches that look much like boxing.

Can you point me to a demonsration clip of a HG practioner who runs through his demo with the majority of punches looking like boxing punches?



at higher levels of understanding, one fighter doesn't look much different than the next really.
My point exactly. Things that work will look the same. That is why people who actually use their stuff will look much the same, regardless of their backgrounds. Real fighting techniques are going to look much like anything you can see in your garden variety MMA matches.

You will only see large variability in styles that don't really fight.

[The Xia]

How do you KNOW they weren't modified? I'm pretty sure you weren't training with any of the people who passed said material down.
I didn't say all lineages were unmodified. I know for a fact that many sifus modified material. As I said, it becomes a problem only if it's watered down. Not to mention, some stuff is unmodified. I cannot think of a better example then Lau Bun lineage Choy Lay Fut being the same as the Fotshan Hung Sing Kwoon's.

and those guys are not you - what worked for them may not work for you, hence the value of competing.
I never knocked the value of competing. I think San Shou is great for Kung Fu. However, one has to recognize that not every technique can be used in a sport environment.

I've said this several times before, but don't mind saying it again. You guys train for a possibility, as you stated above. We train for an inevitability. Perhaps that's why you see such a difference in our training today. The old guys you always spek of trained for an inevitability, just as we do.
It is correct that the old timers were training for survival. They lived in a world where random violence was common. Unless you are in a bad area, chances of violent encounters aren't all that high. However, that doesn't mean they cannot occur. Even in the wealthiest and safest of neighborhoods, something can happen. I agree that sparring and competition is good for a practitioner. Even though you cannot use everything you learn, it does get you used to taking hits and simulates combat.

[Yao Sing]

I've done some CLF and I don't think the windmill techs are the core of the style (what it's built on) but they are somewhat common in the forms. But they are just a small percent of the moves in each form so CLF seems to be filled with a lot more stuff than just windmill strikes.

I can see how you would think that since they seem to stand out when watching a CLF set. 3 or 4 windmill strikes in an 80 move set can't really be called the core I guess.

I'll let the more experienced CLF guys address this but to get back on topic the fact that Chuck Liddel is recommending one of these whipping 'windmill' techs and proclaiming it's effectiveness kind of takes the wind out of Knifefighters sail a bit don't you think?

[SevenStar]

I never knocked the value of competing. I think San Shou is great for Kung Fu. However, one has to recognize that not every technique can be used in a sport environment.

And I never said you knocked it. However, to not compete on account of the few techniques that cannot be used is to only limit oneself.


It is correct that the old timers were training for survival. They lived in a world where random violence was common. Unless you are in a bad area, chances of violent encounters aren't all that high. However, that doesn't mean they cannot occur. Even in the wealthiest and safest of neighborhoods, something can happen.

exactly - and I'm sure this is where differences in training methods come in. My CMA training was nothing like what I am doing now - but back then I wasn't training to compete - I was training for a possible encounter. I think that makes the same difference as that between old cma guys and current ones. the sport fighter knows he will have another fight and must train hard for it. That negates his tendency to be lazy or slack in training. the non-competitor doesn't have this concern. The old timer had to train hard because he knew he had to fight to survive. The newer generations do not have this worry.

[The Xia]

And I never said you knocked it. However, to not compete on account of the few techniques that cannot be used is to only limit oneself.
I'm not saying not to compete on account of techniques that can't be used. I'm just illustrating that the practitioner should recognize the difference between sport and street fighting.




exactly - and I'm sure this is where differences in training methods come in. My CMA training was nothing like what I am doing now - but back then I wasn't training to compete - I was training for a possible encounter. I think that makes the same difference as that between old cma guys and current ones. the sport fighter knows he will have another fight and must train hard for it. That negates his tendency to be lazy or slack in training. the non-competitor doesn't have this concern. The old timer had to train hard because he knew he had to fight to survive. The newer generations do not have this worry.
Yes, I agree that many who practice traditional martial arts, Chinese or otherwise, slack-off. The problem is that many aren't there to learn the martial art. Some go to get fit, others go to feel cool, and yet others go to learn the martial art, but have misconceptions and the wrong mentality. This is why I feel understanding the history is important, it gets rid of people's misconceptions. The old timers were tough individuals that trained very hard. They had a combative mentality. They were there to learn the martial art and knew what it took to achieve proficiency. It doesn't come easy and it doesn't come by taking a non-combative approach to it (collecting forms without understanding applications would be an example of a non-combative approach). Many people make this mistake. Knowing history will erase these notions. As for sparring, it nurtures the fighter mentality, amongst other things.

SevenStar, I don't think we have a disagreement.

[SevenStar]

..........
Chuck was showing an isolated overhand rear hand technique... he is in no way advocating the overall "windmill approach" (nor will you see him attempting to fight that way in his matches) advocated by some CMA styles.

[SevenStar]

I'm not saying not to compete on account of techniques that can't be used. I'm just illustrating that the practitioner should recognize the difference between sport and street fighting.




Yes, I agree that many who practice traditional martial arts, Chinese or otherwise, slack-off. The problem is that many aren't there to learn the martial art. Some go to get fit, others go to feel cool, and yet others go to learn the martial art, but have misconceptions and the wrong mentality. This is why I feel understanding the history is important, it gets rid of people's misconceptions. The old timers were tough individuals that trained very hard. They had a combative mentality. They were there to learn the martial art and knew what it took to achieve proficiency. It doesn't come easy and it doesn't come by taking a non-combative approach to it (collecting forms without understanding applications would be an example of a non-combative approach). Many people make this mistake. Knowing history will erase these notions. As for sparring, it nurtures the fighter mentality, amongst other things.

SevenStar, I don't think we have a disagreement.

No, I don't think we do. :D

[Knifefighter]

I can see how you would think that since they seem to stand out when watching a CLF set. 3 or 4 windmill strikes in an 80 move set can't really be called the core I guess.
Are you saying that out of 80 strikes there will only be three or four "windmill" type strikes and the rest will be more like boxing strikes?
If so, can you direct me to a clip that might show this?

[The Xia]

1- The fact that most KF "fighters" can't fight very well. Systems that really were used for survival would continue to produce a lot of bad-a$$ fighters.
There are a lot of practitioners that don't practice Kung Fu the way it's meant to be practiced. There are also a lot of frauds and watered down training. This doesn't disqualify the validity of the styles.

2- The fact that anyone with halfway decent intelligence whose life was literally on the line has always relied mainly on weapons.
Read some history.



Of course, after reading the article you cited on stance training, I will say that maybe it really was used for survival. If everyone was buying into all the malarkie and spending thier first couple of years standing around holding stances and, maybe then, progressing to a few more years of forms training, most people were probably pretty cr@ppy.
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man would have been king.
Actually, not everyone that fought practiced Kung Fu. Untrained fighters are also on the list of opponents.

[Knifefighter]

Read some history.
Actually, if you really were into scholarly historical research, rather than online ezine propaganda, I think you would find that the majority of life and death battles were done with weapons.

[Green Cloud]

Are you saying that out of 80 strikes there will only be three or four "windmill" type strikes and the rest will be more like boxing strikes?
If so, can you direct me to a clip that might show this?

Just go to the southern forum for a clip.

[The Xia]

I didn't say weapons were never used. I said that hand-to-hand combat occurred as well.
What makes you think I only read "ezine propaganda"? :rolleyes:
And just what do you mean by that? Are you insulting KFM?


Alright, this is the shortest article I can think of that does an excellent job of summarizing TCMA history. It's also written by the forum's own David Ross.
Part 1 - http://www.fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=476
Part 2 - http://www.fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=477

[SifuAbel]

This all such circular, hypocritical, self serving, redundant, asshattery.

Every time this type of question comes up its met some time later with the complete opposite outcome. And of course, it comes down to what the boys on TV are doing.

First grappling made striking obsolete, then it didn't. Approach control and take down defenses were impossible and then they weren't. High kicks were useless and then they weren't. Now its swing punches. whateverrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. :rolleyes: I'm just waiting for a crescent kick to come out one of these days just to see the kind of riot that would ensue here.

Argueing with someone that is clueless about the subject is useless. You can't convince someone of something when his whole agenda is to promote something else. Or, to maintain some proprietary hold on a specific venue. IE no CMA moves in UFC.

I mean really, dude, you have a superficial knowledge at best of what your talking about. It shows. Anybody with even a little knowledge would find your statements rediculous.

[Knifefighter]

First grappling made striking obsolete,
Only against strikers who didn't know any grappling defense.



Approach control and take down defenses were impossible
Takedown defenses have always been functional and high percentage.


High kicks were useless and then they weren't.,
High kicks wll aways be low percentage for all but a very few people at the very highest levels, such as Cro-Cop.



Now its swing punches.
These will always be low percentage strikes.


I'm just waiting for a crescent kick to come out one of these days
What you will see is all the non-fighting KF guys jumping on the bandwagon saying, "See these techniques work". All the fighters will still tell you that while any technique can work occasionally, the ones that work a high percentage of the time are going to stay the same.



IE no CMA moves in UFC.
I don't think anyone is saying you can't have CMA moves in MMA. Just not the BS ones such as backfists and windmilling.
Same reason you won't see snapping high kicks... low percentage and high risk.

However, there's always the chance that fighters may evolve TMA techniques to good effect in new situations. A good example of this is the clubbing types of hits that fighters are using on the ground when in close. These types of strikes are pretty much non-functional when standing, but are being used to good effect on the ground.

[Merryprankster]

I don't know that there was any miscommunication. But I'll allow that Green Cloud didn't deserve to be called a ****head. In my defense, I DID limit it temporally. I don't generally find Green Cloud to be a ****head, but I thought his comment was unnecessarily dismissive.

My annoyance was built around the fact that what was introduced as definitive fact was, in fact, nothing of the sort. While we can certainly reasonably surmise that Kano must have known that Judo would have a strong sportive component, was that, in fact, his intention, or was it a means to an end?

The difference is quite important - after all, intent is the difference between manslaughter and homicide.

In summation:

1. Nobody has yet introduced evidence to me that clarifies Kano's main intent: was sport the primary goal, or a means to an end (recognizing that this is not an either/or proposition)?
2. I'm sorry I called you a ****head, Green Cloud - my apologies.
3. Cung Le's wrestling and TKD still inform his San Da ringfighting :D

[Merryprankster]

The shoe never seems to fit as well when its on the other foot.

Unsure if this was directed at me, if so, then no, it never does. And to mix metaphors, eating crow is never especially tasty, but I usually try to make amends when I have undeservedly lit in to somebody.

[SifuAbel]

High percentage seems to equal lowest common denominator.

High kicks are bad, except when cro cop uses them. Makes me laugh. God forbid someone has to actually master something.

All this spells out to me is that high percentage means lowest common basic that everyone can do. Gee, no sh it. :rolleyes:

"What you will see is all the non-fighting KF guys jumping on the bandwagon saying, "See these techniques work". All the fighters will still tell you that while any technique can work occasionally, the ones that work a high percentage of the time are going to stay the same."

DuH!!! Why does one technique negate another?

This is saying that while fighter X used a crescent kick and knocked fighter Y's block off, more people still used a jab. This makes 0 sense. So the guy doing the crescent kick doesn't by default have a jab? Thats a contribed mental device. So what, if every tom, richard and harry can throw the same punch. I do too, AND, I have a mean crescent kick as well. I have more tools.

So you are bascially ending your philosophy with,"you don't need to strive for greater skill. Just do the same basic stuff. "

Yet, Mr. Cro cop(among others) saw fit to ignore you and master different skills anyway.

[David Jamieson]

cro cops not the only guy who's used the old kick to the head.

anyway, it's all good if it's got good power, structure and intention and it's especially good if you land it and ktfo the other guy.

I think what we need is for a 138 lb chinese guy to go into the ring and kick some ass. and even if that happened, people would make excuses for him like they make for rich franklin.

"oh, he musta been tired because he's a superior fighter"

or any number of downing and brownings or throwing and blowings that have gone on.

ridiculous...easily as ridiculous as a "what if bruce lee was alive today" question. :p

p.s If bruce lee was alive today, he'd be screaming to get outta that box.

[sunfist]

ridiculous...easily as ridiculous as a "what if bruce lee was alive today" question. :p


Cmon man, have some empathy, cant you just imagine the average JKD conversation


Dude 1- So yeah, lets talk a bit about the intricacies of JKD.

Dude 2- Sure, well see its all about taking the best stuff and using it from wherever.

Dude 1- Yeah, I so totally agree.

Dude 1- Soooooo... I wonder what would happen if Bruce was still around

[Knifefighter]

So you are bascially ending your philosophy with,"you don't need to strive for greater skill. Just do the same basic stuff. ".

I'm saying strive for the greatest skill with the basics. Basics are what win 99% of the time- whether you are talking about fighting, basketball, football, running, or business. Getting great at the basics is what makes people great, not mastering a bunch of non-essentials.

Spending a bunch of time trying to master BS techs like crescent kicks is one of the myriad of things that has watered down CMA's and made them so ineffectual.

[MasterKiller]

I have super tight hips, so if I want to kick high, it has to be a crescent kick because I can't turn my hips over to do a proper MT kick over waist-high level.

I rarely kick high as a result, but I have landed crescent kicks in my MMA class. I even landed a tornado kick once at the end of a round. ;)

Of course, crescent kicks are fairly easy to catch and I have been dumped on my @ss after throwing one, also. I probably wouldn't use one in a fight that counts, but it doesn't hurt to keep it in my bag.

[SevenStar]

All this spells out to me is that high percentage means lowest common basic that everyone can do. Gee, no sh it. :rolleyes:

No. Any guy who trains can throw a high kick. what matters is the effectivness of it. For most people, use of a high kick leads to them getting taken down. Consequently, it's not so high %, is it? A cross, on the other hand, has lead to plenty of KOs, dizzyness, KOset ups, pace changers, etc. For pretty much all fighters at some point in time. This is high %.




High kicks are bad, except when cro cop uses them. Makes me laugh. God forbid someone has to actually master something.

now you're being silly. He said "such as cro cop". Obviously, he's only using him as an example.


DuH!!! Why does one technique negate another?

because that's how fighting works. They are going to use the techniques that are maximizing their chances of winning. The cross will ALWAYS be used more than the crescent kick. Heck, look at cung le and his scissors takedown. Does it work for him? sure. How many other people use it? it's something that can work, but you will never see it used more than a double leg, for example.


saying that while fighter X used a crescent kick and knocked fighter Y's block off, more people still used a jab. This makes 0 sense. So the guy doing the crescent kick doesn't by default have a jab? Thats a contribed mental device. So what, if every tom, richard and harry can throw the same punch. I do too, AND, I have a mean crescent kick as well. I have more tools.

which in the grand scheme of this conversation, does not equal a high percentage technique. he's not saying that you don't also have a jab. He's saying that chances are, you will still use your jab more than your crescent kick.


are bascially ending your philosophy with,"you don't need to strive for greater skill. Just do the same basic stuff. "


Now you're being a monkey again.

[The Xia]

ridiculous...easily as ridiculous as a "what if bruce lee was alive today" question. :p
Hey! That's my thread buddy! :p
Seriously though, I feel it is an interesting question.

[SifuAbel]

which in the grand scheme of this conversation, does not equal a high percentage technique. he's not saying that you don't also have a jab. He's saying that chances are, you will still use your jab more than your crescent kick.
.


This was the only part that wasn't non sequitur.

And the answer is , SO WHAT?. So you'll use your jab more than a crescent or a swing punch or whatever. Big deal. Me too, yet I don't ignore the rest of my tools.

Who choses the numbers? For every example of a high kick getting taken down I can show just as many KOs with them. This mentality is contribed.

It always seems convenient that the %'s are chosen to represent that which is in your given paradigm.

And it seems convenient that low percentage techniques are deemed so by people who can't do them, never used them, not in their style, never got hit with them, etc etc .

Actually he said this exactly.

"High kicks will aways be low percentage for all but a very few people at the very highest levels, such as Cro-Cop."

Why should I even care that some low level guy that can't kick well? So the low level guy shouldn't try? Thats dumb, the low level guy will never improve that way. The whole point of training is to achieve a " very high level" .

This whole percentage game reaks of laziness. Its seems to me a dumbing down of MA.

[WinterPalm]

Getting good at what you are good at is a very good idea. I train those things I like the most, the most often and consequently I use them the most. Maybe these differ from the thing my Sifu favours from the style...but we have this variety present so that one doesn't have to rely on specific but can be able to pick and choose, depending on infinite variables, what they are most likely to use and to not use.

When we develop a place to test these techniques and prepare all of our time towards preparing for those specific testing regions, then we are prepared for those circumstances. Without a doubt there should be fast paced, intense sparring in ones training but also the controlled training of striking to sensitive areas without contact and other situational and self-defense based scenarios.
If a sport fighting venue was developed to take place in an elevator you would see a different type of fighting being considered high percentage.

[Knifefighter]

For every example of a high kick getting taken down I can show just as many KOs with them. This mentality is contribed.
LOL!!! There are 10 times more takedowns resulting from high kicks than people getting KO'ed by them.



And it seems convenient that low percentage techniques are deemed so by people who can't do them, never used them, not in their style, never got hit with them, etc etc .
OK, point us to some examples of crescent kicks being used to KO someone.



"High kicks will aways be low percentage for all but a very few people at the very highest levels, such as Cro-Cop." Why should I even care that some low level guy that can't kick well? So the low level guy shouldn't try? Thats dumb, the low level guy will never improve that way. The whole point of training is to achieve a " very high level" .

Another example of why so much KF is BS. The low level guy shouldn't be trying the fancy stuff in the first place. He must first become very good at the basic high percentage stuff and then work on any fancier stuff that he wants to pull out of his toolbox after he becomes a high level practitioner. This is exactly what is wrong with most KF... too little focus on the proven basic stuff and too much emphasis on the esoteric.

Cro-Cop can land the high kicks (in addition to the fact that he is 6'2" and 220 lbs) because he first mastered the basics of the lower kicks and became an expert with them first . His low and mid level kicks do more damage than just about any other fighter in the world.

[Knifefighter]

If a sport fighting venue was developed to take place in an elevator you would see a different type of fighting being considered high percentage.
Nope... you would see pretty much exactly what you already see happening in the clinch and against the fence. The same clinching and fence work will remain high percentage whether it is in an elevator, against a wall, or on the side of the fence in the Octagon.

[The Xia]

Cung Le lands high kicks.

[The Xia]

I have super tight hips, so if I want to kick high, it has to be a crescent kick because I can't turn my hips over to do a proper MT kick over waist-high level.
Can't you fix that with a good stretching routine?

[SevenStar]

And the answer is , SO WHAT?. So you'll use your jab more than a crescent or a swing punch or whatever. Big deal. Me too, yet I don't ignore the rest of my tools.

answer? it was never a question.


Who choses the numbers? For every example of a high kick getting taken down I can show just as many KOs with them. This mentality is contribed.

No, you can't...


It always seems convenient that the %'s are chosen to represent that which is in your given paradigm.

Not true at all. I use the hook kick. But I will be the first to tell you that a hook kick is a low % technique.


And it seems convenient that low percentage techniques are deemed so by people who can't do them, never used them, not in their style, never got hit with them, etc etc .

once again, false. As stated, I use the hook kick, and in my last fight, successfully landed a roundhouse to the head of an opponent that was 5 inches taller than me. It's still low %, it just worked that day.


This whole percentage game reaks of laziness. Its seems to me a dumbing down of MA.

look at import racing. why do you think more people race hondas and acuras than hyundais?

In basketball, why are most of the players tall?

In american football, why are linemen big?

Why is reality TV so prevalent these days?

it's all a percentage game, really. nothing lazy about it.

[David Jamieson]

if it was about percentages, then all mma would be shin kicks and boxing, mt clinch with knees and ground and pound.

i think that the percentages thing is not where it's at.
probably more accurate to say, short and direct, nothing fancy and keep plodding along. Optimizing short and direct takes time.

But if you have a speciality that you have optimized, then that is your high percentage move even if all the other dudes can only bring out a butter churn hook because it's even simpler.

[SifuAbel]

round and round we go.

"oh yes it is"

"oh no it isn't. "

Again, you used a hook kick, its low percentage. Low percentage of what? effectiveness? It didn't work? You miss most of the time? Most of the time it makes your opponent smile because its weak? Nobody has ever landed a kick on you?

on the flip side,
You never miss with a punch? You never get blocked? You never stop your opponents punches? All you opponents punches land on you?

At this point the landed kicks vs. grabbed kicks would number in the hudreds of thousands. And in each match namy more landed than got grabbed. People like liddell seem to kick with impunity.

[SevenStar]

round and round we go.

and yet again, you hop on the carousel and continue to go around as well...

[WinterPalm]

Nope... you would see pretty much exactly what you already see happening in the clinch and against the fence. The same clinching and fence work will remain high percentage whether it is in an elevator, against a wall, or on the side of the fence in the Octagon.

Yep. Try throwing anything resembling a round house kick with four feet either way. More likely it would be knees and elbows with clinch and maybe some takedown but it would look and be trained a lot different than what goes on. Maybe a lot of straight down the line shots.

Heck even the difference between a cage and a ring in MMA makes a big difference in several regards.

Back to Liddell and the swirly hand debate... not my favorite, but go watch a Wing Chun clip...they train pretty much no round shots from what I've seen and they are a CMA. The style I practice has both rounded and straight shots with varying angles of hands, feet, knee, elbow, etc.

MMA practioners get into crazy shape and fight for a venue and train for that circumstance. I don't fear going five rounds in the street and so I don't commit hours of additional time into my training. I do fear someone with a knife or maybe a blindsided attack...so I train for that.

Above all else, I am not on an MMA board trying, nay pleading, with the members to take my point of view when I don't even do MMA.

I do go to a couple Chess forums and try to persuade them to take up Risk as it is a much more realistic and entertaining game.:D

[Green Cloud]

Touche ***** cat, winter palm you go boy that was a perfect post.

[Knifefighter]

if it was about percentages, then all mma would be shin kicks and boxing, mt clinch with knees and ground and pound.
Other than the BJJ that most fighters use, that's pretty much what 99% of MMA is.

[The Xia]

Do you hate TCMA exclusively or do you hate all traditional martial arts that don't have any "ring cred" with many MMA types?
Like what about shuto strikes to the neck that are common in Karate? If someone has a makiwara trained shuto, and he goes to the UFC, are you saying he is not allowed to use it on the side of his opponent’s neck because it is ineffective?

[Green Cloud]

I don't know that there was any miscommunication. But I'll allow that Green Cloud didn't deserve to be called a ****head. In my defense, I DID limit it temporally. I don't generally find Green Cloud to be a ****head, but I thought his comment was unnecessarily dismissive.

My annoyance was built around the fact that what was introduced as definitive fact was, in fact, nothing of the sort. While we can certainly reasonably surmise that Kano must have known that Judo would have a strong sportive component, was that, in fact, his intention, or was it a means to an end?

The difference is quite important - after all, intent is the difference between manslaughter and homicide.

In summation:

1. Nobody has yet introduced evidence to me that clarifies Kano's main intent: was sport the primary goal, or a means to an end (recognizing that this is not an either/or proposition)?
2. I'm sorry I called you a ****head, Green Cloud - my apologies.
3. Cung Le's wrestling and TKD still inform his San Da ringfighting :D

Thanks for that Mp It's all good and It was just a Misscomunication even though we don't always agree on things I do respect what you have to say.

[Mr Punch]

Do we have to go through this again?Cool. finally KFM forums have given me a concrete answer! :D

[Knifefighter]

Do you hate TCMA exclusively or do you hate all traditional martial arts that don't have any "ring cred" with many MMA types?
Like what about shuto strikes to the neck that are common in Karate? If someone has a makiwara trained shuto, and he goes to the UFC, are you saying he is not allowed to use it on the side of his opponent’s neck because it is ineffective?
Are you talking about the infamous "karate chop"?????? Yeah, that's a scary one, alright.

[SifuAbel]

and yet again, you hop on the carousel and continue to go around as well...


What about the rest of it? Do you have an answer? Its this peicemeal BS that makes threads boring.

[lkfmdc]

It's amusing to see the so called defenders of TCMA arguing about high kicks, most TCMA kicks are LOW for a good reason, they are higher percentage... and when high kicks work it is because of the presence of low kicks, IE people think it is going to be another low kick and walk into the high kick.... that's why American KB is such a joke, only kicks above the waist, so pretty much just keep your hands up and you'll never see the kicks do much

As was said previously, a major problem with TCMA is the quest for the "advanced" or "secret" and pretty much no attention to sound basics and high percentage stuff

[omarthefish]

Are you talking about the infamous "karate chop"?????? Yeah, that's a scary one, alright.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=qRawFZ5Cg2A

:D

[SevenStar]

I honestly didn't see anything here worth answering - it seems like you're being rhetorical - a monkey. But, let's see...


Again, you used a hook kick, its low percentage. Low percentage of what? effectiveness? It didn't work? You miss most of the time? Most of the time it makes your opponent smile because its weak? Nobody has ever landed a kick on you?

yes, low percentage of effectiveness. Not in regards to how I well I use it, but how well it's used by people in general. How iften they land, the effect they have, how often / easily it's countered, etc. sure, people have landed kicks on me. Asking that is stupid.


on the flip side,
You never miss with a punch? You never get blocked? You never stop your opponents punches? All you opponents punches land on you?

sure I miss with punches, as has everyone. But you have a better chance of hitting them with one than you do with a hook kick. Once again, the last part of that question is dumb.


At this point the landed kicks vs. grabbed kicks would number in the hudreds of thousands. And in each match namy more landed than got grabbed. People like liddell seem to kick with impunity.

low kicks, sure. high kicks happen, but are for more rare, and you already know why...

[SevenStar]

It's amusing to see the so called defenders of TCMA arguing about high kicks, most TCMA kicks are LOW for a good reason, they are higher percentage... and when high kicks work it is because of the presence of low kicks, IE people think it is going to be another low kick and walk into the high kick.... that's why American KB is such a joke, only kicks above the waist, so pretty much just keep your hands up and you'll never see the kicks do much

As was said previously, a major problem with TCMA is the quest for the "advanced" or "secret" and pretty much no attention to sound basics and high percentage stuff


good post.