Is Kiu Sau Bridging and Two Man Forms Worthless ?

[Firehawk4]

Just wondering what peoples opinions are on Kiu Sau Bridging , Chi Sao , and Two Man Forms do they work agianst Boxers, Muay Thai Boxers , and Mixed Martial Artist ? I have herd a few people with alot of experience who are Sifu s of Kung Fu systems say it dont work for instance it was said that Wong Yan Lam of Lama Kung Fu went around the bridges because Chinese boxers in the early 1900 s had trouble bridgeing with Western Boxers .

[The Xia]

I'll take a guess at what a summary of all the responses might look like.
"They work!"
"No they don't!"
"Kung Fu sucks!"
"No it doesn't!"
"MMA sucks!"
"No it doesn't!"
"Real Kung Fu looks like MMA!"
"No it doesn't!"
:D
Did I miss anything? :p

[Shaolinlueb]

useless? depends on the teacher. 90% of the teachers out there make it repetative moves that dont teach you sheice.

[TenTigers]

in other words,
the techniques are fine.
The teachers are useless.

[monji112000]

I have herd a few people with a lot of experience who are Sifu s of Kung Fu systems say it dont work for instance it was said that Wong Yan Lam of Lama Kung Fu went around the bridges because Chinese boxers in the early 1900 s had trouble bridging with Western Boxers .

I believe you miss-understand what context means. Thats like saying a tire donut is useless because when my batter died It was useful. Different “styles” and “cultures” fight differently. Bridging isn't as easy with boxers. Too many reasons to explain... That doesn't mean you can't bridge. Its not what you want to do its what your opponent will let you do. You may want to punch him... but kicking him is a better option.. ect.. Chi sao is 100% applicable to fighting people.. you just have to understand how to apply it. Thats not easy.
Some basic commonality exists between every person...
For example: In my experience and many other people MOST PEOPLE will go for bear hugs (not single leg and double leg takedowns) and wide hooks. WHY? They are drunk, or don't have martial arts experience. Allot of people like to sucker punch. I don't believe that everyone will pull some mayweather boxing on you... but don't expect someone to just post his hand and let you bridge... its not going happen.

Why am I bothering... if you really have to ask something like this.. then...

[Mr Punch]

I'll take a guess at what a summary of all the responses might look like.
"They work!"
"No they don't!"
"Kung Fu sucks!"
"No it doesn't!"
"MMA sucks!"
"No it doesn't!"
"Real Kung Fu looks like MMA!"
"No it doesn't!"
:D
Did I miss anything? :pYou forgot the other pattern, based on this:


useless? depends on the teacher. 90% of the teachers out there make it repetative moves that dont teach you sheice.

"90% of kung fu isn't taught properly - if it is bridging works"
"but yours is? let's see video of you using it against real live resisting opponents/pro boxers/skilled grapplers/prehistoric killer penguins!"
"I don't have a video camera all the time/ever/I can't vid my secret techs/my sifu isn't interested in publicity/proving himself"
"ha ha, kung fu sucks!"
"No it doesn't!"
"MMA sucks!"
"No it doesn't!"
"Real Kung Fu looks like MMA!"

There is the third KFO option:

"bridging works fine"
"not against grapplers"
"but I'll keep it standing, because my bridging works fine"
"but 90% of fights go to the ground"
"but my bridging works fine so mine doesn't"
"have you tried it against a real live skilled grappler?"
"no, but my kung fu bridging is about sensitivity so all of your jyiuuujyitsoo techs are contained in my bridging anyway"
"how do you know?"
"because CMA must have had grappling"
"ha ha kung fu sucks...!"
"No it doesn't!"
"MMA sucks!"
"No it doesn't!"
"Real Kung Fu looks like MMA!"
"No it doesn't!"

ad infinitum, ad nauseam.

[sunfist]

Just wondering what peoples opinions are on Kiu Sau Bridging , Chi Sao , and Two Man Forms do they work agianst Boxers, Muay Thai Boxers , and Mixed Martial Artist ? I have herd a few people with alot of experience who are Sifu s of Kung Fu systems say it dont work for instance it was said that Wong Yan Lam of Lama Kung Fu went around the bridges because Chinese boxers in the early 1900 s had trouble bridgeing with Western Boxers .

If you ignore what they are saying and keep training how you are training, you can become a perfectly passable, but ultimately not highly capable, martial artist.

If every time your 'betters' tell you a certain (established) technique or tactic is wrong, you immediately avoid it, you can still become a perfectly passable, if not highly capable, martial artist.

If you want to become anything more than mediorce, then while both the opinions of those more experienced than yourself are a valuable guide, and orthodox methods are considered orthodox for many reasons, you still need to ultimately answer the question for yourself.

The short version of this is as follows: Think for yourself, and if this question is really bothering you then why havent you got your ass to a boxing gym already to find out?

[TenTigers]

going around bridges is practiced by many arts, as well as bridging. This is not a new concept, nor does only one system have the monopoly on it. The problem is that many have not either been taught this, or have not taken the time to develop it within themselves. In this day, tooo many people are coddled to the point that they need to be spoon-fed, otherwise they will simply sit there, thoughtless.
I have two teachers, one in Hung Kuen, the other in SPM. Both teachers have similar approaches.
The Hung Kuen Sifu will discuss something, or show a technique during a converstaion, pretty much mentioning it briefly. However, he fully expects me to take it and practice it, as he will suddenly bring it up again the next week, or weeks later out of the blue, to see if I had practiced.
The SPM Sifu lets me struggle and struggle with a technique, or concept, until like a koan, the answer unfolds through self-discovery.
To some, it may seem archaic, but for me, I have never grown so much, both in skill and understanding. Understanding not only TCMA, but my own inner workings. But I digress...
Bottom line-you can take everything at face value. The words of the old-skool, or nu (old) skool. When all is said and done, they are saying the same thing. Get out there, practice, experiment-using yourself as the lab, THINK.

[mantis108]

Personally, to say that Kiu Sau and 2 men forms are worthless is like saying that technique break downs (on step drills) and slow roll in BJJ are worthless. Those are mean for the exponents of the styles to get the fundamentals of the styles down in a clear and definitive way besides the reference point and line familiarization purposes. That's what give shapes to styles.

A fruit baring tree doesn't look like the seed that it once was. Is the seed useless then?

Sure most TCMA styles nowaday are like the tree don't bare fruits. But it's because they don't encourage "randori" or free sparring training as fertilizer, but it's not like we can't add that to the mix. Take that extra step and it will be fruitful.

Mantis108

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

or show a technique during a converstaion, pretty much mentioning it briefly. However, he fully expects me to take it and practice it, as he will suddenly bring it up again the next week, or weeks later out of the blue, to see if I had practiced.

The words of the old-skool, or nu (old) skool. When all is said and done, they are saying the same thing. Get out there, practice, experiment-using yourself as the lab, THINK.

Reply]
You know, if this is all you are going to get from a teacher then how is this better than you and your buddies learning from a book or video?

In fact, a book or video will allow you to repeatedly go back to the source info and give you a better more thorough understanding because of the consistent available reference and repetition....over a teacher who just shows it in passing and expects you to just *Get It* enough to practice it right, after just briefly showing a technique during a conversation.

[TenTigers]

because, once I "get it" and I show it to them , They then proceed to build upon it and bring me to another level. Videos cannot do this. Videos cannot tell you if you are wrong. Videos do not transmit through direct hands on touch. And your friends know as much as you, so where does that lead you? I am sorry that my words cannot explain this adequately. It's like trying to describe what chocolate tastes like. Heck, Eddie Van Halen describes his guitar tone as the "Brown Sound," like wtf does that mean?

[TenTigers]

back on topic-can you bridge a boxer?
yeah.
Then again, what is your definition of bridge? If it means standing in a side horse and extending a tensioned kiu-sao, etc. Well, no, of course not, silly. Now go and shoot your teacher.
Bridge is simply a connection. Hands, feet,intent, meet, it is a bridge. Clinching is a bridge,jamming is a bridge, crowding is a bridge, do I have to break down every permutation of this?
Can you use chi-sao against a boxer? Yeppers like peppers. BUT-if you are thinking about going in there and rolling, or arm-clinging? Load up, fire away, shoot your teacher.
Chi-sao develops touch sensitivity for ONE SPLIT-SECOND IN TIME. You touch my hand,arm, shoulder, whatever, and I will roll, run,press,or hit when there is no opposition-thrust forward when the hand is free.
Can you use trapping against a boxer? uh, yea-ah (Friends tone) BUT..if you are thinking of crossing his jab over his rear hand, or some dumbsh!t like that, you deserve the punch that will follow. Lock n' Load...
Is a clinch a trap? Is draping over his guard a trap? Certainly.
Don't look for textbook,picture perfect exact definitions, look for the underlying concept, and take it from there.
I apologize to any Sifu who might have taken offense at my attempt at sarcastic humor, in telling the student to shoot his teacher. For all those teachers that fully understand these simple ideas and just have stupid students, my sympathy goes out to you. Now go and shoot your stupid students.

Disclaimer: The above post and statements were not to be taken seriously and were said in a sarcastic, and humorous tone. Any shooting of ones teacher, or students, as a result of reading above post, is the soley an act of God, according to the laws of natural selection. Darwin Awards will be handed out posthumously.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

because, once I "get it" and I show it to them , They then proceed to build upon it and bring me to another level. Videos cannot do this. Videos cannot tell you if you are wrong. Videos do not transmit through direct hands on touch

Reply]
Yeah, but you said he barely gives instruction, like just in passing during a conversation, and then WEEKS go by without any feed back. Now you are saying he has to see that you have managed to "Get It" on your own before he comes in and offeres any coaching or teaching.

So for the last 3 weeks (or how ever long it takes you to figure it out yourself and not need him) you have been doing it wrong, not knowing it and have now trained errors into yourself that have to be undone.

And what if you never "Get it"...is he going to just wait, and wait, and wait while you reinvent the wheel yourself??

It's about as inefficient as you can get. You would be better off NOT learning anything about it until you can be taught properly. Enough with this "Prove yourself" crap. He either accepts you as his student, or he doesn't. How many times do you have to "Prove yourself"?

You don't see any nonsense like this in an MMA school...they just teach and hold nothing back. Which is precisely why a 6 month MMA student can usually pound the snot out of a 3 year Kung Fu student.

You would be better off if he was TEACHING you thourally and correctly the first time, instead of blowing it off. At least that way you will have the PROPER foundation in the techniques principals right away. Heck, with that you can ascend to higher levels of it on your own, but to make you foolishly struggle for an extended period of time where you "May, or May not" eventually "Get it" is just plain BAD teaching.

A book or video would show it in detail (Which you don't get from your teacher), and you have the option of going back over, and over again as needed. With your friends doing the same thing, and double checking against your interpretations, you will get far closer to being right than the way your teacher does it. The book/Video is offering far more info than your teacher does.

Personally, I wouldn't waste my time with a teacher who's teaching ability is out done by a book.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Videos cannot tell you if you are wrong. Videos do not transmit through direct hands on touch

Reply]
No, but your friends who are also watching the video can by comparing what you do, to the book, or video. Through a process of going back and forth and consistent and detailed examination for a few weeks, you and your partners will get it pretty darn good...where as the guys who got the brief momentary scrap from your teacher will still be fumbling around in the dark, probably get it wrong, and will need to be retaught, IF they ever figured it out close enough for him to bother in the first place.

Like I said above, if I had a teacher who's teaching skills were out done by a book or video, I'd find someone else.

[Shaolinlueb]

in other words,
the techniques are fine.
The teachers are useless.


yes, because they can not properly translate and transmit their martial arts to their students. or they don't care anymore and just want the money.

the teacher could be awesome at martial arts, but if you can't teach. then don't teach. you are fooling yourself and your students . as a successful school owner and teacher you should know that ;) it isn't easy and not everyone can do it.

a teacher doesn't know everything in martial arts, they can't. there is too much. i am always looking up and reading stuff to find answers. always watching demo's and see how some of these master's move to understand body movement and connectivity. if i don't know the answer i don't make up something i say i will get back to you.


so is bridging useless? no, it has its purpose. if it was useless I am sure they wouldn't have come up with the concept and kept using it. other styles do bridging too. someone on here was talking about bridging in boxing i believe.

2 man forms? if done right, and you treat each attack as a real attack, and each block as a real block. you are getting something out of it. if you are moving your hands cause your teacher says so, you should pay me cause i can do the same.

i love 2 man sets, but one of my "things" about them, is the emphasis on the traditional. i believe in practicing traditional 2 man sets along with more modern.
by traditional i hope everyone knows what i means. in some sets you have big circular arm blocks, leaving yourself open to get to the next move, etc. i can go on. i think everyone knows what i am talking about.
by a modern fight set, i mean, keeping the gaurd up, less emphasis on the stance, but mechanics in there to show you how to use them in a "modern situation", making it more of something you would encounter on the street instead of 16th century china.


don't turn this into an mma vs tcma thread.

mma after 6 months i can do this, yeah we all get it.

[TenTigers]

Certainly not fumbling around in the dark, as we work on many things, but once a concept becomes more clear, suddenly all other tings start to fall into place, like a chain reaction. Skill is skill, and it gets developed over time, but certain skills are learned differently than standard teaching methods. Hard to explain, but some things, even if you "Know it," become suddenly crystalized over time,effort,and patience. As far a s no feedback, that isn't entirely correct-there is constant feedback, but there is a form of self-discovery that is only possible in this way. Yes, I teach, and as a teacher, I constantly rack my brain to find better methods to get a student from point A to point B. Drills, re-arranging the curriculum, etc. But some things simply take time. Iron palm-sure, I 'get it' hit the bag, different surfaces, graduating levels of material,striking, duration, noi-gung, exercises, and simply do this three times a day for a year, etc. Knowing it and doing it are two entirely different things. Noi-gung is another. You can read all the Mantak Chia books you want, but again, "getting it" and knowing through time and doing are different.
Certain things you can definately get from vids, and training partners. Other things, such as specific qualities of energy cannot be conveyed, except through touch.
Not to sound like a brat, but honestly, if you think this is not true, then you simply haven't experienced it. Anyone who has, would back this up in a heartbeat.
-it also doesn't mean your MA is missing anything or you will become a better fighter. I might develop a special skil and get whupped by the next joe that walks in the door. Where does it get you? Dunno, Don't care. I'm fifty next week and my reasons for study might be different than yours. Certain skills are something that not many people really strive to achieve anymore anyway. I am sure nobody is digging holes in their backyard trying to develop light skills...?

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

Mantis108: excellent post, kudos....

Be well..

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Personally, to say that Kiu Sau and 2 men forms are worthless is like saying that technique break downs (on step drills) and slow roll in BJJ are worthless. Those are mean for the exponents of the styles to get the fundamentals of the styles down in a clear and definitive way besides the reference point and line familiarization purposes. That's what give shapes to styles

Reply]
Most two man sets have holes in them that are easily exploited. This leads me to believe that they are a bridge between single tech/app practice, and free sparring. I have often done them, and then attacked the holes forcing my opponent to counter my random techniques. His counters are generally not part of the set, so it forces me to counter his counter and a whole new series is spontaneously manifested. It forces you to learn how to deal with unpredictable forces. Full out free sparring come quickly after that.

[TenTigers]

RD-in the way I was trained, that is precisely the method. The two-man sets-(providing they are not a watered down demo set,which many are) are cooperative templates. In real application, the idea is to shut down your opponent on the first beat,which would negate the rest of the set. Once you know the form, you break it up, and eventually it must be disgarded, otherwise you will actually get worse.
Especially with 2-man weapon sets."When using the staff, don't expect two sounds."

[Golden Arms]

Ten - Couldnt agree more on the Koan/planted seed method of learning. This is how both my current teacher and a past teacher taught and, and it led to the ability to develop very adaptable, intuitive and usable technique. This method of practice follows the Zen/Chaan model/method of practice like a mirror. It allows you to not only get a good variety of knowledge, but incredible depth to that knowledge, at a body level. This is I think one of those things where approaching it with the western mindset can really mess it up. In the words of my teacher "Dont change something until you understand why it is the way it is, then you are welcome to change it if you still think it needs to be changed".

RD, you of all people are the last one I would expect to not understand this since you seem to be a lone wolf in some respects in your martial style practice with the TZ stuff.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

the idea is to shut down your opponent on the first beat,which would negate the rest of the set.

Reply]
I think it is also important to ignore the holes in the beginning of the set at times so you can work the holes engineered into the rest of the set too. There are lessons there as well.


RD, you of all people are the last one I would expect to not understand this since you seem to be a lone wolf in some respects in your martial style practice with the TZ stuff.

Reply]
Actually, this is *Why* I have a really good understanding of the method...to the point that I really don't agree with it. Over the years, I have found that I have made the most progress when someone actually takes the time to thourally teach me something.Later I have the ability to go beyond those teachings and find higher levels on my own.

The other way around, where you only learn scraps in the briefest manor, you never really learn it deep enough to walk the path alone and unguided. You allways need that teacher there to help you along....AND you really learn less than if you just had the manual or video.

Now, one might argue that it may not work that way for others because I happen to be exceptionally skilled with pulling material out of books and videos to such a degree that I can often get it better than another who has a live teacher, but still, that does not change the fact that when I have had real skilled guys who taught me openly, and in a detailed manor, I learned light years ahead of times when I was taught in the way Ten Tigers described.

I have found it is literally *Light years* ahead of the other method. To be thourally taught a techniques in all it's intricacies the first time basically gives you the foundation to not even need a teacher to make it to advanced levels.

Either way you still have to train the techniques, and gain independent experience with them....why not go with the guy who will lay the most solid foundation?

[Black Jack II]

I understand where TenTigers is coming from in certain regards but when a teacher just gives you one element, and just walks away I often attribute that to lazy teaching depending on his real motivation and the schools goals.

But sometimes it's good for a teacher to let you just "play", to steal an FMA concept from the past. People are wired different, some learn better by audio, some visual, most through the actual feel of the technique so its base principles can be learned through the concept of failure.

Actually if your using the concept of play, you can really grow a simple technique into something much more personal, but again if the technique was not really shown to any solid degree in the first place then ehhh.

[TenTigers]

RD-good point-in SPM, my SI-Hings were taught hands on drills, and then when I came aboard, the Sifu decided to teach the two-man set. The Si-Hings were beyond the set , so it made no point to even learn it, as it would entail dumbing down their technique. Unless they were going to teach, it doesn't serve them.
BJ-I can guess, I will be catching alot of flak, only because it is really hard to convey this method of teaching. (Golden arms said it better. Apologies-I am not as articulate as I would like.) It certainly is not out of laziness, as both Sifus are totally entusiastic and passionate about their arts, and it is reflected in everything they do.

[Black Jack II]

Ten,

Not from me, its all in how a person learns and how people want to learn, I just think the way it came across was that a sifu shows a technique, walks away and lets you figure it out for yourself and then recorrects later after you have played with it.

That was how a some of old school material was taught.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Not from me, its all in how a person learns and how people want to learn, I just think the way it came across was that a sifu shows a technique, walks away and lets you figure it out for yourself and then recorrects later after you have played with it.

That was how a some of old school material was taught.

Reply]
Which is exactly why so many systems are just empty shells of what they once were.

[Golden Arms]

Same as above what Ten said...The teacher doesnt walk away, as in not teaching, they just dont explain the good parts, they let you find them. Part of how you find them is doing it on your own, part is having it done TO you correctly, so you feel this thing that you dont have and keep striving to find your way of unlocking it. This is different from someone just walking up and showing you something and then you practicing it in a vacuum for a couple years...although I am fairly certain a gifted individual could still learn well even in those circumstances.

[Black Jack II]

This is different from someone just walking up and showing you something and then you practicing it in a vacuum for a couple years

Who says you practice it in a vacuum. There is no real difference in the description than the first method than the second. It's just being hypothetical.

Best way to learn is to be taught the technique first than drill the living hell out of it in the lab to see where in your reality the technique really exists and to play with its underlying principle. Having an experianced teacher, partners or having direct experiance yourself in the subject matter is the next part of the formula so recorrections and viewpoints can be readdressed, that you encounter under pressure.

Be this lab a combo of sparring, drilling, attribute enchancement or whatever.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

The teacher doesnt walk away, as in not teaching, they just dont explain the good parts

Reply]
That is the same as not teaching. The good parts are the essence/foundation of the technique...if he does not teach you THAT first, he hasn't taught you anything. \

Basically he's giving you an idea, and letting you reinvent the wheel on your own (and charging you as if he actually did something)...when he could have just taught it right the first time, saved lots of time and stumbling while you try to figure it out by your self. Can you imagine if you had a math teacher do that?


Ok Class see these figures, those are numbers....now go figure out how to add and subtract them, and if you can, I will teach you how to add and subtract some more.......See Yah!! I have to take a nap.....

Or better yet, he already taught addition and subtraction, but briefly explains what multiplication and division are and leaves you to teach your self, ONLY offering help once, and *IF* you figure it out yourself.

If you have to figure it out yourself, then you really don't need him....you can get everything he gave you and more out of a book or video for a small fraction of the cost.

If you have to figure it out yourself, then you might as well study MMA tapes and make up your own fighting method.

If you have to figure it out yourself, you might as well just go learn from the book....at least then you have a reference and some documentation.

[TenTigers]

"-Basically he's giving you an idea, and letting you reinvent the wheel on your own (and charging you as if he actually did something)"

..yeah, but neither of my teachers charge me for instruction.
(that does not mean I do not give them lai-see when appropriate)

[Golden Arms]

RD, like I said, this is just a viewpoint thing. You hate it and I like it. If a teacher explains to me the exact alignment of a Kiu Sau from tip of the finger to my feet..I can spend less time and get it, correct. However, if he tells me some of it, has me do it a lot and find out WHY its that way, and why some things are NOT certain ways, I now come out of it with a much deeper knowledge and body feel for that movement and structure. I prefer depth over speed, and so this way works for me. I am more than happy to learn this way as well because when I am older and my teachers are dead, I will have the ability to change, and expand what I know still, since I will have the taste, flesh and bone, of my art, for my body. It is a path to true understanding if you will work hard.

I would not imply that it is the only path however, just one that works well for me.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

I prefer depth over speed,

Reply]
Speed and depth do hand in hand. If you are taught right t begin with, you have the skill, and deep understanding right away too (Because you are shown it form the start, instead of having to guess things out). You will never have that if you must reinvent the wheel....what you will have is something you made up yourself, not something that is actually part of the style you are trying to learn.



I am more than happy to learn this way as well because when I am older and my teachers are dead, I will have the ability to change, and expand what I know still

Reply]
You will have that ability anyway, and probably better because you will be better versed in the fundamentals to begin with, instead of struggling to grasp simple concepts due to the fact that your teacher simply does not want to teach and would rather drag out the learning process by stringing you along.

[Golden Arms]

Sounds like our views differ, or perhaps you have had a bad experience in the past. I am happy with my training as well, but like I said, I dont think it is the only way, just A way.

Why would you guess Zen practice for instance is transmitted in similar fashion if it is just reinventing the wheel to sit? What is your viewpoint on it?

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Zen is totally different, it's not a technical skill. It's a method of thinking really, so exercises in alternate thinking processes are important.

[Notintheface]

Personally, to say that Kiu Sau and 2 men forms are worthless is like saying that technique break downs (on step drills) and slow roll in BJJ are worthless. Those are mean for the exponents of the styles to get the fundamentals of the styles down in a clear and definitive way besides the reference point and line familiarization purposes. That's what give shapes to styles.

A fruit baring tree doesn't look like the seed that it once was. Is the seed useless then?

Sure most TCMA styles nowaday are like the tree don't bare fruits. But it's because they don't encourage "randori" or free sparring training as fertilizer, but it's not like we can't add that to the mix. Take that extra step and it will be fruitful.

Mantis108

If I may, even if "randori" or free sparring was added I am pretty sure that a majority of what is taught in TCMA would be pruned down to a minimum in order to deal with modern fighting methods that normally occur on the street or in the ring.
As far as Kiu Sau being used I would say maybe, I am referring to cage combat atm, it could be used in the clinch against the cage to possibly do a quick touch press to set up for an elbow. Please correct me if I am thinking incorrectly since it has been a while since I have done any kung fu.

Now for the two man forms and its current state per my knowledge. The 2 man has always been accepted as true and right reguardless if you mess up or how asinine the technique may seem. In the slow roll you are practicing a technique that will be later tested against a full resisting opponent. There is little to no testing after a 2 man is taught. What most kung fuers thing is pressure testing looks like slap boxing. Try applying mantis catches the cicada or Bong sau on someone really trying to take your head off. If you are able to apply it more times than not then it works. No amount of time will ever allow you to use a technique that just won't work.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

There is little to no testing after a 2 man is taught.

Reply]
2 man work is supposed to evolve into full on free fighting.

[Black Jack II]

2 man work is supposed to evolve into full on free fighting.

Maybe so but how often do you see schools doing this as a free form drill?????

[YungChun]

Really good stuff here.

The original poster, and others should re-read..


Can you use chi-sao against a boxer? Yeppers like peppers. BUT-if you are thinking about going in there and rolling, or arm-clinging? Load up, fire away, shoot your teacher.
Chi-sao develops touch sensitivity for ONE SPLIT-SECOND IN TIME. You touch my hand,arm, shoulder, whatever, and I will roll, run,press,or hit when there is no opposition-thrust forward when the hand is free.
Can you use trapping against a boxer? uh, yea-ah (Friends tone) BUT..if you are thinking of crossing his jab over his rear hand, or some dumbsh!t like that, you deserve the punch that will follow. Lock n' Load...

This stuff will invariably leave many a student scratching their heads... If more students "got this" less of them would end up with fat lips..


Try applying mantis catches the cicada or Bong sau on someone really trying to take your head off. If you are able to apply it more times than not then it works. No amount of time will ever allow you to use a technique that just won't work.
You can't really test a Bong sao.. Cause for its use has to "be there" if it isn't then there is no way to force using it.. It's a close range transitory movement often used to <help them> close off their line or facing..

If Kiu Sao doesn't work it's a good bet that it isn't being used right... It would depend on exactly what the app is...

In general a healthy dose of forward energy--a will to close, enter and HIT might just get it kick started..

[Notintheface]

Actually I have see a lot of them Blackjack plus like I said I was a kung fu addict as well :)

RD's

There is little to no testing after a 2 man is taught.

Reply]
2 man work is supposed to evolve into full on free fighting.

Can you honestly say that this free sparring goes beyond the slap boxing phase?
Honestly if I was pushed to describe "free fighting" it would wind up being a slow roll...... maybe and if it goes hard it winds up looking like kick boxing. If I am wrong, could you point me in the direction of some free fighting material that demonstrates actual usage? When I say useage, I do mean more than the random backfist, long fist attack or attempted Pak sao. I mean actually using trips, throws, kicks and what have you that actually more contact than a slap to the body. Just because you can tap someone doesn't mean your technique will actually connect with the proper power. Hell I used to think I knew how to throw a decent jab just because I was bad ass on the pads. **** that first time I threw one on a live opponent, a boxer, I got KTFO. But yeah supposed to doesn't always happen and from my experience usually doesn't. But I would more than be delighted to eat my foot bro if you can point me in the right direction.

[Notintheface]

ok. even with it being a transitional move it is unneeded transition at best when considering fighting dynamics. but then again if I misinformed please direct me towards a working example.


If Kiu Sao doesn't work it's a good bet that it isn't being used right... It would depend on exactly what the app is...

Saying that is just silly, it either works or it doesn't. there isn't a maybe, sometimes, well if the moon is full. If you get in the position to apply a technique then you should be able to apply it point blank. Hell, I think that seven star sweep( Modified) that the mantis folk do could easily be adapted to MMA. (Thanks Tony oh wait I don't know him) I know this because I have tried it a on fatigued opponents and it works plus it sets up for a nice take down.

[YungChun]

Saying that is just silly, it either works or it doesn't. there isn't a maybe
The technique, any technique must be a reflection of what the opponent is doing.. Indeed one's action should be a reflection of the opponent's action...in an attempt to 'fit in' with him, adapt with him and take him....

It would be *silly* for me to randomly select any particular move and then randomly choose a time to apply it.. The correct conditions—distance, position, timing, energy, etc, must exist before ANY technique can be successfully applied...

It would be "silly" to imply otherwise... :D:p

[Notintheface]

It would be *silly* for me to randomly select any particular move and then randomly choose a time to apply it.. The correct conditions—distance, position, timing, energy, etc, must exist before ANY technique can be successfully applied..

I can not argue that, you are spot on with that observation. So let us just discuss the technique itself then. What would be the optimal condition that the bridge could be used in effectively? Could it it off a jab or perhaps hook punch?


It would be *silly* for me to randomly select any particular move and then randomly choose a time to apply it.. The correct conditions—distance, position, timing, energy, etc, must exist before ANY technique can be successfully applied...

No it wouldn't be silly, If I say I can do an RNC, a Muay Thai kick, or even an Iron broom sweep, I should be able to apply with a proper set up or timed moment in a full on attack. The difference between the techniques, not so sure on the iron broom sweep, have been proven again and again. The point I am trying to make, and I know I sound like a broken record, that is really no evidence of it working. I could be talking out of my butt, :D, but there is proof out there to back up what I am saying. As far as the 2 man stuff, Bridge, ect, I want to be made into a believer again but with proof and not just anecdotal evidence.

I guess the ole KUNG FUer in me wants to believe again. PLEASE MAKE ME A BELIEVER...

good reply by the way

[lkfmdc]

If I may, even if "randori" or free sparring was added I am pretty sure that a majority of what is taught in TCMA would be pruned down to a minimum



Been there, done that, have the mo gwoon :D

The most (the filter takes out the word "fun da mental"? WTC?)

principle at NY San Da (http://www.nysanda.com) is that everything we do, we drill under realistic conditions. So over the years stuff has gotten pruned down, thought not as much as most would suppose. We still have a MASSIVE curriculum of material we work with (and that's just standing, not including the BJJ we also do).

I also think that not that long ago, before the commercial schools at the turn of the 19th to 20th century, most TCMA was mostly drilling and had a LOT less forms and form work

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

I also think that not that long ago, before the commercial schools at the turn of the 19th to 20th century, most TCMA was mostly drilling and had a LOT less forms and form work

Reply]
My research seems to agree with that. Forms were for teachers to organize thier curriculum's, and for personal refinement of body mechanics and sport specific maintenance of cardio, range of motion etc... They were never for the students.

My style didn't even HAVE forms untill it was given to Shaolin to preserve in the early Sung dynasty. Before that it was just drills of the loose techniques and fight strategy along with lots of conditioning. A great many line most likely continued that way trough the Ming dynasty I am sure.

[Shaolinlueb]

i agree with ten tigers, the teacher lets you figure it out.

at first it will be hard. but in the future, things will be easier to see and learn. less instruction will be needed, etc.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

i agree with ten tigers, the teacher lets you figure it out

Reply]
If I have to figure it out myself, what the hell do I need a teacher for?

When we are in school, we are TAUGHT how to do math, we are TAUGHT how to read, write, we are TAUGHT the history, and sciences.


You don't go to school and the teacher says look, see these letters? they make words, now figure out how to read for yourself so I can go do anything but have to actually teach what I know.

sorry, but the go figure it out for yourself is a lame excuse and really means I don't actually know anything, or I don't know HOW to teach, so you are on your own to invent whatever you can.

If you have to figure it out on your own, how are you going to ever learn the style? Figuring it out on your own means you MAKE IT UP YOURSELF!!!

I think it's totally lame. If I go to a teacher to learn a style, especially if I am paying, I expect to be TAUGHT the style, not be blown off and told to go figure it out myself......

[Black Jack II]

Being the western capitalistic pig that I am, I agree with Royal on this, in specific if the guy is charging you for his service.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

It's not even a matter of charging. If someone is claiming to teach, then they have to teach. Otherwise the art is NOT passed on. You end up with guy who all made up thier own thing, and the art that was supposedly taught ends up dieing because no one was ever taught it properly.

To not teach, and just tell your students to go "Figure it out themselves" means you will now have an endless variety of NEW STYLES all using the same name as the original one...which now no longer exists. You get lots of impostor arts, and the real one is gone.

[Black Jack II]

It's not even a matter of charging. If someone is claiming to teach, then they have to teach.

Not the correct, if he is not charging he really does not have to do anything, its the students problem at that point to see if what the teacher is doing fits in with his own best interests.

Nobody has to do anything and if it dies off maybe it was never meant to be.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Not true, if he commits to teach, he commits to teach....his rates are not relevant.

[Black Jack II]

Not true, if he commits to teach, he commits to teach....his rates are not relevant.

Difference of view, I believe if a person charges then they owe much more responsibility to the student on the manner he learns the data, if he does not charge then he has less of that responsibility on how that manner can be imparted and more freedom to do whatever he see's fit, for better or worse.

Even the charging aspect does not make good teachers, its hit and miss with everything, my point is if your charging you owe more to the student in the basic regard that he is paying you for said service, does that mean you will get better treatment...no.

[TenTigers]

one-there is no charge.aside from the usual lai-sees
two-did your math teacher ever give you problems,equations to figure out, homework, classwork, a quiz, or were the answers given along right there? Things must have changed since I went to school (uphill, both ways, in the snow,barefoot),had to fight a grizzley off with my bookbag,and we were thankful.)
anyway-you aren't getting my point and only seem to have caught a word or two, and from that are drawing your own conclusions. It is not an easy concept to get, but lety me assure you, that there is always guidance,always thought-provoking methods, pressure testing,hands on instruction, etc. I always get feedback, but only after I work on it, then I relate my experience, and then am given direction, but still, I need to go home and work,sweat, bang my head on the wall...
When I teach a form, I show the short sequence three times. I walk through it move by move, then after three times, I walk away. I tell the student to "Sweat over it. It doesn't matter if you make mistakes, just try your best to remember it and work on it" then after awhile, I come back to them and "talk them through it" and I find that they remember it much better. Of course there are some glitches here and there, but if I hold their hand through the entire process, they never learn anything. Have you ever had the experience of being in the passenger seat driving to a place, and even if yuo do it several times, once you are the driver, you don't know how to get there? It is because you didn't need to focus on the directions. Learning anything is the same thing. You can not be handheld throughout your training. Otherwise, you never actually learn. You may be able to imitate, but what will you really know and understand? It is like a parrott speaking without knowing what they are saying.

(of course, recent evidence has shown that parrotts might actually have an understanding of their words...but you get the idea)

[Golden Arms]

Well said TT. Same experience here.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Ten Tigers,
See, what you describe there is a much more in depth teaching then the "Brief" mention in passing you stated before, and is more in line with what I am saying.

The constant correction, and guidance is teaching. That is not how you presented it before.

[TenTigers]

yeah, sorry. I am not as atriculate as I would like. It's hard to convey, as well.