What U looking for in a book?

[SPJ]

My bro's likes the book with a lot of pictures of the moves and with arrows--

so that he may learn how to do the mvoes.

me/moi, theory and lots of theory.

what u looking for in a book?

:D

[SaintSage]

My bro's likes the book with a lot of pictures of the moves and with arrows--

so that he may learn how to do the mvoes.

me/moi, theory and lots of theory.

what u looking for in a book?

:D

Something nekkid. :p;)

[NJM]

You beat me to that one, Sage.


My bro's likes the book with a lot of pictures of the moves and with arrows
so that he may learn how to do the moves.

:D

Come on, it's almost too easy.

[SaintSage]

You beat me to that one, Sage.



Come on, it's almost too easy.


Hehe, yeah.

But to actualy answer the question, I tend not to like MA books anymore. I already have a huge collection, and it always seems like, "Those who say, don't know." I like techs, but theory is just fun for a psuedo-philosophical debate with myself.

[SPJ]

My bro is like this.

In the old MA books, there are some drawings with paintbrush or some photos and lots of words to explain the moves.

He started to draw lines, curves and arrows. He even draw pictures to make "senses" out of words of descriptions.

--

:D

[stricker]

#1. for book structure, eddie bravo's Mastering the Rubber Guard

its not that the techniques are good, its the flow diagram, how its layed out as a system with every 'what if' covered etc, it goes right from strategy down to specific technique details. the structure and concept of the book is just great and the blueprint of how to do it IMO. Its encyclopeadic too.

but the content is very specific (advanced guard game for no gi sub wrestling/mma)

#2. close behind that is renzo gracies Mastering ju jitsu.

thats just a great martial arts book that lays it all out, makes everything very simple. the content is broad and a must own for any martial artist IMO. good introduction and broad coverage of the basics and principles of MMA.

[Becca]

I really liked the way your Martial Arts Treasure Chest was layed out. I'm not so into photos and movements, but rather the history of them, how and why they were named and other ways they might be used.:)

[Lucas]

i said all of the above.

but i only like applications techniques in pictures of books if i already know the technique or variations similar so that i have an experienced foundation to really understand what i am seeing.

otherwise i generally ignore the pic aps.

that being said, there are many basics in books that have aspects that cross over to many other things one may already know.

[sunfist]

In my experience, if you learn a set from a book youve basically filled your memory up with meaningless material. However, if you skim it repeatedly there a re two benefits. Firstly, the occasional move or series of moves will jump out at you and trigger an epiphany about something else you were working on.

Secondly, by becoming familiar with the general postures in advance, you can learn the style for real much more efficiently. Say a Tongbei master is coming to town for a couple of seminars, and you have no experience in the style: If you go in cold you very quickly go into overload from the bombardment of new information, however if youve skimmed a decent amount of material before hand, the general shapes of the style are already in your head, which means you can get to work on the details.

Of course youd never do the second because forms are useless and god forbid if you want to sample the material of a skilled individual from another style :p

[SPJ]

yes. agreed that the books with or without pictures are only good for references.

We may read about the names and "see" the postures in drawing or photo's.

however, all the in's and out's have to be learned from a teacher first hand.

--

My bro is a Zhao Bao Tai Chi player. He is very "picture" oriented.

--

theory or the explanations of how and why are very important to know. They are like the "essences" or "principles" of moves/practices.

--

we certainly need to have some practice experiences first before we may be understanding or appreciating the "theory".

--

:)

[SPJ]

http://cmckk.myweb.hinet.net/tongbei/BaGI.htm

I practice Ba Ji and Tong Bei.

This is a website from students of Ma Xiang Da in Taiwan.

It is Ma style Ba Ji or Tong Bei Ba Ji.

I dun know their specific moves or theories.

Since I have practice backgrounds in both.

I may make senses out of words of theory and moves based on my practice experiences.

--

:)

[SPJ]

My point was that we may not do things specifically the same. or all the moves "exactly" the same.

but the general ideas and general moves would be the same.

:D

[SPJ]

actually from what I heard. Ma just put the name of Tong Bei in front of everything he does.

Tong Bei Tang Tui. Tong Bei Fan Zi. Tong Bei Ba Ji.

in that case. then it is not a mixture of Tong Bei and Ba Ji. It may be just Ba Ji.

--

:D

[SPJ]

My mistake.

Tong Bei means general preparation and not extended back or arm.

Sounds the same. Chinese characters are not the same.

oops.

:D

[SPJ]

the slogan is Wen Tong Wu Bei.

mastering/understanding literature. (Wen Tong)

preparing/readying martiality/fighting skills. (Wu Bei)

Tong Bei for short.

The research society was formed by 3 indoor disciples of Ma in Taipei, Taiwan (Dec, 2006).

:)

[BlueTravesty]

While I voted "all of the above" I usually like MA books that are light on technique structure, and discuss more of the principles and theory. The history/legend is good, but ideally a good book should draw the line between the two (a style's verifiable history, and the legends surrounding it.)

The techniques and apps aren't bad, and can help enrich a book; but ultimately, books are better at communicating tangible aspects of the art it is about. I am somewhat biased, as I've never been able to learn from book images- at least not enough to REALLY understand the technique.

My two favorite books are "The Sword Polisher's Record" by Adam Hsu, and "Chinese Martial Arts Training Manuals" by Brian Kennedy and Elizabeth Guo. Technique is almost absent from them, but they are rich in all the other aspects. Despite the lack of technique though, Adam Hsu's book helped me to understand "Silk Reeling" better than any other media available.

[John Takeshi]

Hehe, yeah.

But to actualy answer the question, I tend not to like MA books anymore. I already have a huge collection, and it always seems like, "Those who say, don't know." I like techs, but theory is just fun for a psuedo-philosophical debate with myself.

But if you actually say: "Those who say don't know," aren't you admitting that you don't know? I think it's better just to not know, and never say. That way, nobody can ever say you don't know without admitting, perforce, that they don't know, because they just said it.

[SPJ]

w/o derailing the thread too much.

2 things:

1. MA books may be further categorized. MA-history; MA-techniques; MA-theory etc

even further subcategorized: MA-technique-throws etc.

2. If we are a beginner, we would like to look at the moves and "see" what they are like.

If we already know and practice for a while, we would be looking into more theory and apps.

--

:)

[Becca]

If we already know and practice for a while, we would be looking into more theory and apps.

True; every time I run across a technique I already know and have it explained from another point of veiw, my understaning of it increases exponetially.