Blame David Carradine, MMA vs. TCMA, Chest-beating, and why I’ve come not to care [Archive]

View Full Version : Blame David Carradine, MMA vs. TCMA, Chest-beating, and why I’ve come not to care

The Xia

10-05-2007, 08:01 PM

To me, David Carradine represents all the wrong things that people look for in TMA. He represents a shallow esotericism for the sake of feeling “cool”. They then call it “philosophy,” or more appallingly, Buddhism and Taoism. He represents an obsession with hierarchy and formalities that reflect said shallow esotericism. He represents corny 50s TV morals rolled into fortune cookie form that become the virtues of the “philosophy.” The 50s TV morals seem to be the major hook for soccer moms, and the shallow esotericism to the LARPers. However, they are both part of the same strand. But guess what? This isn’t limited to TCMA, as much of the talk on this forum seems to assume.
JMA has tons of mcdojos and LARPers and the situation with KMA looks the worst. Believe it or not, there was once a time when Tae Kwan Do meant hard training! So TCMA is not alone. I’d also think that there are far less schools that claim TCMA then JMA and KMA. Sure, there are bad apples, but there are still plenty of good schools out there. If you are in one, surely you must know of others. The CMA world is rather connected. So obviously you must know that there is good stuff being taught out there.
Then we come to the MMA vs. TCMA thing. Why do TCMA people let it get to them to the point they start questioning what they do? As mentioned before, CMA isn’t only a grouping of styles, it’s an inter-connected community. It’s not really part of the MMA world. CMA have their own tournaments available to them if they want to. Why go MMA? Not to mention, what if someone doesn’t care about competing? That doesn’t make them bad martial artists. There are loads of skilled MA who don’t do sport fighting.
And how’s about all this chest-thumping that MMA seems to be bringing on? Honestly, as stated before, I am anything BUT for stupid David Carradine style shallowness and morals. But come on! Constant bragging, posturing, and taunting are not qualities I admire. Maybe it’s just me, but anyone notice lots of dumb jock types getting into MMA? Coincidence? I think not. Frankly, if I wanted to watch that kind of thing, I’d turn on pro-wrestling. They’ve had years of practice to perfect those antics lol. Why fall prey to that? This, and the sloppiness of many MMA players (come on, UFC striking does not look like Muay Thai from Thailand to me) turn me off to it.
My point is for the TCMA people on this board. If what you do is worthwhile, why do you care what MMA people on the internet have to say? The fact is that there are good TCMA schools out there. To me, the worth of TCMA is self-evident. I don’t really care what MMA people think about it. I really don’t like these TCMA vs. MMA threads, but it appears that all this internet talk has gotten to people. If I can get at least a few posters to do what I decided to do awhile ago, this thread will have been a success. What is that you may ask? Largely ignore the MMA propaganda, and go back to talking mostly about TCMA. After all, this IS a Kung Fu forum!

The Willow Sword

10-05-2007, 08:07 PM

you drunk or somethin? dude you have posted better things. This is Stupid. Put down the sake and have some coffee or go to sleep man. :rolleyes:

Peace,TWS

Anthony

10-05-2007, 08:20 PM

Wonder what it was like before he edited it. Gotta be drunk or high.....sounds like his friends just dropped him off home after a night out.

The Xia

10-05-2007, 08:21 PM

All I did was add this "After all, this IS a Kung Fu forum!" when I edited it.

The Xia

10-05-2007, 08:22 PM

I only posted this because I'm noticing that all this internet BS seems to actually be changing people's minds.

Anthony

10-05-2007, 09:01 PM

I was just kidding so don't get insulted. Just having fun.

Anyway, just want to say that I don't really share your view on "Kung-fu" the series. The original series anyway. I don't think it's TV morals at all. I think that the life wisdom espoused by Master Po was quite good (I mean well written and meaningfull). But, I agree that the show doesn't represent what TCMA is factually. I think it's the fantasy of what people (including myself) want TCMA to be about. Morality, self-discipline, hard work, etc.

At the same time, we owe the show some gratitude. At that time it got many people curious and interested in TCMA.

And I agree with you that there is some stupidity on this forum lately. Why can't two people fight a challenge match without a long, drawn out, useless thread of people talking about it. Where do people get the time?

I train to better myself. Not to be better than the other guy.

I could care less about MMA. It's boring to watch, it has no entertainment value whatsoever (unless youre also into gay porno), and I don't care to roll around hugging another guy.

Personally, I'm in it for my own health and fitness. Kind of like going to the gym-I'm not trying to bench press more than someone else, just trying to make myself stronger....we'll you get it.

Anthony_ATT

10-05-2007, 10:32 PM

The Xia

10-05-2007, 10:57 PM

I was just kidding so don't get insulted. Just having fun.
No biggie. Just wanted it to make clear why I was posting this. :)

Anyway, just want to say that I don't really share your view on "Kung-fu" the series. The original series anyway. I don't think it's TV morals at all. I think that the life wisdom espoused by Master Po was quite good (I mean well written and meaningfull). But, I agree that the show doesn't represent what TCMA is factually. I think it's the fantasy of what people (including myself) want TCMA to be about. Morality, self-discipline, hard work, etc.
Personally, I haven’t even seen much of the TV show to be honest. I have seen some of it a long time back. But to be honest, I never paid much mind to the show. I used Carradine because he has come to symbolize the mentality I mentioned. Also, people who embody the traits I described often happen to be fond of that show. Not to mention, from what I’ve seen of David Carradine in recent years, he looks pretty goofy to me. “Yellow book.coooooooooom……” It’s about as deep as some of the “wisdom” MA LARPers come out with. So I used him. lol
I do believe in positive effects of training, but it’s not anything like the Carradine mentality (to call it something). If you have good Gung Fu, that in of itself says you have self-discipline and worked hard. So you have that covered. As for morality, there is Mo Duk/Wu De. TCMA types often worked in illegal or semi-legal professions within China. They fought in brawls, challenges, duels, clan wars, etc. All of this would disqualify TCMA from fitting within the LARPer idea of morality. However, you have examples of TCMA masters standing up for people when no one else would. You have examples of TCMA masters giving free medical care to people that couldn’t afford it. So there definitely is a martial virtue, it’s just not what LARPers or soccer moms think it is.

At the same time, we owe the show some gratitude. At that time it got many people curious and interested in TCMA.
True, but there is that issue of making people interested for all the wrong reasons. :D

And I agree with you that there is some stupidity on this forum lately. Why can't two people fight a challenge match without a long, drawn out, useless thread of people talking about it. Where do people get the time?
Heh, that’s part of the Mo Duk I’m referring to (or lack thereof). Say what you will about our TCMA ancestors, but think about how they handled challenges vs. what we are seeing right now.

I train to better myself. Not to be better than the other guy.

I could care less about MMA. It's boring to watch, it has no entertainment value whatsoever (unless youre also into gay porno), and I don't care to roll around hugging another guy.

Personally, I'm in it for my own health and fitness. Kind of like going to the gym-I'm not trying to bench press more than someone else, just trying to make myself stronger....we'll you get it.
That reason is fine by me. Mine is that I simply enjoy it. The health and self-defense benefits are definite pluses as well.

Shaolin Wookie

10-06-2007, 03:22 AM

My point is for the TCMA people on this board. If what you do is worthwhile, why do you care what MMA people on the internet have to say? The fact is that there are good TCMA schools out there. To me, the worth of TCMA is self-evident. I don’t really care what MMA people think about it. I really don’t like these TCMA vs. MMA threads, but it appears that all this internet talk has gotten to people. If I can get at least a few posters to do what I decided to do awhile ago, this thread will have been a success. What is that you may ask? Largely ignore the MMA propaganda, and go back to talking mostly about TCMA. After all, this IS a Kung Fu forum!

I agree with you on some points, not on others.

#1-MMA striking does not look like MT striking. This is ultimately incorrect. One of the things I admire about MMA fighting is the way they practice "all-defense" When they strike, we sometimes think it's sloppy, or poorly structured. This is because the movements have to be less exaggerated than even MT allows. Why? It is when you're striking that you're most vulnerable to takedowns. One of the weaknesses of MMA, however, is their commitment to absorbing every kick and punch thrown at them. But it's also their strength, in some cases, because it allows for more takedowns when they land their traps (snaring the leg), grabs, trips, and takedowns.

#2-dumb jocks and MMA. Okay, this is kind of true. I'm a smart jock. Always athletic, played sports, not afraid of contact. I guess the mental aspect of kung-fu appeals to me. I know, for a fact, that I would get bored of MMA pretty quick. I love variation, testing my memory, applying my material, thinking about my material and getting involved in it. But I'm not compelled to fight in a tournament (although one-or-two would be fun, and I'd to try a sparring match in a tournament, so long as it wasn't point-sparring), or train like a professional fighter. Kung-fu can be trained that way. It's called San Shou. From what I see, LKFMDC trains that way.

But I'm not really interested in that. I want to spar, I enjoy the flow of forms (yeah, so maybe it's like dancing a little, but I don't give a ****), I love practicing weapons techniques above all [one of my main draws to CMA] (b/c **** me if I won't pick something up in a fight and start bashing with it). It has health benefits and detractors (all fighting has risk factors, like broken ring fingers getting caught in sparring partner's shirt :( ), LOL.

#3-MMA can teach you a couple of things, besides how to goad a TCMA guy into an internet challenge match. I wasn't impressed with that one, in its setup, or in its unravelling. Then again, catching a knee to the top/back of the head is never fun. BTW, how was that legal? Were you guys using the rule where if one of his hands was off the mat, you could strike him with knees? Have to watch the vid again sometime, b/c I didn't examine how that knee landed, although I'm not really interested in doing so.

#4-There are just as many misconceptions about MMA in the TCMA world, as vice versa. Sometimes you just have to cipher through the BS and take that middle ground, where you say--okay, I train this way, you train that way. We train for different things, for different reasons.

#5-Not all MMA guys are BA's. I encourage you, XIA, to visit an MMA school. Just visit one. I have. You'll see some fantastic fighters, and you'll find some overweight, slow, very poor fighters. You'll find college students that are good, and more that suck. You'll find UFC wanabees who suck ass, and one's that might go on to UFC tournaments. There's always a couple of guys in the MMA school that have an aura around them, b/c they're **** good. There's usually a couple of guys in a kung fu school who are **** good. It's the same cross-section of students you'll find in a CMA school. But you'll see that the good one's train smarter in MMA. Just like good TCMA students train smarter than the bad ones. But I'd generally put my money on a good MMA guy over a good CMA guy. The former does combat drills the entire time, whereas that is only one aspect of kung fu. This is just clear-cut logic. Kung Fu will always be about more than just sparring. But put a spear in a MMA guy's hand, and put a short stick in yours or mine, and I'll bet the short stick comes out on top. Or put a kwan dao in his, and a broadsword in yours or mine, and you'll see a gutted and flayed MMA guy, LOL.

But this is, and you know it, an outdated concept. You can't go around flaying people anymore, and you wouldn't, because you won't have your broadsword on you when you get into conflict. An MMA guy will be better prepared for "realistic" self-defense scenarios. But even then, it's still a matter of Fate/Fortune, because no fight, under any circumstances, is a sure-thing. Look at Couture vs. Sylvia--Couture is the better fighter, by far IMO, but he slips when advancing, and gets KFO'd. Sometimes it's just luck.

#6-Training in kung fu is always going to have its ups and downs. But if you want to learn something that has a mental aspect, a health aspect, a physical aspect, perhaps even a somewhat spiritual aspect (only somewhat b/c I don't credit any spirits outside of FSMism), there's only a couple of choices.

#7-As to why kung fu guys are more sensitive to the flack, get jaded, and leave for something else--kung fu has always had dropouts for those whose hearts can't contend with its training. They're generally vocal. And they find something that suits them. It will always be individual. Even if they don't see that, you should.

I mean, ****, man, I preferred SD over Longfist, Wing Chun, and Tiger-Crane, LOL. It's always the individual.

Michael Udel

10-06-2007, 04:01 AM

I voted for Carradine 'cause he was the only thing I liked about the Kill Bill movies. He pulls off the cheesy dialog better than anyone...wonder why?

Merryprankster

10-06-2007, 07:23 AM

I'm not entirely certain what the point of the post was. I think it's a disection of what Xia feels to be a lack of faith by TCMA practicioners lately in their arts, and a perceived amount of ego being injected into the whole deal.

I wouldn't really be certain how to respond to it, under normal circumstances, and under these less so; but here's my take:

The arguments, such as they are, are almost invariably over training methods. When people say such enlightening things as "Kung Fu doesn't work," it's a kind of short hand for "The training methods have become poor, and that has allowed all kinds of things to happen to its effectiveness." There's some truth to this, but it's not articulated clearly.

Let me caveat this all by saying for those who don't know me that I'm not a TCMAist. However, the arguments that people have here about what is "real" TCMA speaks volumes. People can't even agree upon the criteria they use to evaluate what is a "real" TCMA. People get into arguments constantly about that type of thing. They argue about who has the "real," art. They argue about what "really," is TCMA. They argue about whether or not you can add something or take away or study different styles etc and if that means you aren't a "real" TCMA practitioner.

TCMA does not have its house in order, collectively.

By contrast, MMAists have collectively agreed on the criterion - demonstrated effectiveness and contribution to sportive combat. Nobody argues about what is "real" or not because as long as it meets the criterion, it's in. Combat drills are in; padded, but full on, sparring is in, heavy conditioning is in, etc. People tend to argue more about "what so and so should have done IN THAT FIGHT," when in MMA discussions, not about the grand scheme of "how they should be training, etc."

Now, we can argue all day and night about whether or not this makes a complete training program or about the pros and cons of such an approach; but there is something else here. Not even the most hard core TCMAist, unless they have no shred of higher brain function, can deny this: the training approach of MMAists consistently generates people with useable, dangerous skillsets for unarmed combat.

As a collective, this fact throws TCMA on the defensive for a simple reason: TCMAists are very aware, first, that effectiveness, even if not the only criterion, is certainly one important one of several, and that secondly, that their own house, collectively, is not in order. People practicing "TCMA," (again we run into the "real" or not argument here) are not consistently effective on the whole. And that's a real problem, "real" TCMA or not, because judging quality is not a straightforward proposition. This makes it very easy for fakes, charlatans, and people who just suck to claim an awful lot of crap and never have to back anything at all up.

To clarify, this does not mean that there aren't crappy MMA schools out there, or schools that claim to be "MMA," but really have bad programs, which could fall under the category of not "real" MMA. The difference is that because our community has agreed upon quality standards, because we have collectively agreed upon the criterion/criteria, we will always know where to go to receive quality instruction. Can you say the same in TCMA? I don't think you can, generally speaking, because of the quality evaluation problem.

And I think that's the rub. That's what keeps TCMA on the defensive, on the whole, in this general argument... you can't deny that a great deal of TCMA claimants can't deliver the real deal, and even talk about it amongst yourselves all the time...but then, you can't even identify what is "real," so you can't provide examples when asked by MMA types.

mickey

10-06-2007, 07:56 AM

Hi The Xia,

I do agree with some of the stuff you have presented but, why dump it on David Carradine? He is just an actor who, early on, really tried to distance himself from the martial arts community. Now he needs it. It is keeping him in this world. The man suffers from alcoholism (correct me if I am wrong) and appears to be traveling a road where brightness seldom shines. His Sifu, Kam Yuen, has been trying to offer some illumination by giving him things to do, to focus his mind on. Does the aforementioned make him a symbol for all that is wrong with TCMA? HELL NO. He is just a human being. He is only a symbol to those who need a symbol in their lives and he has/had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with that.

By the way, the best episode of Kung Fu was the pilot episode. It was all downhill from there.

mickey

SPJ

10-06-2007, 08:11 AM

I like "Kung Fu" tv series. I dun like "kill bill".

there are several things here.

A. culture/oppinion;

1. tv "culture", movie "culture" or media.

2 main stream or society "culture".

3. politics/government culture.

4. sub groups/religions culture.

5. the new internet "not real" forum culture.

--

B. personal beliefs/morals.

the 60's and 70's are periods of soul searching both in china and america.

In china, it was the cultural revolution, the red book and red guards, mao is the sun and party and the "truth".,

In US, deeply involved in Vietnam conflict, women right liberation, Dr, King's civil rights movement, rock and roll, drugs, hippie, peace and no war movements--

and of course, Elvis and david carridine.

--

Knifefighter

10-06-2007, 08:37 AM

JMA has tons of mcdojos and LARPers and the situation with KMA looks the worst. Believe it or not, there was once a time when Tae Kwan Do meant hard training! So TCMA is not alone.

LOL @ saying TKD has no hard training. Go into a TKD school that does tourney training and spar with some of the guys and you will quickly find that they can go pretty hard and can probably knock you on your a$$.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8m-CJdUAgQ

This, and the sloppiness of many MMA players (come on, UFC striking does not look like Muay Thai from Thailand to me) turn me off to it.

The closer you get to real fighting, the "sloppier" the techniques will look. All the pro boxers who have gotten into altercations with each other outside of the ring are testament to this.

Shaolin Wookie

10-06-2007, 08:39 AM

I do prefer David Carridine to cookie-cutter chop sockey flicks. One of the cool things in Kung-Fu (yeah, I like that series) and more innovative features of it were the qualities of Chan it presented. The fighting was horrible--all wavy, fluttering hands, and tacky judo rolls and throws. There was, ironically, almost no kung-fu in Kung-Fu.

As for the esoteric, shallow presentation of Chinese philosophies--which seems to be your main gripe, or the attachment of eastern mysticism to an Irish dude who had no Chinese blood in him:

Okay, sure. I think the series would have been a kajillion times better had they casted Bruce Lee. But he was, perhaps, too ****y and ego-driven to have made it a "deeper" show. It would have turned into, inevitably, Han's palace for three seasons. There's that moment in "Return of the Dragon" where he and the chick are looking at the magnificent gardens and the ruins of the coliseum, and she asks doesn't he think they're beautiful? He says: "No. They're a waste of space. We have slums like these. I'd build on it! Make money!"

Can you imagine that in Kung Fu?

Master Po's lessons with the grasshopper. Bruce says: "Grasshoppers are for blind old pussies. Look at my mantis. Bet you five dollars it's stronger!" Then he throws the mantis at the grasshopper and it kills it. He looks at Master Po: "Now give me some money, *****!"

And then he kills Master Po, is exiled to America, but returns to get his revenge and builds a railroad straight through the demolition of the Shaolin Temple, getting rich in teh process.

Kung Fu was great because it showed more than just Kung Fu. It showed how a guy pledged to peace survived in a hostile world. It was kind of like a parable.

It was outdated television, but certainly original.

Knifefighter

10-06-2007, 08:43 AM

But put a spear in a MMA guy's hand, and put a short stick in yours or mine, and I'll bet the short stick comes out on top. .

The chances are the MMA guy throws the spear, follows right behind it with a takedown and chokes the TMA guy out... kind of like what happened a few years ago at a Dog Brothers gathering.

mad4dos

10-06-2007, 08:44 AM

kungfu is a enjoyable show it may not be
true to history or the real chinese martial arts
but it's fun to watch :)

after all it's just a tv show!

as to the TCMA VS MMA issue..
who cares just do the art you want to learn
MMA's the current trend just like other arts have been
it's no better or worse than any other style/art ...

thay passed to so will this
better to be good a what you want to be and not to just follow the crowd
just because it's not the current thing dosen't mean it's no good after all

mad4dos

Shaolin Wookie

10-06-2007, 08:50 AM

The chances are the MMA guy throws the spear, follows right behind it with a takedown and chokes the MMA guy out... kind of like what happened a few years ago at a Dog Brothers gathering.

**** straight!! Greek style baby!!!

That would be a good option, though.

LOL.

Shaolin Wookie

10-06-2007, 08:51 AM

jmd161

10-06-2007, 11:24 AM

The chances are the MMA guy throws the spear, follows right behind it with a takedown and chokes the TMA guy out... kind of like what happened a few years ago at a Dog Brothers gathering.

As sad as that sounds I could actually see that happening. I don't understand why most people don't seem to catch the fact, that most TCMA schools aren't realy about fighting. This is not a cop out, it's a fact that most TCMA schools are just trying to pass on the style and culture. Many today have no clue how to use their art in actual fighting so they end up doing what comes natural flaying their arms and kick boxing.

jeff:)

kwaichang

10-06-2007, 01:12 PM

:eek::eek::cool: You guys all wish to be little Grasshoppers like young Kwai Chang admit it that is why you guys train to be One with the Universe and with all Nature admit it. Who wouldnt want to be trained by the Monks of Old in the Shaolin Temple. Seek peace and harmony KC:)

Anthony

10-06-2007, 04:34 PM

Ok....you got us! And why not!

Anyway, it's the individuals perrogative to train in whatever they like. After all, hand to hand combat is useless in today's world. I mean, how often do you get attacked on your way home from work or to the supermarket that you should spend so many hours practicing self-defense? You do it because you like it.

monji112000

10-06-2007, 05:26 PM

here is my opinion on the subject...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Mz-9XQL6Ubo&mode=related&search=

MMA vrs TMA
Kung Fu vrs BJJ

get a life. this got old years ago. If you don't want to cross train don't. If you do then go ahead. Who really cares? go head wear the dumb looking outfits and you will match with the guys wearing the BJJ gi's

RD'S Alias - 1A

10-06-2007, 07:12 PM

I don't understand why most people don't seem to catch the fact, that most TCMA schools aren't realy about fighting. This is not a cop out, it's a fact that most TCMA schools are just trying to pass on the style and culture.

Reply]
It is a *Fighting* style, you *Can't* pass it on without fighting.

Anthony

10-06-2007, 07:50 PM

True.

BUT........things evolve. Fighting is not really important in today's world so if other benefits take priority for people then so be it. So an MMA guy can beat up a TCMA guy....whoop de friggin' do.

If an art was all about fighting guess what....I wouldn't do it. I'm 36 and successfull. Fighting had nothing to do with that. Let the morons do the fighting so they can feel good about themselves.

Anthony

10-06-2007, 08:05 PM

And by the way, Metallica hasn't been good since before you were born so do me a favor and if you want to post a band post Led Zeppelin or shut the f--k up.

SPJ

10-06-2007, 08:18 PM

in the 60's and 70's

we listened to the beatles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONXp-vpE9eU

today we listen to?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lt6PVVr4B04

in the 60's and 70's;

we played tkd, karate, judo, kung fu, mt--

in the 90's and today;

we play mma, bbj--

--

what will we play or listen to tommorrow?

--

let it be.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oZYqAeIdYk&mode=related&search=

:D;):)

RD'S Alias - 1A

10-06-2007, 08:19 PM

Metallica sucked even when they were at thier best...I never liked them.

SPJ

10-06-2007, 08:35 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UAi-ReXmbk

david talked about "kung fu" and "kill bill".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwILj3zyGg&mode=related&search=

another interview.

:)

monji112000

10-06-2007, 08:53 PM

And by the way, Metallica hasn't been good since before you were born so do me a favor and if you want to post a band post Led Zeppelin or shut the f--k up.

hasn't been good? they only put out 1 good album, and that song is the best song hands down they recorded and its a cover. Led zeppelin... wtf? its was the lyrics that made me post it, I could have put the original its much better.

Anyway, it's the individuals perrogative to train in whatever they like. After all, hand to hand combat is useless in today's world. :D well you can go around thinking that.. doesn't really reflect on reality. but hey whatever works for you. Let me guess you walk around with a gun right?

jmd161

10-06-2007, 09:38 PM

It is a *Fighting* style, you *Can't* pass it on without fighting.

And which style would that be?

Just about every so called TCMA "fighting" style is being passed on these days without actual fighting being done.

jeff:)

jmd161

10-06-2007, 09:41 PM

RD'S Alias - 1A

10-06-2007, 09:44 PM

Just about every so called TCMA "fighting" style is being passed on these days without actual fighting being done.

Reply]
Then they are not being passed on. They are being lost....if they have not been lost already.

Anthony

10-07-2007, 11:27 AM

I have to appoligise. Don't take me all too seriously because that's not my intended tone. I'm being half serious and half trying to be funny. Thought this thread started off kind of silly and I'm just trying to "go with it."

I actually do like Metallica. But I'm not crazy about their work after "justice for all." But I was trying to be funny.

Monji....no I don't carry a gun nor own one. My comment about hand to hand combat being useless in this world I think is generally true. Sure you may find yourself in that situation without you asking for it in real life. In that case I think youre better off looking for a way to run away if you can. Fighting should be avoided at all costs because you don't know who your touching hands with, where their friends are, what weapons they may be carrying, or what diseases they have. If you can convince me that the average person needs to be a fighter in today's modern society then youre welcome to. It's just that so many people live fine, happy lives without it.

I think most of you are saying that a "martial art" should be martial, or else call it yoga or something.

In reality there are too many variables in a real self-defense situation to train for it. Put it this way jmd161, if you run track you don't say that you do it for self defense but it sure can save your life - maybe more so than throwing punches and kicks. I think that you assume that self-defense=fighting. I don't see it that way. Running track can be self-defense training too.

I don't hate MMA either. In my day all schools were "stand-up" type schools. It was stand up sparring one way or the other (point, light contact, heavy contact). So that's what I did and competed in when I was younger. I don't have a need for sport's competition in my life at this point (I'm too tired from all my other responsibilities). Had MMA been around sooner I probably would have cross trained in it -as a younger man with more time to indulge my own interests. It has definately improved the entire MA community like someone pointed out above. It forced instructors to be more honest.

I remember some of the goofy one, two, three, step self-defense techniques taught in some of my classes when I was a kid. Ridiculous stuff that you were made to believe would actually work in the street. So even if youre training so called "self-defense" techniques you actually may not be. Alot of people train in techniques they think will work in reality because instructors instill this notion. People don't take into account fear, adrenaline, or a million other things that can work against you.

But I guess a "martial art" should be martial. I'm just at a different stage in my life where I'd rather just get exercise out of it than the fighting.

jmd161

10-07-2007, 11:46 AM

Then they are not being passed on. They are being lost....if they have not been lost already.

Exactly!

RD, if this is news to you?

Then you need to get out more often bro! I'm the biggest fan there is of TCMA, but even I know that 95% of the TCMA out there is bull crap!

jeff:)

RD'S Alias - 1A

10-07-2007, 12:21 PM

It's hardly news to me. I have been saying this for 10 year now.

Except for the few lines that still do the Old School training, learning actual *Martial* TCMA is a process of reconstruction.

It is possible, because the forms are still here, and if you dig enough the over all tactics and strategys are still around (never seems to all be in one place though), but you have to do a LOT of independent research just to figure out *How* your style is supposed to fight, and then you have to develop a curriculum that is more like the Old School, "Pre form factory" days.

A large number of TCMA schools don't even know the correct apps of the form's techniques. You literally have to start seearching out others of your style, or realted styles and look to how they are applying the techniques under fire (Watching San Shou is good for this).

Once you have halfway workable apps, you need to start drilling and then fire testing them to restore thier potency. It's kind of like rebuilding a 1929 Chevy that came to your shop in Boxes with little documentation as to what it's original state was. Yes, you CAN restore it, but it's a monumental effort, and some things will never be like original. (And yes, I had to restore 1929 Chevy once...it came to our shop in Boxes....)

For all of us who have been in the TCMA world a long time, this is a big task...for all the newbies, it is just impossible. I hate to say it, but beginners have to have a dialed in connection to one of the Old School lines. If they don't they would be better off in MMA.

The Xia

10-07-2007, 10:30 PM

First, Merryprankster said it correctly (about why I made the thread), “I think it's a disection of what Xia feels to be a lack of faith by TCMA practitioners lately in their arts, and a perceived amount of ego being injected into the whole deal.”
That pretty much sums it up.
As for my comments on MMA and sloppiness, I can go on and on about that. This conversation has been had over and over here and elsewhere. So I'd like to avoid dwelling on that topic.
Another thing is that I do know people who are into MMA that aren’t jerks. It just so happens that they were involved with some other type of sport fighting before it (on a side note, they’ll be the first to say that the stand-up game of UFC fighters is rather bad). However, most of the people that have become interested in MMA through the UFC seem to be dumb jock types from my experience. It’s just something I notice.
On Carradine, I just used him because his name has become associated with the personality type I mentioned. That, and from my experience, those types like the TV series. But I personally don’t know much about him or the show.
For all of you that say that 99% (or whatever) of TCMA schools suck. Do you really think it’s that bad? I’d venture the guess that percentage-wise, there are more good TCMA schools then Tae Kwan Do. The TCMA community is that, a community, so don’t you guys know people then just yourself that are training effectively? It's a bit odd to me that there are loads of threads where posters talk about how they saw this skilled sifu the other day, or that school and how their students had excellent Gung Fu, or how this video on youtube shows great Gung Fu, etc, meanwhile, you look on other threads and posters are saying how TCMA is dying lol. I think all the trolling has gotten to TCMA people. I think all the talk about how TCMA sucks has backed people into a corner where the defense is "Well yeah 99% suck but not me." I feel this way: sure, there are cartons of bad apples, but there are still good schools, students, and teachers. There are plenty of good TCMA that could care less about MMA and the UFC because it's not really part of the TCMA world. If TCMA want to compete, there is Lei Tai, Kuoshu, TCMA tournaments, etc. Not to mention, there are plenty of good TCMA that aren't interested in sport fighting. That doesn't make them bad martial artists. My advice, don't let the internet make you lose faith in what you know is true.

The Xia

10-07-2007, 11:01 PM

It's hardly news to me. I have been saying this for 10 year now.

Except for the few lines that still do the Old School training, learning actual *Martial* TCMA is a process of reconstruction.

It is possible, because the forms are still here, and if you dig enough the over all tactics and strategys are still around (never seems to all be in one place though), but you have to do a LOT of independent research just to figure out *How* your style is supposed to fight, and then you have to develop a curriculum that is more like the Old School, "Pre form factory" days.
I wouldn't recommend trying to reconstruct anything. There are many aspects that have to be passed on through hand-to-hand transmissions. So instead of busting your hump and getting nowhere, isn't it better to find a good sifu?

It's A large number of TCMA schools don't even know the correct apps of the form's techniques. You literally have to start seearching out others of your style, or realted styles and look to how they are applying the techniques under fire (Watching San Shou is good for this).
I disagree. Lots of San Shou fighters don't have TCMA backgrounds. Although some do... Let's put it this way, giving Mandarin and Cantonese names to boxing techniques doesn't make it TCMA.

Once you have halfway workable apps, you need to start drilling and then fire testing them to restore thier potency. It's kind of like rebuilding a 1929 Chevy that came to your shop in Boxes with little documentation as to what it's original state was. Yes, you CAN restore it, but it's a monumental effort, and some things will never be like original. (And yes, I had to restore 1929 Chevy once...it came to our shop in Boxes....)
As I said before, many things need to be passed on directly from teacher to student.

For all of us who have been in the TCMA world a long time, this is a big task...for all the newbies, it is just impossible. I hate to say it, but beginners have to have a dialed in connection to one of the Old School lines. If they don't they would be better off in MMA.
I think that's totally off. There are still plenty of good sifus out there.

jet64

10-07-2007, 11:24 PM

but then, you can't even identify what is "real," so you can't provide examples when asked by MMA types.[/QUOTE]

just want to clarify what you mean by this?

David Jamieson

10-08-2007, 05:23 AM

I haven't lost any "faith" in what I train at all.

Mostly because I lack concern about what others are into. lol

People are entitled to make their own mistakes and certainly are even more entitaled to their successes.

Nobody has to take the point of view of someone else based on tat other persons experience which is frankly 100% irrelevant in context to what personally inspires or motivates any of us.\

Igf you like "x" that's cool, I like "y". It's ok if you don't like it, but it is also safe to say, you don't know much about it either ergo, commentary on that which you have no experience with is irrelevant.

Having said that, I do notice there are a lot of people who go on about traditional chinese martial arts that don't or haven't ever put any effort into achieving something with them.

You know what, that's cool too.

Bruce W Sims

10-08-2007, 06:12 AM

(clip) Then we come to the MMA vs. TCMA thing. Why do TCMA people let it get to them to the point they start questioning what they do? As mentioned before, CMA isn’t only a grouping of styles, it’s an inter-connected community. It’s not really part of the MMA world. CMA have their own tournaments available to them if they want to. Why go MMA? Not to mention, what if someone doesn’t care about competing? That doesn’t make them bad martial artists. There are loads of skilled MA who don’t do sport fighting.

(clip)

My point is for the TCMA people on this board. If what you do is worthwhile, why do you care what MMA people on the internet have to say? The fact is that there are good TCMA schools out there. To me, the worth of TCMA is self-evident. I don’t really care what MMA people think about it. I really don’t like these TCMA vs. MMA threads, but it appears that all this internet talk has gotten to people. If I can get at least a few posters to do what I decided to do awhile ago, this thread will have been a success. What is that you may ask? Largely ignore the MMA propaganda, and go back to talking mostly about TCMA. After all, this IS a Kung Fu forum!

I think TMA people forget that there are a full range of practices including martial theatre, martial commerce, and martial arts that are all competing for regard on the public stage. Add to this non-TMA practices such as MMA and suddenly it becomes clear that what is underdiscussion is more a matter of which way the revenues go.

Another point to keep in mind is that advertising is expensive and impersonal. By repeatedly going out on the INTERNET and baiting traditionalists, MMA people keep themselves in the public eye at little or no expense to themselves.

Yet another point is that TMA people rarely have the same goals and intentions in mind as the MMA people. To make the MMA arguement valid, one must first reduce TMA practices to nothing more than fighting. And, if you review practically every thread on any forum you will find that the arguement first begins when a TMA person invokes the idea that there is something greater going on than the some of the art's parts. The MMA person says "no there isn't" and we are off-and-running.

If I had any voice in any of this I would encourage Traditionalists to stop allowing themselves to be used as foils or pawns through which MMA people gain access to non-MMA forums.

Just a thought. As always "YMMV".

Best Wishes,

Bruce

RD'S Alias - 1A

10-08-2007, 06:50 AM

I wouldn't recommend trying to reconstruct anything. There are many aspects that have to be passed on through hand-to-hand transmissions. So instead of busting your hump and getting nowhere, isn't it better to find a good sifu?

Reply]
Finding a good teacher is very difficult.

If only 10% are good teachers, what are the 90% to do? maybe it's just not geographically feasible for 70% of the 90. Then what?

Maybe you have been in a style for 10+ years, but can't fight with it due to a lack of contact, or because you learned from someone who either does not know the actuall apps, or won't teach them.

What do you do then?

Many Chinese teachers don't teach anyway, and EXPECT you to figure it out yourself (IE Reconstruct it or flat out make it up yourself).

There are a lot of upper level guys who came up in form factories, who are now teachers. Should they just pass on as thier teachers did? or reconstruct the style so it is restored back to it's original roots?

If they are passionate about thier art, restoring it is the only option...the same way I restored that old 1929 Chevy that came to our shop in boxes. Sure, by the time our crew got done with it, some details were off, but over all it was a really good job. There are enough TCMA to be found to where we can restore these arts the same way I did that 1929 Chevy. If you are a teacher of this generation, Why not do so? Would you rather pass on the watered down useless non functional system you learned? Or would you rather restore it to it's former greatness by getting back to the roots and adding alive training, shifting the focus away from forms and back to two man technique practice etc...? Why not study and research fight footage untill you see apps for parts of the forms you were never taught application? It's all out there, you just have to find all the pieces of the puzzle to do it.

I am not talking about students here. They would be better off finding a good teacher, or going to MMA if none are available. I am talking about today's generation of TCMA teachers. I am talking about people who already HAVE the forms, the system, the over all flavor of thier style.

SPJ

10-08-2007, 08:14 AM

as pointed out;

1. a good teacher and a good school of a certain style may not be readily available to everyone.

we will do whatever that is available first.

2. personal development is indeed a "personal" thing. we learn and take whatever in class and go from there.

3. since we may not "transpose" our personal experiences onto others. then let it be. MMA peeps will speak from MMA perspectives. TMA/CMA peeps will speak from their points of views. right or wrong. you be the judge of it based on your experiences. do not read and trust all the posts from the forums. I read many Chinese websites and forums. just to get some info. the discussion parts I just glanced thru and not paying much attention to them. or over critical. however, the info parts, I have to research more before I even quote or link them.

4. The fate of TMA or any style of MA lies in the hands of the practitioners. yes some practitioners never teach. yes some not so good teachers are teaching a lot of students. again for the students, we take whatever is available and go from there. more students, more people interested, more propagation, more research and development, then the style "live" and "grow".

5. again personal development, with the family, work and modern mundane living, how much time an indiviual may devote to a style or styles of MA???

6. in short, whatever works for you works for you. no matter lessons are from MMA/mt+bjj or aikido, judo, shuai jiao, boxing, etc etc.

peace.

:D

Shaolin Wookie

10-08-2007, 08:23 AM

It all has to do with the training.

I recently videotaped some forms on 8mm for my family, and I had one or two I did about a year ago to compare with. My SD stuff was wretched then, and much better now, although I can see where it has to go to get better.

We have all these training and one-step drills, and techniques......as do most styles. My Longfist one did, too. But they only taught those later on, they said. So every day in Longfist, I'd do my forms, have the guy correct my postures, the angles of hands, the manner in which I shifted weight, the "correct" height at which to punch---all of them aesthetic trimmings. The form looked pretty nice, but it was useless to me ( and as a consequence, I don't practice it at all, and don't remember much of it in sequence....only a couple of bits from the beginning....LOL)

But in SD, my forms don't look as "cool" even though they are developing aesthetically as I begin to understand them. And I credit this to all the drills, techniques, and one-step things, as well as specific classes on pressure point striking, takedowns, punching and kicking drills, extensive sparring-----it's the stuff outside the forms that will enhance the learning of the forms. Not vice versa.

If you learn forms first, and the drills later, only after having "mastered" the forms, I think you develop the wrong mindset. You try to go back and inject techniques into the forms. Better to have learned the techniques with the form, so the form is the technique.....know what I mean?

Bruce W Sims

10-08-2007, 09:06 AM

I find myself agreeing with practically everything thats being shared. There is one small piece that still brings me up short. That piece has to do with the idea of forms-work as it relates to combat.

I would be the first to say that use of forms is only one of a range of training techniques one uses to cultivate their skillset. I bet noone would spend 100% of their time on weight-training to the exclusion of all else either, right?

The other thing is that even though there are four different categories of forms including Teaching, Demonstration, Conditioning and Training, none of these forms will look exactly as they do if parts or techniques are used in combat. The techniques are idealized to assure that the person is executing them letter perfect, and the lack of a person working within the same time and space changes things as well. Still the material of itself is still valid.

The only other point I would mention is that Traditionalists labor under an additional obligation to preserve (or CONserve) the tradition passed to them. Joining a traditional kwan for instance---as in my case---- obligates me to preserving the traditons I have learned. What is more, the YON MU KWAN , to which I belong, obligates its members to delve into and research traditions rather than just seeking out "the next big thing". I can tell you that these obligations are not for the faint of heart.

No real point. Just some odd thoughts to toss into the kitty.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

bodhitree

10-09-2007, 04:24 AM

Xia

I'm glad you're still alive (after the september Takeshi Kumite), and although you have recovered from your physical injuries, it appears that you are still suffering from the mental scars.

Let me tell you an ancient saying

the tiger has confidence in his path, the dragon also see's the goal ahead, this is the essence of the judo fist.....

mickey

10-14-2007, 04:35 PM

The Xia,

I watched the pilot of Kung Fu again (just because of you). The last fight scene exemplifies what quite a few posters have said already about Chinese martial arts-- that they are one and the same with MMA. Thoough the choreography lacks sophistication and the camera angles sucked, you get the punching, kicking, throwing, fighting in the top mount position, as well as fighting from the ground. David Chow was the choreographer for the pilot and it is he who is facing Carradine in the last scene.

The series suffered from his absence.

Take a look for yourself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00p3c_Tl2Uk

mickey

The Xia

10-15-2007, 07:45 PM

The Xia

10-15-2007, 07:50 PM

The Xia,

I watched the pilot of Kung Fu again (just because of you).
All for me! Should I be flattered? :D

The last fight scene exemplifies what quite a few posters have said already about Chinese martial arts-- that they are one and the same with MMA.
Although, I'd agree with that only if by "MMA," one is refering to a mixture of skillsets (like Ti, Da, Shuai, Na). Or the fact that traditionally, TCMA incorporates elements from other styles into its core. :D

Thoough the choreography lacks sophistication and the camera angles sucked, you get the punching, kicking, throwing, fighting in the top mount position, as well as fighting from the ground. David Chow was the choreographer for the pilot and it is he who is facing Carradine in the last scene.)

The series suffered from his absence.

Take a look for yourself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00p3c_Tl2Uk

mickey
Thanks for the link. I see what you mean.

johnnycache

10-16-2007, 12:10 AM

MMA is a rules-set. MMA "vs" TMA is something made up by defensive TMAer's answering the question "Why don't you enter MMA?"

the answers:

1) We just don't care/are philosophically opposed to "sport fighting"

Well, you still need to spar hard at all ranges to fairly charge for the task of fight training.

2) We're not just about the fighting - we're also about the culture

Well, you still need to train good fighting along with your culture.

3) MMA guys are just big dumb jocks

First off, if you get to claim that, then those MMA people who say kung fu people are a bunch of silly sinophiles get their say as well. Second, toplevel mma competitors are certainly fine athletes - as should any top level martial artist be, but I think the elements of "dumbness" and "aggressiveness" you choose to perceive come as much from the threat to your paradigm as from empirical evidence.

4) Look how sloppy that striking is it looks nothing like my form

Well, no plan survives contact with the enemy, and it's harder to kick pretty when the guy's allowed to tackle you.

5) What about breaking? The Lion Dance? Weapons?

Guess what? you can have all that in your school and still have a full contact fight team.

6) I think I'd get bored of MMA, kung fu has so much variety

This is an "american audience" comment of the same ilk as "boo stop going to the ground" - the challenge of covering all ranges, especially developing a deep ground game, and applying all assimilated material in a live setting equals or exceeds that of learning many different forms and moves. And, of course, you can use all that intricate kung fu in the MMA polygon, any time you want.

7)What about the various TCMA tournaments? Aren't they just as good?

Some of them are, some of them aren't. There are certainly hard CMA comps out there - if they are failing in popularity next to MMA, boxing, or another sport that is probably an issue of venue and advertising. In other words, I'd love to watch Saturday Sanda on Spike - get it on the air.

Again, MMA is simply an open rules-set. Open to all. MMA trained, ground trained, standup trained, traditional trained, western-trained, whatever. It's a laboratory for testing martial arts and individual fighters with as few restrictions as possible. That should excite, not threaten, a true martial artist.

So why is there all the defensiveness and rationalization? Why are so many people deeply threatened and displeased by the opportunity to safely and publicly use, test, and promote the arts they've spend years training in? And has it occurred to any of you that part of the reason for the formation of a distinct MMA culture might be the rejection of MMA by the old guard in Asian martial arts? The "MMA culture" is a democratic one - anyone can join by starting a fight team or signing up to fight, so if your level of input is minimized and your cultural input is minimized, consider the degree to which that stems from you minimizing your participation and voicing your disdain and excuses.