Glorified Kickboxer [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

anerlich

03-18-2009, 06:26 PM

Couch, I have little time for people who don't do basic research before bothering the forum.:p

If you enter "Glorified Kickboxing" into Google, you will find out:

Canada wanted to change the rules for UFC 97 to straight Glorified Kickboxing rules
The UFC is being punished for the mistakes of a Glorified Kickboxing promoter
Extreme Couture Long Island has classes in Glorified Kickboxing
Liddell, Jardine, Griffin, jackson, Bonner, CroCrop, Mark Hunt, Fedor are all Glorified Kickboxers
Some Krav Maga schools teach Glorified Kickboxing classes
Lau Gar is very similar to Glorified Kickboxing
There are related disciplines called Glorified Butt-Scooting and Glorified Tae Bo
Chuck Norris's World Combat League hosted a Glorified Kickboxing Tournament in Tulsa in late 2007 / early 2008

There does seem to be a great deal of interest, though little knowledge, of this rapidly expanding 21st century martial art. While not wanting to cast aspertions on sanjuro_ronin's possible qualifications in the art, I feel that I have been called a "Glorified Kickboxer" often enough to claim some seniority in the art, and this feel I should do all I can to bring this much sopken about but little known martial art to the world. A short article will follow in the next day or two.

I may also write about Theoretical NonFighting, another fast growing 21st century martial art, for pretty much similar reasons.

That said, I would not want to discourage other scholars of these arts from making their own contributions, quite the reverse. After all, Glorified Kickboxing belongs to all humanity!

stonecrusher69

03-18-2009, 06:37 PM

Phil Redmond

03-18-2009, 06:48 PM

stonecrusher69

03-18-2009, 06:53 PM

You beat me to it. :)

Opps!!! sorry Phil

Hardwork108

03-18-2009, 07:11 PM

I cant wait to hear some of responses...very good question!

I think sanjuro_ronin is the most qualified to answer that.

You don't know how right you are! ;):)

Hardwork108

03-18-2009, 07:17 PM

I don't think the term " Glorified kick Boxers " is ment exclusively for WCers but anyone who trains in their particular art and can't fight with it,and rely more or less on what appears to be Kick Boxing.

Correct, except for the fact that many of the Glorified Kickboxers here in this forum claim to be kung fu fighting while hopping around like boxers and or TKD-ists and using basic kickboxing techniques. Some have even gone further and implied that this was some kind of an "improved" kung fu...lol.

Well I got to give it to this forum, it really is full of laughs.:D

Hardwork108

03-18-2009, 07:25 PM

So. I don't really get it. Can someone spell it out for me plain and simple?

Why are some WC folk called glorified kickboxers?

I call any so called kung fu man who mixes and mashes his kung fu with other irrelevant arts and then gets in the ring and calls what he does "kung fu" or even "improved" or "functional", etc. kung fu.

Is it because they don't practice WC exclusively?
It is because how they don't practice WC (or kung fu) exclusively.;)

Is it because when they spar, it looks like something like kickboxing?
Well some of them would "jump" around like boxers, throwing wide hooks ("because it works") and then would use some chain punching and then refer to what they did as kung fu or even "functional" kung fu.

Can someone define the slogan?
Unfortunately the term defines most (NOT ALL) of the kung fu "experts" in this forum.

Cheers.

Don't thank me, thank the Glorified Kickboxers who inspired the "legend".:D

Kansuke

03-18-2009, 09:03 PM

sanjuro_ronin

03-19-2009, 05:50 AM

So. I don't really get it. Can someone spell it out for me plain and simple?

Why are some WC folk called glorified kickboxers?

Is it because they don't practice WC exclusively?

Is it because when they spar, it looks like something like kickboxing?

Can someone define the slogan?

Cheers.

Its a valid question.
Those that have fought know the answer:
The Ruleset of a match will dictate the "look" of that match.
Vale Tudo matched don't look like MT matches and WTF TKD matches don't look like K-1 matches.
Now, one can ask why is it that when you see MA in a full contact environment with rules or limited rules, that it tends to look like "kick boxing"?
Well, if you punch, you "box" and if you kick and punch you "kick box", but that is to obvious an answer.
Fact is, under real pressure, the human body will revert to its most "effective" mode of fighting.
That is why, regardless of the skill of a WC fighter, when you see him fight full contact, on the surface it will look like "kickboxing" to a certain degree.
Unless there is a huge skill descrepency between fighters.

t_niehoff

03-19-2009, 06:15 AM

Its a valid question.
Those that have fought know the answer:
The Ruleset of a match will dictate the "look" of that match.
Vale Tudo matched don't look like MT matches and WTF TKD matches don't look like K-1 matches.
Now, one can ask why is it that when you see MA in a full contact environment with rules or limited rules, that it tends to look like "kick boxing"?
Well, if you punch, you "box" and if you kick and punch you "kick box", but that is to obvious an answer.
Fact is, under real pressure, the human body will revert to its most "effective" mode of fighting.
That is why, regardless of the skill of a WC fighter, when you see him fight full contact, on the surface it will look like "kickboxing" to a certain degree.
Unless there is a huge skill descrepency between fighters.

Very insightful observations.

Yes, the human body when under high levels of stress and moving at 100% (power/speed) moves in certain ways (you simply can't move in other ways and "keep up"with an opponent). You have to experience this to appreciate it.

I would add is that the "range"or 'stage" or whateveryou want to call it -- whether in stand-up/outside/free-movement or inside/clinch/attached or ground -- changes the "demands" placed on us (since different combative factors come into play) and so will change how we naturally move at 100% in those different situations. On the outside/free-movement, fighting will end up looking like kickboxing since, as you point out, this is how our body naturally moves at 100% in that "range". It looks like boxing/kickboxing since boxers/kickboxers have spent so much time in that range being pressured and moving at 100% that they have come to most closely "embody" that way of movement. Regardless of your style or art, if you fight at that range and your opponent pressures you (and you move all out), it will "look" like kickboxing.

This also applies to clinch and ground.

The consequences of this I think extremely important. If you start with the fight -- what it is really going to be like and how you are really going to NEED to move, then you will realize that if you fight on the outside it will end up "looking" like kickboxing. So, if you want to fight on the outside, doesn't it make sense to train like you will endup fighting? In other words, to practice some form of kickboxing if you want to fight on the outside.

Similarly, if you want to fight on the ground, knowing it will end up looking like wrestling or BJJ, to practice some form of submission grappling?

couch

03-19-2009, 06:16 AM

Couch, I have little time for people who don't do basic research before bothering the forum.:p

That said, I would not want to discourage other scholars of these arts from making their own contributions, quite the reverse. After all, Glorified Kickboxing belongs to all humanity!

You cheeky bugger!!! LOL!!!

couch

03-19-2009, 06:22 AM

Very good everyone. This simple question could turn into a good discussion.

So we could say, in summary:

1. Distance/position determines the tools to be used
2. Ruleset also determines the tools to be used

So a WC man who fights at a specific range (no different than a TKD'er trying to keep me at HIS/HER range) might resort to 'boxing/kickboxing' in fight/sparring match for a few reasons:
1. They are starting at a longer range to begin with and b/c of all the champion Chi Sau played, this 'extended range' isn't covered
2. They are scared. When the ish hits the fan, it's easier to NOT play the 'in your personal space' range.
3. (insert other personal opinions here)

Best.

sanjuro_ronin

03-19-2009, 06:25 AM

Have you ever seen a clip of a WC guy fighting full contact that looks like a typical WC demo?

t_niehoff

03-19-2009, 06:51 AM

Very good everyone. This simple question could turn into a good discussion.

So we could say, in summary:

1. Distance/position determines the tools to be used
2. Ruleset also determines the tools to be used

I think to just talk about tools ignores the "WHY" -- which is that when we are highly stressed/pressured and NEED to move at 100% (power/speed) our bodies are going to move in certain ways. It's like lifting a weight. If the weight is not too heavy, you can do it in all kinds of ways. You can "train" those ways using light weights. But when you go to lifit a weight close to your limit, you will find those ways won't work and that your body will need to lift it a certain way (the way powerlifters do -- why do powerlifters lift that way? becasue they have found from actually lifting weights at their max what works).

The ruleset typically determines the "range" -- boxing's rules don't permit clinch or ground.

So a WC man who fights at a specific range (no different than a TKD'er trying to keep me at HIS/HER range) might resort to 'boxing/kickboxing' in fight/sparring match for a few reasons:
1. They are starting at a longer range to begin with and b/c of all the champion Chi Sau played, this 'extended range' isn't covered
2. They are scared. When the ish hits the fan, it's easier to NOT play the 'in your personal space' range.
3. (insert other personal opinions here)

Best.

Or, they just haven't trained to use their WCK tools in fighting.

lkfmdc

03-19-2009, 06:53 AM

Have you ever seen a clip of a WC guy fighting full contact that looks like a typical WC demo?

funny how no one ever answers that question directly....

sanjuro_ronin

03-19-2009, 06:55 AM

funny how no one ever answers that question directly....

There are 100's of clips of WC demos....

Wayfaring

03-19-2009, 07:10 AM

The consequences of this I think extremely important. If you start with the fight -- what it is really going to be like and how you are really going to NEED to move, then you will realize that if you fight on the outside it will end up "looking" like kickboxing. So, if you want to fight on the outside, doesn't it make sense to train like you will endup fighting? In other words, to practice some form of kickboxing if you want to fight on the outside.

There's another angle to this as well. Even if I don't want to fight on the outside, in a live situation I may not have a choice. Even if I don't want to fight on the ground, the same is true.

Many times in a live environment the ability to dictate the terms of a fight, or the ability to move a fight into one area or another at will be dependant upon things like being well rounded, conditioning levels, and what types of opponents you train against.

couch

03-19-2009, 07:12 AM

Have you ever seen a clip of a WC guy fighting full contact that looks like a typical WC demo?

Right. It never looks like a demo.

But my big beef is such: why doesn't it? Why doesn't it look like something someone spends a huge hunk of time in?

I could pull the 'but it's not the real Wing Chun' card, right? LOL :rolleyes:

But my point of contention is: it should. Some of the shapes should be there. The concept of controlling an opponents centre, protecting one's own centre, and the range we play should be where we get stuff done should be there.

If it isn't, then people aren't doing the right things to make their Wing Chun work. Maybe us that pressure test/spar/etc should just bite the bullet on the fact that most people that do the demo's for WC don't pressure test/spar/etc and they are a poor representation of the fighting ability of the art.

Heck, check this out: http://tinyurl.com/cnznff Ip Ching is saying that Wing Chun shouldn't be used for fighting...only for health!

lkfmdc

03-19-2009, 07:14 AM

There are 100's of clips of WC demos....

Yet I've never seen a clip of a real fight that looks like those demos....

sanjuro_ronin

03-19-2009, 07:14 AM

Right. It never looks like a demo.

But my big beef is such: why doesn't it? Why doesn't it look like something someone spends a huge hunk of time in?

I could pull the 'but it's not the real Wing Chun' card, right? LOL :rolleyes:

But my point of contention is: it should. Some of the shapes should be there. The concept of controlling an opponents centre, protecting one's own centre, and the range we play should be where we get stuff done should be there.

Other systems look the same in a demo as they do in a real fight, although not picture-perfect, they nevertheless look "the same".
AT the very least, the PERSON doing the demo looks and moves the same in a fight as in the demo, to the degree that one CAN look the same.

sanjuro_ronin

03-19-2009, 07:15 AM

Yet I've never seen a clip of a real fight that looks like those demos....

...which begs the question, why?...

dnovice

03-19-2009, 09:10 AM

sanjuro_ronin

03-19-2009, 09:33 AM

The question what would constitute a fight looking like a wc demo?
Does every single move have to be out of the wc arsenal?
Is it WC if some techs are visible?
If some, how much wc to non wc?

First you have to define what WC is in your opinion before we can even go further in deciding what looks like WC and what doesnt.

Sanjuro, Ikfmdc, couch etc? what are your opinions??

cheers

Its not that complicated, really.
Look at a demo of Muay Thai, there are many on youtube, then look at a MT fight.
Same thing for BJJ, or kyokushin.
Heck, look at a demo of CLF or Hung Ga and see how they fight full contact.
Then do the same with WC.

dnovice

03-19-2009, 09:45 AM

Its not that complicated, really.
Look at a demo of Muay Thai, there are many on youtube, then look at a MT fight.
Same thing for BJJ, or kyokushin.
Heck, look at a demo of CLF or Hung Ga and see how they fight full contact.
Then do the same with WC.

Yes but then we are being vague, and that leaves it to subjective interpretation. What i consider wc is different from what you consider wc? no argument because the ambiguity permits it.

Personally, I know what i think. I want to know your opinion to see where u are coming from...

t_niehoff

03-19-2009, 09:50 AM

There's another angle to this as well. Even if I don't want to fight on the outside, in a live situation I may not have a choice. Even if I don't want to fight on the ground, the same is true.

Many times in a live environment the ability to dictate the terms of a fight, or the ability to move a fight into one area or another at will be dependant upon things like being well rounded, conditioning levels, and what types of opponents you train against.

I agree with you.

t_niehoff

03-19-2009, 10:00 AM

Other systems look the same in a demo as they do in a real fight, although not picture-perfect, they nevertheless look "the same".
AT the very least, the PERSON doing the demo looks and moves the same in a fight as in the demo, to the degree that one CAN look the same.

The reason for this is simple: that those other (functional) methods fight as the core of their training. Since they fight, and have through that fighting worked out how to make their tools work for them in fighting, they can then demo those things in a nonfighting situation, showing examples of what they do WHEN they actually fight. Contrast that with people who don't fight as the core of their training, but spend the majority of their "training" performing unrealistic exercises like chi sao or san sao. When asked to demo, they can't demo what they are doing in fighting since they aren't really fighting. So they demo things that they believe should work based on their "theory" and/or unrealistic practice. Their demos instead of reflecting what they do in fighting reflect what they do in their unrealistic exercises (which is all they know).

dnovice

03-19-2009, 10:39 AM

couch

03-19-2009, 10:47 AM

The question what would constitute a fight looking like a wc demo?
Does every single move have to be out of the wc arsenal?
Is it WC if some techs are visible?
If some, how much wc to non wc?

First you have to define what WC is in your opinion before we can even go further in deciding what looks like WC and what doesnt.

Sanjuro, Ikfmdc, couch etc? what are your opinions??

cheers

Hard to say. IMO, it has to look like I train. If it doesn't, I'm wasting my time.
Since there is a lot of good WC and a lot of bad WC, the answer is up to the eye of the beholder, no?

sanjuro_ronin

03-19-2009, 10:47 AM

lol. apparently the questions i asked were to difficult. Ok to simplfy. Do these clips look like wing chun? Say why they do and don't?

clip one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rd4dTS2si7A&feature=related

clip two
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfLq__054Qk

Next, use the same rules you applied to the above two to say whether royce gracie is using bjj.

clip one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heZ7mloK9mw&feature=related

cheers

Not sure what question you are referring to...
As for the clips you posted.
The second tend to LOOK like what one thinks WC "should" look like, but it looks more like a demo than an actual match.
The first one is typical of full contact matches with minimal gear and you can see them trying to apply some WC in the begining.
The clip of Royce Gracie is the 10th of 10 clips, not sure what you are asking....

lkfmdc

03-19-2009, 10:48 AM

clip one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rd4dTS2si7A&feature=related

Elbows and knees from a double neck tie? Ground and pound from top positions? I can show you footage exactly like that from hundreds of gyms that HAVE NEVER DONE A SINGLE DAY OF WING CHUN IN THEIR LIVES

clip two
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfLq__054Qk

Throwing straight punches with no defense = wing chun?
ok, if you say so :rolleyes:

sanjuro_ronin

03-19-2009, 10:57 AM

Here you can see the WC guy trying to apply his WC:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBjRvUqyZSQ&feature=related

dnovice

03-19-2009, 10:57 AM

Not sure what question you are referring to...
As for the clips you posted.
The second tend to LOOK like what one thinks WC "should" look like, but it looks more like a demo than an actual match.
The first one is typical of full contact matches with minimal gear and you can see them trying to apply some WC in the begining.
The clip of Royce Gracie is the 10th of 10 clips, not sure what you are asking....

you're right. its the 10th clip but posting them all would take up too much space and be redundant. My question is does it look like Royce is doing BJJ? and vice versa for the the clips (are they doing wc)?

Elbows and knees from a double neck tie? Ground and pound from top positions? I can show you footage exactly like that from hundreds of gyms that HAVE NEVER DONE A SINGLE DAY OF WING CHUN IN THEIR LIVES

See this is why its important to define what you mean by an art being the same as its demo. You are saying here that as long as a move that doesn't belong in the arts arsenal is used the art is not itself. For example the clip is not WC because he is pounding the guy on the floor...

Throwing straight punches with no defense = wing chun?
ok, if you say so :rolleyes:

lol. I think both clips are wing chun. But you don't, because we have different definitions of what wing chun would look like.

Now according to your definition, your very strict definition Royce Gracie is not using BJJ because he is throwing crescent kicks, round house kicks etc. Right?? This is base on your definition not mine. I think its BJJ.

Hard to say. IMO, it has to look like I train. If it doesn't, I'm wasting my time.
Since there is a lot of good WC and a lot of bad WC, the answer is up to the eye of the beholder, no?

It can't look exactly like you trained because you are in a controlled environment. However, you should see elements of wing chun in there like chain punching, immense pressure in attacking, centerline coverage...

Yoshiyahu

03-19-2009, 10:57 AM

You are actually right...i haven't seen clips of Hung Ga sparring. Can you post some please...But I have seen some WC and Choy Li Fu sparring.

An when they put on the gloves they look like either MMA fighters or Glorified Kick Boxers...

I would love to disagree but I can not disagree.

I feel most schools do not focus on using your WC with gloves. In other words all the different techniques has to be altered. To be used in gloves. In my opinion one should practice realistic drills with the gloves and gear on. In other words. Instead of doing weak arm deflections against weak punches. Someone should really throw a punch at the other guy face. An the other guy blocks it. With what ever technique he is practing. This should be drilled with gloves on everyday to gain proficeincy. An when sparring one person should concentrate strickly on WC techniques an the other concentrate on doing what ever works. The problem is when people spar mostly they are trying to win. Instead of learn how to fight with the technique. So they simply punch and move and punch and move.Kick and move. They don't use the steps or hand techniques.

Realistically one can use
Pak Sau
Bil Sau
Man Sau
Gan San
Lan Sau
Bong Sau
Gum Sau
Lop Sau
Huen Sau
Lau Sao

With the gloves on. But you practice it and spar with it over and over again. Drilling works if you drill hard. I mean it aint nothing wrong with doing a drill slow at first. But if your wearing gloves,headgear and face shield with mouth piece why not do the drill with full force. I mean you got protection. Hit the face if you can. Then spar freestyle. But you may not agree with my opinions. I saw some choy li fu fights. Theyrarely successfully use the long swinging punches of Choy Li Fut. The only place where you can see CLF or WC use the correct way its suppose to be is in Jackie Chan movie. Lol....But I understand why some choose not to use it in sparring but they are cheating themselves.

Its not that complicated, really.
Look at a demo of Muay Thai, there are many on youtube, then look at a MT fight.
Same thing for BJJ, or kyokushin.
Heck, look at a demo of CLF or Hung Ga and see how they fight full contact.
Then do the same with WC.

dnovice I hate to agree with sanjuro but he is right...The most WC techs you will ever see is a chain punch and front kick. No leg checks,no leg sweeps,no throws,no hand deflections from sil lim tao or chum kiu. You see mostly Chain punch,Front kick and occasionaly a shoot to take down. I understand in Karate Tournments and Tae kwon Do tournements those things are illegal. But WC do they really have sparring Tournments thats open to all styles to compete? Or do they just isolated Chi Sau tournments for those who practice chi sau? I think WC needs to fight other styles more. Just my opinion. I also think they should have tournments where many WC techniques are allowed. Such as throwing, Sweeping, Stop Kicks, Leg Check along with chain punching the face and applying grabs and hand techniques. An other non-deadly techniques should be allowed along with any I forgot about. As well as allowing other styles to use their non-lethal techniques.

check out these clips

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Id-UIcxMJNQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDnm0YiNfcA
(Is this really sparring)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX1scWT_EaU
(Looks Like Kickboxing to me)

Some of the better clips of WC sparring:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZ3-Hi-kMNo&feature=related
(This guy is chain punching a little)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Glv1xm8Vk8g
(Pretty good WC guy in my opinion)

Choy Li Fut is just doing Kick boxing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcH0FC4Xihk

This guy only does Chi Sau now. But I head back in the old days he was a great fighter. I would love to see clips of him fighting with gloves on to see if he uses the same techniques as he does with Chi Sau.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-232DNU8_TI&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ui6rj58DA0&feature=related

Chi Sau is great for building sensitivity. But its not real fighting. When you have an opponent throwing power into his punches and kicks and he is evading an not bridging or dissolving your attempt to bridge then you have to be able to react and adapt. Plus everyone is not going to just strike and kick your torso. Sometimes they aimed for the legs, sweeps, throws, kicks to head, elbows, knees, close line, take downs etc. So in sparring one should train WC to be compatible with all these techniques.

The question what would constitute a fight looking like a wc demo?
Does every single move have to be out of the wc arsenal?
Is it WC if some techs are visible?
If some, how much wc to non wc?

First you have to define what WC is in your opinion before we can even go further in deciding what looks like WC and what doesnt.

Sanjuro, Ikfmdc, couch etc? what are your opinions??

cheers

lkfmdc

03-19-2009, 11:02 AM

lol. I think both clips are wing chun.

But then, don't you realize, your definition of "wing chun" becomes meaningless?

They throw some punches, the clinch up, the throw some elbows, they throw some knees

If guys who have never done a single minute of Wing Chun fight EXACTLY THE SAME WAY, then what does "wing chun" mean?

Has nothing to do with "my defnition", it has to do with reality....

sanjuro_ronin

03-19-2009, 11:05 AM

Yoshiyahu,
I think you may have missed or misunderstood some of my points.
Hung Gar and CLF spar the same as they demo.

The moment you put on gloves you are gonna "box" because boxing is basically the best way to hit with gloves on.

CLF actually is one of the systems that tend to look the same when they fight as when they train.

dnovice

03-19-2009, 11:07 AM

But then, don't you realize, your definition of "wing chun" becomes meaningless?

They throw some punches, the clinch up, the throw some elbows, they throw some knees

If guys who have never done a single minute of Wing Chun fight EXACTLY THE SAME WAY, then what does "wing chun" mean?

Has nothing to do with "my defnition", it has to do with reality....

lol. Your definition is apparently the definition of the world. lol. Jokes aside. You never said whether you thought the BJJ clip is actually BJJ...

sanjuro_ronin

03-19-2009, 11:10 AM

lol. Your definition is apparently the definition of the world. lol. Jokes aside. You never said whether you thought the BJJ clip is actually BJJ...

Its pretty hard to figure out what Royce was doing, LOL !!
Its hard to play your game when a better fighter takes you out of it, like what happend to Royce

lkfmdc

03-19-2009, 11:13 AM

lol. Your definition is apparently the definition of the world. lol. Jokes aside. You never said whether you thought the BJJ clip is actually BJJ...

Do BJJ guys use BJJ? Of course they do, when teh fight hits the mat they go for position, isolate position and apply techniques. Teh same arm bars, chokes and sweep you see in class every day you see in the matches... you can't argue that... I have no idea what you are arguing actually? :confused:

In an MMA match, of course BJJ people need strikes and stand up wrestling. And if you have watched the evolution of MMA, you'l see that a lot of the "old curriculum" striking that BJJ had has been abandoned in favor of the same old punches, elbows, low kicks and wrestling EVERYONE USES

IE "style" is a completely artificial distinction, there are no styles, there is only what works and what is crap. If you want to fight effectively, you practice what works and you forget the crap

lkfmdc

03-19-2009, 11:15 AM

Its pretty hard to figure out what Royce was doing, LOL !!
Its hard to play your game when a better fighter takes you out of it, like what happend to Royce

Royce was trying to take the fight to the ground, we have examples in that fight of him pulling guard and trying to work submissions. Of course, most of the fight is him failing to do those things

But, of course, we can put up HUNDREDS of clips of people doing BJJ in real fights, so a singel clip or clips is pretty meaningless

sanjuro_ronin

03-19-2009, 11:16 AM

Do BJJ guys use BJJ? Of course they do, when teh fight hits the mat they go for position, isolate position and apply techniques. Teh same arm bars, chokes and sweep you see in class every day you see in the matches... you can't argue that... I have no idea what you are arguing actually? :confused:

In an MMA match, of course BJJ people need strikes and stand up wrestling. And if you have watched the evolution of MMA, you'l see that a lot of the "old curriculum" striking that BJJ had has been abandoned in favor of the same old punches, elbows, low kicks and wrestling EVERYONE USES

IE "style" is a completely artificial distinction, there are no styles, there is only what works and what is crap. If you want to fight effectively, you practice what works and you forget the crap

I disagree with one thing, there are styles, but not like most think.
There is MY style of doing WC or HK or Kyokushin and then there is YOUR style of doing Lama, doing CLF etc.
People forget that styles were about how a certain teacher/fighter did HIS MA, not about THE MA in particular.

sanjuro_ronin

03-19-2009, 11:17 AM

Royce was trying to take the fight to the ground, we have examples in that fight of him pulling guard and trying to work submissions. Of course, most of the fight is him failing to do those things

But, of course, we can put up HUNDREDS of clips of people doing BJJ in real fights, so a singel clip or clips is pretty meaningless

Sakuraba was the better fighter that day, he fought his fight and didn't let Royce fight his.
Funny how those things matter ;)

lkfmdc

03-19-2009, 11:19 AM

I disagree with one thing, there are styles, but not like most think.
There is MY style of doing WC or HK or Kyokushin and then there is YOUR style of doing Lama, doing CLF etc.
People forget that styles were about how a certain teacher/fighter did HIS MA, not about THE MA in particular.

well, in my school, I taught everyone (mostly) and yet they all have different ways they move, different techniques they like, different strategies. If you want to call that a "style" fine, but in this context in this thread, it isn't what we are talking about

People who do, I don't know, let's call it "Possum Pai" who think that in a "real fight" the "authentic Possum Pai" guy is going to take his "subdoing the chipmonk posture" and use the signature "Possum plays dead" hand strike are missing the boat

lkfmdc

03-19-2009, 11:22 AM

Sakuraba was the better fighter that day, he fought his fight and didn't let Royce fight his.
Funny how those things matter ;)

crazy talk, just plain crazy talk

dnovice

03-19-2009, 11:29 AM

Its pretty hard to figure out what Royce was doing, LOL !!
Its hard to play your game when a better fighter takes you out of it, like what happend to Royce

Very true. But in my opinion he was still trying to using BJJ, was using it, but it just wasn't working for him for a number of reasons: 1) he's fighting a better fighter, 2) the fighter isn't allowing him the time or space to do everything he can etc...

Do BJJ guys use BJJ? Of course they do, when teh fight hits the mat they go for position, isolate position and apply techniques. Teh same arm bars, chokes and sweep you see in class every day you see in the matches... you can't argue that... I have no idea what you are arguing actually? :confused:
I'm not making an argument, man. I just want people to look at clips with fair eyes, without bias. Basically, in a real fight a BJJ guy will apply some techniques from BJJ when appropriate and freestyle the rest. This is the definition i go by. As long as you utilize some moves from the art.

In an MMA match, of course BJJ people need strikes and stand up wrestling. And if you have watched the evolution of MMA, you'l see that a lot of the "old curriculum" striking that BJJ had has been abandoned in favor of the same old punches, elbows, low kicks and wrestling EVERYONE USES

Exactly. I agree. And this is the definition I'm applying to the WC clips. Ok, the guy can't use bong sao, tan sao etc... maybe he's not proficient enough but he threw chain punches, a wc front kick. He then bridged the gap and tried to control his opponent, albeit in a non WC way. But there is WC in the clip (to me.) This is neither right nor wrong, depending on who you ask.

I have studied science all my life. In science if you want to analyze something you have to give a definition to that thing. Without definitions you will be running around in circles not even knowing when you are contradicting yourself. This is why if one is going to analyze whether any art is itself in a fight one has to define what that constitutes.

Yoshi, as for all those other techniques which are not visible in the clips the answer is you use what you are good at using... And what you are good at using comes from what you trully practice in the right way.

cheers.

couch

03-19-2009, 11:50 AM

It can't look exactly like you trained because you are in a controlled environment. However, you should see elements of wing chun in there like chain punching, immense pressure in attacking, centerline coverage...

Agreed, but it needs to look like more than chain punching. Where are all the things that are trained? Simultaneous attack and defense? Front and side kicks? Hand block hand/foot block foot?

And chain punching isn't for punching. It's for chaining your attacks and controls together. It's beginner stuff.

t_niehoff

03-19-2009, 11:55 AM

And chain punching isn't for punching. It's for chaining your attacks and controls together. It's beginner stuff.

What! Heresy! ;)

dnovice

03-19-2009, 12:06 PM

People who do, I don't know, let's call it "Possum Pai" who think that in a "real fight" the "authentic Possum Pai" guy is going to take his "subdoing the chipmonk posture" and use the signature "Possum plays dead" hand strike are missing the boat

Haha. very true.

taai gihk yahn

03-19-2009, 03:42 PM

the human body, for all it's variability in terms of movement quality and shape, is still limited in so far as when you engage in highly context specific activity, the options available to you quickly decrease; for example, if you've ever paddled a canoe for 8 hours a day, or chopped wood for 2 hours straight, or baled hay all morning (all things I've done, yes), you quickly realize that there are no shortcuts, secret techniques or esoteric ways to do this - the movement is bounded by the goal; with fighting, if your goal is to hit someone in vulnerable areas, or submit them via a choke or joint lock, your options become increasingly limited the closer you get to achieving that goal; as such, certain principles and their corresponding movements will be arrived at almost without one choosing it so - which is why, in culture after culture, you see things like wrestling, or use of the spear, sword, bow & arrow, and more recently firearm - the more specialized, the more efficient we become at something, the less variability there is - instead, you have increased skill at fewer things;

when you have a context where in one isn't showing much, where secrecy thrives, like TCMA, you can have "specialized" styles that "work" using weird sh1t, because of the unfamiliarity factor: if I throw the technique "weasel takes a three-day weekend" and no one has ever seen it before, good chance it will work; but once the cat's out of the bag, it's efficacy diminishes quickly; OTOH, a straight jab, which everyone knows about, still works after al these years because of economy of the motion; factor in timing, position, conditioning, reach, speed, etc. it works even better because the basic mechanics of the jab are enhanced by all of these things;

when you "mix" many styles, it's going to create a winnowing effect; we are in the midst of a world-wide evolution in MA, because for the first time, everyone is seeing what everyone else is doing, and many more people are willing to put it on the line to test what they do against conditioned, resisting opponents; also, scientific research has enhanced training methods to a point previously unknown; finally, a rational-based approach to "traditional" arts has found great value in many of these practices for contemporary usage, such as Ch'an principles applied to strength and conditioning training; certainly, some people still believe that there are "hidden" arts that they claim operate on a level far beyond what is "publicly available", and come up with a sophisticated set of rationalizations as to why these are inherently superior, usually referencing some "old masters" stories, or blowing their experience with skills such as rooting, listening / sticking, etc. way out of proportion in terms of their applicability across the board, but the reality is that, most people tend to fight a certain way because that's what really works;

the body is the body; a given "style" can operate on principles that it believes are universal, but for most of TCMA, these were developed within a rather limited context of fighting approaches, which were often informed more by Chines cultural conventions than anything else; to wit, there is plenty of historical documentation about what happened when Lama came to town, in terms of how it fared against "styles" that spent all their time doing short-hand bridge work: for all the sophistication involved in those skills, it all went out the window when the other person decided not to play that game; which just shows that you can spend your life trying to untie the Gordion knot, or just do what Alexander did...

sanjuro_ronin

03-20-2009, 05:42 AM

Very well said dude,
I will add though that, there are some freaks in this world, people that do operate on a whole different level, be it via genetics or just by a mindset that the majority of pedestrians just can't grasp.
These people however are NOT the ones to focus on, simple because that are just that, freaks, and to think that what they can do is attainable by all, well, that is where lots of crap starts to happen.
best to focus on what the "typical" person can do within a given system and now what the "elite" can do, to get a better judgement of the system.
Your point about the whole "effectiveness of the unknown" is a very valid point too, something that still drives many TMA systems.

clam61

03-24-2009, 08:32 PM

i train sum nung WC and we hop around. we dont bob and weave like kickboxers but we hop around. so did sum nung.

Correct, except for the fact that many of the Glorified Kickboxers here in this forum claim to be kung fu fighting while hopping around like boxers and or TKD-ists and using basic kickboxing techniques. Some have even gone further and implied that this was some kind of an "improved" kung fu...lol.

Well I got to give it to this forum, it really is full of laughs.:D

taai gihk yahn

03-24-2009, 08:36 PM

i train sum nung WC and we hop around. we dont bob and weave like kickboxers but we hop around. so did sum nung.

many TCMA styles "hop around", that is, they train "hing gung" or lightness skill; you see this in the footwork utilized by certain styles, although not typically in the southern short hands; for example, the taiji form I learned has certain moves like this (I practice a older version of Yang style, before he took out all the jumps and low sweeps, etc.); you also see it in other northern styles;

taai gihk yahn

03-24-2009, 08:47 PM

The hopping around of boxers and TKD-ists has nothing to do with Ligthtness Skills of kung fu.

that's a bit of an over-generalization; some aspects are the same, others are different

anerlich

03-28-2009, 09:00 PM

But you have to realize that the Root is not taught in many MCDojos.

How do you know? Done a survey of McDojos in the St Louis area? I thought everyone there trained in secret underground fighting clubs.

Xingyi does have a number of forms in which something that could be described at hopping, the most notable of which is the Dragon, which goes from a very low stance, leaping in the air, and switching to the same low stance. Not something you want to spend your life doing if you have knee problems.

Excellent answer.

Nah.

IronWeasel

03-29-2009, 09:26 PM

Hit Iron palm bag a thousand times a day (Break when your body tells you to)

I'm not sure that this is a good recommendation.

Hardwork108

03-31-2009, 08:44 AM

that's a bit of an over-generalization; some aspects are the same, others are different

The aspects that are "different" make all the difference!;)

Yoshiyahu

03-31-2009, 09:31 AM

Can you post a video of Xing Yi Form where the hop around like a boxer?

I would love to see what you are talking about...

Because a Boxer doesn't hop or jump in the air...he actually bounces around. But there are also flat foot boxers too. So it depends on the training. But Jumping rope consecutively for 20 minutes helps with the stamina needed to bounce like a boxer. If you can not jump rope at a steady pace than your hopping skills will be sad...

But please share the video of Xing Yi Quan where they stay on their toes and hop around or bounce?

I would love to see it?

How do you know? Done a survey of McDojos in the St Louis area? I thought everyone there trained in secret underground fighting clubs.

Xingyi does have a number of forms in which something that could be described at hopping, the most notable of which is the Dragon, which goes from a very low stance, leaping in the air, and switching to the same low stance. Not something you want to spend your life doing if you have knee problems.

Nah.

Clam61 Said:

i train sum nung WC and we hop around. we dont bob and weave like kickboxers but we hop around. so did sum nung.

Please show some footage of
Sum Nung
Kwok Wan Ping
Tom Wong
Joseph Chow

Hopping around? I would love to see if if you have it. Please show us how they hopp around.

Also after you do that show us a video of your hopping around or that of your class mates or sifu. As for me when I hop around too. But its not from the Wing Chun. I draw from Boxing and kick boxing to hop around. But I don't regularly hop around. I use it with certain types of people. An other I simply utilize my WC steps on the balls of the feet. Which gives you quick springy steps and movements. But not quite bouncing?

Please share some proof?

Here is a Yuen Kay San video...I don't see much hoping around like a kick boxer do you?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8520428760600079916&ei=a0bSScDXJ4GqrwKuj-irAw&q=Yuen+Kay+San&hl=en

sanjuro_ronin

03-31-2009, 09:41 AM

Hardwork108

03-31-2009, 09:49 AM

Yoshiyahu

03-31-2009, 11:16 AM

Regardless of what you may have heard, Boxers, of any type, don't really "bounce around".
Even what some TKD guys do isn't really "bouncing around", though it sure looks like it.
Being on the balls of your feet, for lack of a better description, and such doesn't = "bouncing around".

Wow when I post bouncing you disagree...but all the post about hopping around you had no problem with...I Find that mystfiying? Maybe its just because I posted something useful to aid with future understanding...

Most of the time boxers use the term Dancing. But if you actually look at their feet they are slightly bouncing their weight up and down. Kinda of like they do when training with a jump rope...

Sanjuro do you agree the dancing boxers do is similiar to what they do with a jump rope. Only while in motions by Strafing to side, moving backwards,side stepping, circling around,or moving forward?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bounce[1]

Does anyone know about a boxers footwork?

sanjuro_ronin

03-31-2009, 11:20 AM

Wow when I post bouncing you disagree...but all the post about hopping around you had no problem with...I Find that mystfiying? Maybe its just because I posted something useful to aid with future understanding...

Most of the time boxers use the term Dancing. But if you actually look at their feet they are slightly bouncing their weight up and down. Kinda of like they do when training with a jump rope...

Sanjuro do you agree the dancing boxers do is similiar to what they do with a jump rope. Only while in motions by Strafing to side, moving backwards,side stepping, circling around,or moving forward?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bounce[1]

Does anyone know about a boxers footwork?

Are you asking me, a former Amateur and semi-pro boxer with a winning record that trained out of Sully's gym, one of the best ones in the country, if I know about boxing footwork?
:rolleyes:

Hardwork108

03-31-2009, 11:39 AM

Are you asking me, a former Amateur and semi-pro boxer with a winning record that trained out of Sully's gym, one of the best ones in the country, if I know about boxing footwork?
:rolleyes:

And I believe he is still asking!

P.S. As far as your boxing record goes then, BRAVO! BRAVO! BRAVO!

See Yoshiyahu, one needs to feed the egos of these Glorified Kickboxers otherwise they get depressed and sulk.;)

taai gihk yahn

03-31-2009, 01:14 PM

But it means NOT being in a KUNG FU ROOT!!!
based on my experience with both boxers and yi quan folks, at a high level of proficiency, the results are the same: many paths, one mountaintop

Hardwork108

03-31-2009, 04:21 PM

based on my experience

Thank you!

Edmund

03-31-2009, 05:14 PM

Can you post a video of Xing Yi Form where the hop around like a boxer?

I would love to see what you are talking about...

I would love to see it?

He didn't actually say they hopped around like a boxer.
He said there's hopping up and down in the Xingyi form (Which there is).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xd3WC9514iw

Yoshiyahu

03-31-2009, 05:25 PM

Are you asking me, a former Amateur and semi-pro boxer with a winning record that trained out of Sully's gym, one of the best ones in the country, if I know about boxing footwork?
:rolleyes:

Yes please answer my question Mr. Glorified Kickboxing champion of the world Sannnnjuro Roninnnnn!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-BquHUw1KA

He didn't actually say they hopped around like a boxer.
He said there's hopping up and down in the Xingyi form (Which there is).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xd3WC9514iw

Wow finally a video I want the other guy to post one as well...I loved your video...I think Xing Yi is an excellent Art.

But in retrospect we were discussing how real Wing Chun hops around when fighting...

Do you agree a Wing Chun does hopping about an dancing when fighting in the streets?

Hardwork108

03-31-2009, 05:27 PM

He didn't actually say they hopped around like a boxer.
He said there's hopping up and down in the Xingyi form (Which there is).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xd3WC9514iw

They may "hop" but they still have their kung fu roots. No roots, no kung fu!

anerlich

03-31-2009, 05:31 PM

He didn't actually say they hopped around like a boxer.

Yes, no one said that. If Yoshiyahu came to that conclusion, that would be a comprehension issue for him.

There is the issue of whether boxers actually "hop" as well, but that dsicussion would almost certainly go nowhere.

TWC's entry technique is often described by non-TWCers as a "hop", and techincally it is, though the intent is forward, not upward.

Hardwork108

03-31-2009, 05:34 PM

There is the issue of whether boxers actually "hop" as well, but that dsicussion would almost certainly go nowhere.
Boxers do what they do and it works for them but it has nothing to do with kung fu roots.

TWC's entry technique is often described by non-TWCers as a "hop", and techincally it is, though the intent is forward, not upward.

Let us say that it is a rooted "hop"!

Yoshiyahu

03-31-2009, 06:06 PM

Yes, no one said that. If Yoshiyahu came to that conclusion, that would be a comprehension issue for him.

There is the issue of whether boxers actually "hop" as well, but that dsicussion would almost certainly go nowhere.

TWC's entry technique is often described by non-TWCers as a "hop", and techincally it is, though the intent is forward, not upward.

So do you think Hopping,Bouncing and dancing is more advantageous than rooting in your footwork while fluenly flowing from one step to the other with out the up and down motion.

taai gihk yahn

03-31-2009, 06:42 PM

Thank you!

and your point?

Edmund

03-31-2009, 06:47 PM

Wow finally a video I want the other guy to post one as well...I loved your video...I think Xing Yi is an excellent Art.

Does it matter who posted the vid?
Anyone with a little bit of Xingyi experience could have told you the same thing.

The fact is: you didn't know that internal arts (that are supposed to be always rooted according to you) actually have some jumping and hopping IN THEIR FORMS. Chen Taiji has jumping kicks and twirls through the air as well.

You have a PRECONCEPTION about arts you haven't learnt from some articles or something. Then you and HW108 are making assessments about what's rooting and internal and just stupid judgments about how deep it all is. Yet your experience is pretty ****ing limited.

At least I've had some real lessons in Xingyi, Taiji, boxing etc.

But in retrospect we were discussing how real Wing Chun hops around when fighting...

Do you agree a Wing Chun does hopping about an dancing when fighting in the streets?

What a stupid loaded question.

If I said "do you agree real WC guys do the robot dance and wave their chins in the air to get their heads knocked off?" would that be a real question?

You were denigrating the idea of "hopping around dancing" and accusing boxers and kickboxers of not having awesome rooting abilities for fighting. Wake the hell up. They probably do a lot more fighting than you do and hit pretty hard for their supposedly bad rooting abilities.

You can't conceive that it would work even though they prove their approach over and over. Hence you see it in a negative way and use negative terminology. You don't even know what they're doing or how it's done. You're assuming you know and frankly you completely mis-characterized them.

You're stuck following a dogma of your own creation. Even internal arts jump around in their forms but you've never known that.

taai gihk yahn

03-31-2009, 06:48 PM

Let us say that it is a rooted "hop"!
a skilled boxer has "root"; he may not have developed it according to "kung fu" methodology, but "root" is, ultimately, the ability to dynamically receive and / or issue power without loosing your balance; skilled wrestlers have it too (so do skilled taiji players - although many of them seem to have more difficulty maintaining their root at higher rates of speed, unlike boxers or wrestlers...); you can develop this ability many ways: "post" standing is one; hitting a heavy bag is another; push hands another; "kung fu" does not have the market cornered on acquisition or utilization of this skill;

anerlich

03-31-2009, 07:22 PM

I want the other guy to post one as well...I loved your video...I think Xing Yi is an excellent Art

If I'm the "other guy", you'll be waiting a while. I was trained in Xingyi for longer than Mouthboy108 claims to have done Wing Chun, but that was over 20 years ago. I don't know who the good Xingyi guys are any more.

I don't see any reason to do you any favours, either.

sanjuro_ronin

04-01-2009, 07:00 AM

Yes please answer my question Mr. Glorified Kickboxing champion of the world Sannnnjuro Roninnnnn!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-BquHUw1KA

Wow, you've become an even bigger idiot than many have given you credit for.
Congrats and good luck on your search.

sanjuro_ronin

04-01-2009, 07:02 AM

The fact is: you didn't know that internal arts (that are supposed to be always rooted according to you) actually have some jumping and hopping IN THEIR FORMS. Chen Taiji has jumping kicks and twirls through the air as well.

Dong Tai Chi, a version of Yang that was mentioned in another thread, has them too, as do many other TCMA.

You were denigrating the idea of "hopping around dancing" and accusing boxers and kickboxers of not having awesome rooting abilities for fighting. Wake the hell up. They probably do a lot more fighting than you do and hit pretty hard for their supposedly bad rooting abilities.

It must be an uber-secret chi system that allows boxers to hit hard with no "root".
;)

Kansuke

04-01-2009, 07:03 AM

Wow, you've become an even bigger idiot than many have given you credit for.
Congrats and good luck on your search.

What are the odds this new idiot is just another screen name for the Two Year Grandmaster?

sanjuro_ronin

04-01-2009, 07:03 AM

a skilled boxer has "root"; he may not have developed it according to "kung fu" methodology, but "root" is, ultimately, the ability to dynamically receive and / or issue power without loosing your balance; skilled wrestlers have it too (so do skilled taiji players - although many of them seem to have more difficulty maintaining their root at higher rates of speed, unlike boxers or wrestlers...); you can develop this ability many ways: "post" standing is one; hitting a heavy bag is another; push hands another; "kung fu" does not have the market cornered on acquisition or utilization of this skill;

In other words, rooting is system specific, task specific actually.

lkfmdc

04-01-2009, 07:11 AM

What are the odds this new idiot is just another screen name for the Two Year Grandmaster?

Unfortunately, the reality is that there are so many dillusional turds in Chinese martial arts that it is just more likely he is yet another loser on this board :rolleyes:

I've added him to my elite and selective "ignore list"

sanjuro_ronin

04-01-2009, 07:13 AM

What are the odds this new idiot is just another screen name for the Two Year Grandmaster?

Eh, I don't have the patience anymore for this, ignore is there for a reason and I have began to use it more and more it seems.
Makes the forums much easier to tolerate.

lkfmdc

04-01-2009, 07:25 AM

a skilled boxer has "root"; he may not have developed it according to "kung fu" methodology, but "root" is, ultimately, the ability to dynamically receive and / or issue power without loosing your balance; skilled wrestlers have it too (so do skilled taiji players - although many of them seem to have more difficulty maintaining their root at higher rates of speed, unlike boxers or wrestlers...); you can develop this ability many ways: "post" standing is one; hitting a heavy bag is another; push hands another; "kung fu" does not have the market cornered on acquisition or utilization of this skill;

apparently this poor sucker never learned real kung fu, much less "internal" since he had to rely on learning Western boxing! (http://www.jiangschool.com/Images/BOXER.jpg)

sanjuro_ronin

04-01-2009, 07:27 AM

apparently this poor sucker never learned real kung fu, much less "internal" since he had to rely on learning Western boxing! (http://www.jiangschool.com/Images/BOXER.jpg)

Who is that by the way?

TenTigers

04-01-2009, 07:30 AM

hmm, I'm guessing-William Chen?

sanjuro_ronin

04-01-2009, 07:31 AM

Oh, its Jiang Hao-Quan.

sanjuro_ronin

04-01-2009, 07:33 AM

Oh, he's just another "glorified kickboxer":

Grandmaster Jiang Hao-Quan has over 71 years of professional martial arts teaching experience, and a championship winning, fighting background. You will learn from a teacher who has devoted his whole life to Chinese and Western boxing, and the classical weapons. You will also learn from his assistants and dedicated students in a friendly, encouraging environment that is neither intimidating nor competitive. Learn from the vast knowledge and experience this true grandmaster has to offer you, while the opportunity is still here. Grandmaster Jiang Hao-Quan is a living legend and would like nothing better than to teach his wealth of martial arts knowledge and experiences to eager, able and willing students. Instructions offered include: Pa Kua Chang (Ba Gua Zhang); Tai Chi Chuan (Tai Ji Quan); Hsing-I Chuan (Xing-Yi Quan), Shaolin Chuan; Chi Kung (Qi Gong); Shuai Chiao; San Shou; Weapons; Chinese Kickboxing; Boxing and more...

lkfmdc

04-01-2009, 07:38 AM

Who is that by the way?

http://www.jiangschool.com/jiang.htm

Professor Jiang Hao-Quan was born in January 1916, in Chang Chou City, Kiangsu Province. He is a famous contemporary martial artist who has over 70 years of martial arts teaching experience, and has devoted his whole life to Chinese and Western boxing and the classical weapons. In the 1940's, he defeated over ten boxing masters from China, England, United States of America, Russia and Portugal. He was named the "Chinese boxing champion" and the "Living Yuan-Jia Huo." In the 1980's he was appointed the "Head Coach of Zhongnanhai Central Guards," and trained many senior guards for the country. He was also the coach of the contemporary "Forbidden Corps." Jiang Hao-Quan has also been a champion Spring Board Diver, an acrobat, a gymnast and body builder.

Jiang Hao-Quan began studying martial arts at the age of 4, studying Shao Yao Chang (Hsiao Yao Chang) with one of his uncles. While still very young, Jiang Hao-Quan's mother met a monk at the local temple that she regularly attended. The monk was skilled at Shao Yao Chang also, and taught the art to Jiang. Later while Jiang was attending the Chang Chou middle school, one of his teachers there, noticed Jiang's athletic abilities. That teacher was a member of the first graduating class at the Nanjing Central Martial Arts Academy (Nanjing Chung Yang Kuo Shu Kuan), and made an arrangement for Jiang to take an admission test to enter the Nanjing Academy's youth level. So at the age of 15, in the summer of 1932, Jiang took and passed the test for admission into the Nanjing Central Martial Arts Academy. He entered the academy's youth level as a full time student. The curriculum at the school was divided into two main categories, Shaolin styles (including Shaolin boxing, Cha Ch'uan, Tan Tui, and Pa Chi) and Wu Tang styles (including Tai Chi Ch'uan, Hsing-I Ch'uan, Pa Kua Chang, and Liu Ho Pa Fa), plus the academic studies. Full time students had to complete the entire four year course of study. Jiang completed his four years, specializing in Shaolin Ch'uan, Hsing-I Ch'uan, Pa Kua Chang, Tai Chi Ch'uan, San Shou (Free Fighting), Pao T'ing Shuai Chiao (Swift-Throw Chinese Wrestling), Boxing, Solo and Matching forms. He graduated with honors in 1936. Jiang Hao-Quan has been practicing and studying the martial arts for over 87 years, and has been teaching them for over 70 years.

Jiang Hao-Quan has been fortunate enough to have had access to many of the best teachers of 20th century China. While attending the Nanjing academy, he was the student of three different Pa Kua Chang teachers. All three of them (Huang Bo-Nien, Jiang Rong-Qiao, and Yin Yu-Zhang) were third generation practitioners in the lineage of Dong Hai-Ch'uan (credited as the originator of Pa Kua Chang). As part of the curriculum at the academy, two different Pa Kua Chang forms were taught - Lao Pa Chang and Ch'uan Shi Pa Kua Chang. Jiang Hao-Quan learned the Lao Pa Chang (old eight palms), the traditional Pa Kua Chang form, from Jiang Rong-Qiao which he learned from his teacher Zhang Zhao-Dong; he learned Lung Hsing Pa Kua Chang (Dragon Form Eight Diagram Palm) from Huang Bo-Nien which Huang learned from his teacher Li Cun-Yi; and Jiang learned Pa Kua Chang San Shou (Eight Diagram Palm Free Fighting) techniques from Yin Yu-Zhang which he learned from his teacher Yin Fu who was his father. Huang Bo-Nien also taught Hsing-I Ch'uan to Jiang Hao-Quan.

Jiang Hao-Quan was one of two outstanding students in the early 1930s at the Nanjing academy, selected to learn Ch'uan Shi Pa Kua Chang, a modified version of the combat-oriented Pa Kua Chang system originally created by Dong Hai-Ch'uan. Two of Dong's closest students, Zhang Zhao-Dong and Li Cun-Yi, inherited the form and then passed it on to their respective students, Huang Bo-Nien and Jiang Rong-Qiao. Jiang Rong-Qiao and Huang Bo-Nien were both renowned martial artists in early 20th-century China.

CFT

04-01-2009, 07:40 AM

Let us say that it is a rooted "hop"!Just what is a rooted "hop"? How do you root in the air?

sanjuro_ronin

04-01-2009, 07:58 AM

He entered the academy's youth level as a full time student. The curriculum at the school was divided into two main categories, Shaolin styles (including Shaolin boxing, Cha Ch'uan, Tan Tui, and Pa Chi) and Wu Tang styles (including Tai Chi Ch'uan, Hsing-I Ch'uan, Pa Kua Chang, and Liu Ho Pa Fa), plus the academic studies. Full time students had to complete the entire four year course of study. Jiang completed his four years, specializing in Shaolin Ch'uan, Hsing-I Ch'uan, Pa Kua Chang, Tai Chi Ch'uan, San Shou (Free Fighting), Pao T'ing Shuai Chiao (Swift-Throw Chinese Wrestling), Boxing, Solo and Matching forms. He graduated with honors in 1936. Jiang Hao-Quan has been practicing and studying the martial arts for over 87 years, and has been teaching them for over 70 years.

What ??? 4 YEARS of study ??
Specialization in various MA???
That's just crazy talk !!
:p

Xiao3 Meng4

04-01-2009, 09:56 AM

Just what is a rooted "hop"? How do you root in the air?

:eek: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMw_Jtn3Avc

Not really rooting in the air, rather through his opponent's structure and momentum. Impressive!

Forget the weapons stuff at the end, they aren't relevant to the topic.

sanjuro_ronin

04-01-2009, 12:16 PM

:eek: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMw_Jtn3Avc

Not really rooting in the air, rather through his opponent's structure and momentum. Impressive!

Forget the weapons stuff at the end, they aren't relevant to the topic.

Rooting is task and system specific.
You think a guy squatting 800lbs or deadlifting 1000 doesn't have "roots"?
Or guys that compete in tug-of-wars?
Or surfers?
Etc,etc.

Xiao3 Meng4

04-01-2009, 12:44 PM

Rooting is task and system specific.
You think a guy squatting 800lbs or deadlifting 1000 doesn't have "roots"?
Or guys that compete in tug-of-wars?
Or surfers?
Etc,etc.

Now that's just crazy talk. :D

Surfers, Skateboarders and Snowboarders have some the best roots, imo.

sanjuro_ronin

04-01-2009, 12:45 PM

Now that's just crazy talk. :D

Must be the kool-aid.

taai gihk yahn

04-01-2009, 04:10 PM

It is so difficult to get through to you guys. Are you guys playing dumb to get a laught, or is it more serious than I thought?

All MAs will have some kind of a "root". Nobody is denying that!!!

Kung fu roots are Distinct and are more relevant to kung fu applications than to kickboxing ones. There may share some common ground with other MAs but then we have the constant of the forces of gravity involved...lol.

The kickboxing experts who infest these forums do not see the obvious distinctions and that is because, well, they are kickboxers?;)

I won't disagree insofar as there are qualitative differences, which, as you seem to be saying,is related to the preferred method of engagement; so sure - you wouldn't root exactly the same way to throw boxing combos as you would for push-hands, because the type of force transference is different; so, if you are trying to push, or do bridging hands work (a la yi quan, i liq quan, etc.), because you are connected more to the other person, you will utilize your root differently; and in that case, where you are in contact more with the opponent, then things like post standing make a good deal more sense, because you are first identifying the nature of your own relationship to the ground, then the ground's "response" to you; and then you add the third variable of the opponent;

as far as the lightness skills, you do develop those out of the root in taiji: meaning that at the beginning, the downward rootedness is usually felt in the entire body; unfortunately, a lot of taiji peeps get stuck there, mainly because when pushing against most people, if you have that complete sinking, it's almost impossible to get uprooted; of course, someone with skill will get around that, but most push-hands in these parts is pretty low level; anyway, what happens after some time (took me ~8 years, FWIW), you start to feel a differentiation in the upper body, which is almost like a "elastic stretching" through the spine, where the "suspended from above" piece kicks in simultaneously with the root of the legs (whereas before it would be one or the other); after that, pushing changes dramatically, it's hard to describe, but you no longer feel like you are slogging through mud; from there, you can do the "hing" stuff using the ground reaction force that you use to establish static root, to push off in conjunction with the global elastic recoil of the body's connective tissue; it's a very distinct feeling when you get it "just right" (the Tung fast form is based on this principle, BTW - supposedly you aren't supposed to practice it more than one time / day)

Edmund

04-01-2009, 05:02 PM

The problem is that most people who are making clueless posts about are basing it on their "little" bit of "experience" in god knows what.

I got news for you. You need to be rooted in the so-called external kung fu styles as well and everyone knows that they have jump kicks too. You guys just don't seem to understand the concepts involved in kung fu rooting. You see kung fu as just an external alternative to Western boxing or whatever kickboxing that you are familiar with.

That wasn't even the issue I was raising.
You got some Xing yi experience? Or Bagua? Taiji?

How much have you done ? Because you've shown jack **** knowledge of any of it. Yet you moan about how great you are and deride people who actually did training in these styles! It's hilarious that you claim that your lack of any physical training in these arts is better because you reckon they don't get internal arts.

They must have gone to McDojos because they don't agree with your ideas which you gleaned from 2 years of WC. Then you go on about Yi quan, taiji, bagua etc. like you *think* you've done some.

Quit speaking about styles you haven't even trained in like you're an expert.
When someone makes a preconceived assumption about no hopping in Xingyi and I or others correct it because they've actually done some Xingyi, you should shut your yap because you don't KNOW ANY Xingyi.

You've got zero technical details of many of these styles that you go on about. You couldn't show anyone the first thing about them. You talk about Sun Lu Tang - Have you actually learnt any Sun Taiji? Any loser can spout sayings from books then claim they got "quality" rather than quantity.

anerlich

04-01-2009, 06:49 PM

The problem is that most people who are making clueless posts about are basing it on their "little" bit of "experience" in god knows what.

G@ypr0n108 is describing himself here.

He stirs up multiple arguments on several forums, and that's just on KFO, and posts so much he couldn't possibly have time to do any training anyway, let alone have the long discussions with all the "legitimate" KF masters he's supposed to have met, but somehow no one else has.

What sort of d0rk claims to travel halfway across the world, then spends all his waking hours in that location trolling on KFO?

Even the bona fide internal guys think he's a tosser, even when, or because, he sucks up to them like an industrial vacuum cleaner.

Yoshiyahu

04-01-2009, 06:57 PM

I won't disagree insofar as there are qualitative differences, which, as you seem to be saying,is related to the preferred method of engagement; so sure - you wouldn't root exactly the same way to throw boxing combos as you would for push-hands, because the type of force transference is different; so, if you are trying to push, or do bridging hands work (a la yi quan, i liq quan, etc.), because you are connected more to the other person, you will utilize your root differently; and in that case, where you are in contact more with the opponent, then things like post standing make a good deal more sense, because you are first identifying the nature of your own relationship to the ground, then the ground's "response" to you; and then you add the third variable of the opponent;

as far as the lightness skills, you do develop those out of the root in taiji: meaning that at the beginning, the downward rootedness is usually felt in the entire body; unfortunately, a lot of taiji peeps get stuck there, mainly because when pushing against most people, if you have that complete sinking, it's almost impossible to get uprooted; of course, someone with skill will get around that, but most push-hands in these parts is pretty low level; anyway, what happens after some time (took me ~8 years, FWIW), you start to feel a differentiation in the upper body, which is almost like a "elastic stretching" through the spine, where the "suspended from above" piece kicks in simultaneously with the root of the legs (whereas before it would be one or the other); after that, pushing changes dramatically, it's hard to describe, but you no longer feel like you are slogging through mud; from there, you can do the "hing" stuff using the ground reaction force that you use to establish static root, to push off in conjunction with the global elastic recoil of the body's connective tissue; it's a very distinct feeling when you get it "just right" (the Tung fast form is based on this principle, BTW - supposedly you aren't supposed to practice it more than one time / day)

Excellent response...i enjoyed it...you really know what your talking about...you shared true knowledge...some people who talk alot could learn from you...thank you for your post!

Xiao3 Meng4

04-01-2009, 06:58 PM

CHRIST ALMIGHTY!

Here I am trying to help distinguish the difference between Boxing/Kickboxing and that of (internal) kung fu roots and here we get an MMA "kung fu-ist":rolleyes: "expert" who brings the "art" of skateboarding into the equasion. :rolleyes:

Hi Hardwork,

You quoted me yet directed your comments towards Sanjuro Ronin.

To be clear, he never mentioned skateboards. However, I do agree with him regarding rooting. I also agree with Tai Gihk Yahn, as I do not see the two viewpoints as being incompatible

In Kung Fu and Qi Gong, fundamental root training is Zhan Zhuang, which consists of nothing more than standing on flat, solid ground. This allows our root to develop wholistically. If we incorporate an environmental variable capable of interacting with the root - such as a person pushing or pulling us, momentum over uneven terrain, lifting objects, throwing objects, spiraling energy, etc. - Then our root will still get stronger overall, but with extra rooting ability in an environment that contains the variable with which it developed.

The thing is, rooting skills are very transferable. Time and again, I've seen XBoarders take up Tai Ji or Wing Chun, and a lightbulb go on in their head as soon as they're introduced to the idea of rooting. Their rooting ability in drills, push hands, Chi Sao and sparring ends up being much more developed in much less time.
It works the other way, too: I'm just beginning to learn to skateboard and am finding the rooting skills I've been developing in my martial arts training to be very useful. In three 2 hours sessions I progressed sufficiently to be able to roll down a ramp, pick up speed, go up another ramp and choose to do either a front-side turn, a back-side turn, or a fakie, then continue on down the ramp, down another steeper ramp, and repeat. All without falling after the 2nd 2 hour session. People actually commented on how fast I had learned. (Thanks MA training! You're the best!) :)

Anyway, skill transfer in rooting can happen, does happen, and Xboarders have a heck of a lot to transfer.

Have been cross training recently, have we Sanjuro? Lol,lol.

Rooting practice also involves rooting the mind. When engaged in physical activity, it's much easier to root the mind in the moment. Rooting the mind during social activity is another thing altogether! It's kind of like adding an environmental variable, but this one interacts with the mind. For instance, exposure to intense emotions or aggressive social behaviour can unsettle the mind. Therefore, learning to stay settled in the face of highly energetic social behaviour is part of rooting. Likewise, learning how to unsettle your opponent mentally can often guarantee victory.

Whatever kung fu knowledge that may be lacking in this forum is more than made up for by the available laughs...LOL,lol.

Taai Gihk Yahn, would you like to explain the difference between Internal Kung Fu roots and applications to those of Skateboarding roots and applications to one of our distinguished resident Glorified Kickboxers or should I?

He is more likely to listen to you. I am not saying that he will understand as the science of neurology is in its infancy when it comes to problems such as those suffered by our poor punchdrunk Sanjuro, but it may just be worth a try.;)

The above quote is a good example of aggressive social behaviour. It has three possible uses: first, to unsettle the minds of people you feel are a threat. Second, to establish authority or dominance over said threat. Third, to relieve personal feelings of inadequacy brought about by the threat.

The thing is, there are no victories to be won or lost here, no dangers or threats. It's a forum where everyone is allowed and encouraged to share their opinions and experiences, and where, as in real life, aggression and ego do nothing but garble the info and minimize sharing. So basically, when people are aggressive and egotistical, everybody loses, especially the aggressive or egotistical person: they end up feeling alone, isolated, and unloved.

So, in my opinion and experience, rooting skills from various arts are transferable, since they all come from Zhan Zhuang anyway.

P.S. There is ONE battle for supremacy on the board which is vital and, for those who chose, should be fought with utmost skill: The King of Hot Babe Pics.

anerlich

04-01-2009, 07:48 PM

He is more likely to listen to you.

Of course he is. Taai Gihk Yahn and Xiao3 Meng4 give considered, sensilbe answers. HW108 is a troll.

Here I am trying to help distinguish the difference between Boxing/Kickboxing and that of (internal) kung fu roots

And failing, due to your manifest ignorance of both subjects.

sanjuro_ronin

04-02-2009, 05:33 AM

Its amazing how some stalkers address posts to people that have them on ignore, something very disturbing about that.

Anyways...

To be clear, he never mentioned skateboards. However, I do agree with him regarding rooting. I also agree with Tai Gihk Yahn, as I do not see the two viewpoints as being incompatible

Glad someone can actually read AND understand.

In Kung Fu and Qi Gong, fundamental root training is Zhan Zhuang, which consists of nothing more than standing on flat, solid ground. This allows our root to develop wholistically. If we incorporate an environmental variable capable of interacting with the root - such as a person pushing or pulling us, momentum over uneven terrain, lifting objects, throwing objects, spiraling energy, etc. - Then our root will still get stronger overall, but with extra rooting ability in an environment that contains the variable with which it developed.

Oops, common sense, watch it you may end up a "knuklehead".

The thing is, rooting skills are very transferable. Time and again, I've seen XBoarders take up Tai Ji or Wing Chun, and a lightbulb go on in their head as soon as they're introduced to the idea of rooting. Their rooting ability in drills, push hands, Chi Sao and sparring ends up being much more developed in much less time.

The principles are transferable, even the skill to an extent, not the application of course, but that is a given.

P.S. There is ONE battle for supremacy on the board which is vital and, for those who chose, should be fought with utmost skill: The King of Hot Babe Pics.

Gong Sau ?
:D

Hardwork108

04-02-2009, 09:42 AM

That wasn't even the issue I was raising.
You got some Xing yi experience? Or Bagua? Taiji?
Actually I got a little bit of Taiji (Yang) experience, but I could have told you what I did without that experience.

How much have you done ? Because you've shown jack **** knowledge of any of it.
As far as kung fu roots go then there is a common ground that is understood by those of us who have been lucky enought to practice in authentic schools.

Yet you moan about how great you are and deride people who actually did training in these styles!
That is a lie. I have never said I was great. I am just surprised how some people here have not grasped basic concepts after having a some zillion years of experience in a zillion arts!

I am talking about basic stuff.

It's hilarious that you claim that your lack of any physical training in these arts is better because you reckon they don't get internal arts.
:confused:

They must have gone to McDojos because they don't agree with your ideas which you gleaned from 2 years of WC.

Another lie. My experience of kung fu is over 8 years. Do you realize that the more you push the lies that are propogated by the crosstraining MMA community here, the more you loose your credibitlity?

Then you go on about Yi quan, taiji, bagua etc. like you *think* you've done some.
This forum is full of people who have practiced every martial art under the sun but have yet to coprehend basic concepts.

Kung fu styles have guiding principles regarding the roots. Some may emphasis certain aspects while other styles may focus at different ones. This includes the so called "External" kung fu styles as well. Whatever style of kung fu you do, you will need to develop KUNG FU roots and NOT boxing or kickboxing ones!!!

Furthermore, one cannot equate kung fu hopping/jumping (in internal and EXTERNAL styles) in the air to a boxer/TKD-er's hop!!!!

Quit speaking about styles you haven't even trained in like you're an expert.
I am not an expert nor have I ever claimed to be so please stop putting words into my mouth!

I am just amazed at the lack of knowledge regarding basic kung fu principles by people who act like "experts"!

Everybody knows that boxers have roots, so have the TKD guys, but these are not kung fu roots. They may serve the purpose those arts were designed for but don't confuse them with kung fu roots that were designed for kung fu applications.

When someone makes a preconceived assumption about no hopping in Xingyi and I or others correct it because they've actually done some Xingyi, you should shut your yap because you don't KNOW ANY Xingyi.
No one made any such assumption. No matter what people do in any kung fu style they will still have their kung fu roots unless they have been training in some Mckwoon that teaches hopping around as a "functional" alternative.

You've got zero technical details of many of these styles that you go on about.

What good are technical details when one is clueless about basic principles???

You couldn't show anyone the first thing about them.

I believe, I just did!;)

Read my post!

You talk about Sun Lu Tang - Have you actually learnt any Sun Taiji?
NO, but I bet you 10 to one that they have kung fu roots!

Any loser can spout sayings from books then claim they got "quality" rather than quantity.
Are you applying that the "loser" was Sun Lu Tang, because it was his book I was quoting and doing so accurately!

I recommend you to read his book. Then you will appreciate what I am trying to say.:)

Hardwork108

04-02-2009, 09:46 AM

Its amazing how some stalkers address posts to people that have them on ignore, something very disturbing about that.

What is even more disturbing is the way you have been hiding behind the ignore button in fear of having to answer to me for the vile lies that you propogated about me here in the forum.

You had claimed that I had claimed that my sifu had beaten Gracies. We are still waiting for you to show us where I have made such claims!

Hardwork108

04-02-2009, 10:02 AM

Thank you for your post.:)

Hi Hardwork,

You quoted me yet directed your comments towards Sanjuro Ronin.
Sorry.

To be clear, he never mentioned skateboards. However, I do agree with him regarding rooting. I also agree with Tai Gihk Yahn, as I do not see the two viewpoints as being incompatible
At one level they may not be but to really "appreciate" the various principles involved in TCMA rooting then one must practice kung fu in the proper way and not boxing or Tae Kwon Do way. Am I wrong?

In Kung Fu and Qi Gong, fundamental root training is Zhan Zhuang, which consists of nothing more than standing on flat, solid ground. This allows our root to develop wholistically. If we incorporate an environmental variable capable of interacting with the root - such as a person pushing or pulling us, momentum over uneven terrain, lifting objects, throwing objects, spiraling energy, etc. - Then our root will still get stronger overall, but with extra rooting ability in an environment that contains the variable with which it developed.
Agreed.

The thing is, rooting skills are very transferable. Time and again, I've seen XBoarders take up Tai Ji or Wing Chun, and a lightbulb go on in their head as soon as they're introduced to the idea of rooting. Their rooting ability in drills, push hands, Chi Sao and sparring ends up being much more developed in much less time.

I am not denying that, but again the fact is that no one can claim that "roots are roots and that is that"!

There are fundamental differences between what we call kung fu roots and what is seen in sport fighting. Am I wrong?

It works the other way, too: I'm just beginning to learn to skateboard and am finding the rooting skills I've been developing in my martial arts training to be very useful. In three 2 hours sessions I progressed sufficiently to be able to roll down a ramp, pick up speed, go up another ramp and choose to do either a front-side turn, a back-side turn, or a fakie, then continue on down the ramp, down another steeper ramp, and repeat. All without falling after the 2nd 2 hour session. People actually commented on how fast I had learned. (Thanks MA training! You're the best!) :)
I understand what you are saying and by the way congratulations.:)

Anyway, skill transfer in rooting can happen, does happen, and Xboarders have a heck of a lot to transfer.
Again, I agree but again a skate boarder will then have a heck of a lot more to learn once the basic transfer is over. Am I wrong?

Rooting practice also involves rooting the mind. When engaged in physical activity, it's much easier to root the mind in the moment. Rooting the mind during social activity is another thing altogether! It's kind of like adding an environmental variable, but this one interacts with the mind. For instance, exposure to intense emotions or aggressive social behaviour can unsettle the mind. Therefore, learning to stay settled in the face of highly energetic social behaviour is part of rooting. Likewise, learning how to unsettle your opponent mentally can often guarantee victory.
Agreed.:)

The above quote is a good example of aggressive social behaviour. It has three possible uses: first, to unsettle the minds of people you feel are a threat. Second, to establish authority or dominance over said threat. Third, to relieve personal feelings of inadequacy brought about by the threat.

The thing is, there are no victories to be won or lost here, no dangers or threats. It's a forum where everyone is allowed and encouraged to share their opinions and experiences, and where, as in real life, aggression and ego do nothing but garble the info and minimize sharing. So basically, when people are aggressive and egotistical, everybody loses, especially the aggressive or egotistical person: they end up feeling alone, isolated, and unloved.
Sometimes the insecure behavior can flow both ways except when it comes from the other way it is accompanied by cowardly lies!

So, in my opinion and experience, rooting skills from various arts are transferable, since they all come from Zhan Zhuang anyway.
I agree with you, but what others here fail to understand is that transferable does not mean the same!

Transferable, to me, is on a more basic level where then one will have to learn, understand and finetune the kung fu methodology to roots. Am I wrong?

P.S. There is ONE battle for supremacy on the board which is vital and, for those who chose, should be fought with utmost skill: The King of Hot Babe Pics.

LOL.

Where I live (Colombia) you get those type of hot chicks walking by and smiling at me most of the time, and no they are not blind hot chicks.:eek:

Now, why can't the the MMA crowd here make sensible posts like yours? Or did I just answer my own question?:eek::)

Hardwork108

04-02-2009, 10:11 AM

Of course he is. Taai Gihk Yahn and Xiao3 Meng4 give considered, sensilbe answers. HW108 is a troll.
If I were you I would cool down a little so as not to make false and insulting statments. I am talking about the last part of the above sentence, by the way.:)

I know that this is the internet and hence people feel easy about lying and making false statements about people they don't know, but it doesn't make it right!

And failing, due to your manifest ignorance of both subjects.
If you had even a basic understanding of one of these subjects, I am talking about kung fu, then you would have at least understood the point that I was trying to make.:)

m1k3

04-02-2009, 10:42 AM

Hardwork108
Works intently on his root
glorified kung fu! :D

Xiao3 Meng4

04-02-2009, 11:42 AM

Hi Hardwork,

Thanks for the polite reply.

At one level they may not be but to really "appreciate" the various principles involved in TCMA rooting then one must practice kung fu in the proper way and not boxing or Tae Kwon Do way. Am I wrong?

There is no denying that the application of a developed root varies from discipline to discipline. Striking arts apply their roots differently than grappling arts, and both of those categories have variations within them. The application of root is what distinguishes them in my mind.

I am not denying that, but again the fact is that no one can claim that "roots are roots and that is that"!

"roots are roots" is like saying "dogs are dogs" or "cars are cars." It sounds silly, because we all know that there can be remarkable differences within those categories. However, on a fundamental level, all dogs share certain traits with all other dogs. All roots share certain principles with all other roots.

There are fundamental differences between what we call kung fu roots and what is seen in sport fighting. Am I wrong?

On the level of Structure, the rooting is the same. On the level of application, there is variation, which we covered above. On the level of intent, there is also variation, but less than is to be expected... self-preservation is a powerful organizing center!

Again, I agree but again a skate boarder will then have a heck of a lot more to learn once the basic transfer is over. Am I wrong?

It never ends... we all have a heck of a lot more to learn.

Sometimes the insecure behavior can flow both ways except when it comes from the other way it is accompanied by cowardly lies!

I honestly have no idea what's real or not in the realm of forum soap operas. Likewise, you have no idea who I am or if I've even trained a day in any Martial Art. All we know is that we're communicating about a common topic, and for any benefit to come from our discussion, there must be openness, acceptance, patience, and reason. Insults and old grudges do little to foster those.

Transferable, to me, is on a more basic level where then one will have to learn, understand and finetune the kung fu methodology to roots. Am I wrong?

Again, it sounds like you're describing the application of root, so no, I don't think so.

I find it funny that we're all saying pretty much the same thing, only using slightly different focal points. It highlights the value of stepping back from someone's words and personality, and reading between the lines.

Hendrik

04-02-2009, 12:50 PM

Rooting has turned into one of the biggest misconception which lock one into " I have to be root solid before I can do anything." mind set.

There is nothing wrong with the term Rooting, but not undersand what is it refer to is a big trouble.

What these " I have it too Mc kungfu rooting" people dont realized or aware ---> at the point one root solid, one no longer will practice "comes accept, goes return...." one becomes resisting and sustaining or reacting instead of flow but stuck. Thus, when they are on the soft mat or judo mat or wresting mat they cant even walk.

The Taiji classical said, " as light weight as one feather of force cannot land on my body" that is because of balance not because of rooting.

These days people are so deluted into a wrong direction keep thinking if only they can root better all issues are solved. Nope, that is day dreaming. because there is time one purposely want the total opposite of rooting to use the momentum generated.

Since it is a 3 dimensional physical word, there are six directional force vector, it is about how to balance these six force vectors that lead one to be able to flow with "as light weight as one feather weigth of force cannot land on my body."

So, to the mininum, when mention Root, Hang got to be there. Otherwise, it is hopeless.

only with Root and Hang, the body is in a balance up right state, but even that it only cover 1/3 of the six directional force vector or one dimensional.

Root with Hang, one's spine is not in a proper position, and thus, it is not supprise the more one intend to root the easier one being take down. ----> one violate the law of nature .

while agrueing most are very smart, they will pull up all kind of reason to the scientific....ect. However, look closely, most doesnt even know how to think in comon sense. and thus, it is all mouth fu.

sad.

just some thoughts and ofcorse I can be wrong. But what If I am right?

sanjuro_ronin

04-02-2009, 01:11 PM

Xiao3 Meng4

04-02-2009, 01:36 PM

Are you suggesting that "rooting" should be "dynamic" ??
:eek:

Sacrebleu!

Xiao3 Meng4

04-02-2009, 02:01 PM

There is nothing wrong with the term Rooting, but not undersand what is it refer to is a big trouble.

Absolutely.

Hendrik

04-02-2009, 02:02 PM

Are you suggesting that "rooting" should be "dynamic" ??
:eek:

Notice what the Kuen Kuit said

Come accept, goes return..... using silence to lead action.

Silence when take mental form is quietness.

silence when takes the Qi realm form is "free flow -ness"

Silence when takes a physical form is balance.

When the Mind/Qi/Body all is in silence then your ball is done and you are ready to flow.
Until then, forget about all the mind speculation. it is about attainment not about reasoning.

Thus, the name of game is about dynamic balancing at all instant for the mind/qi/body.

But no one comprehend the kuen kuit eventhought the whole world is quoting it.

Miss Wing Chun has passed away for so long, but we still could heard her voice sobbing .

do you know where you going to?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qr621o9iZ5I

Do you know where you're going to?
Do you like the things that ROOTING is showing you
Where are you going to?
Do you know...?

Do you get
What you're hoping for
When you look behind you
There's no open door
What are you hoping for?
Do you know...?

Once we were standing still ROOTING in time
Chasing the fantasies
That filled our minds...

Now looking back at all we've ROOT
We let so many dreams
Just slip through our hands
Why must we wait so long
Before we'll see
How sad the answers
To those questions can be

Hardwork108

04-02-2009, 03:59 PM

Hardwork108
Works intently on his root
glorified kung fu! :D

Somebody has too.;)

taai gihk yahn

04-02-2009, 04:18 PM

Excellent response...i enjoyed it...you really know what your talking about...you shared true knowledge...some people who talk alot could learn from you...thank you for your post!

well, you are welcome, I guess, and thank you for the sentiment, but at the same time I wouldn't go overboard: it is just my description of my personal experience, contextualized by some of the "traditional" descriptors utilized by taiji folks - if it speaks to you, great (I assure you, others would find it useless or worse, which is fine of course, since how others receive what I write is actually of little consequence to me); that said, "true" knowledge, IMPO, cannot be shared - it is really up to each and every individual to go out and discover for themselves, which is really just as simple as walking up the block to Haagen Daaz and tasting the double fudge ripple for yourself!

Hardwork108

04-02-2009, 04:23 PM

Hi Hardwork,

Thanks for the polite reply.
You were polite to me and were respectful. You also seem to know (kung fu) what you are talking about. You also made sensible suggestions. So why should I not be polite to you.:)

My past history with some of the ("Modern MMA is the best thing since sliced bread")guys here has an ugly history where vile lies and accusations were spread about me here in the forum. These people are still posting here and still make snide and UNTRUE remarks about me just to discredit my traditional approach to training. Furthermore, inspite of some of them being "jacks of" many, many martial arts, their kung fu knowledge is nothing to write home about. ;)

So yes, there is conflict, lets just hope that it is shortlived:).

There is no denying that the application of a developed root varies from discipline to discipline. Striking arts apply their roots differently than grappling arts, and both of those categories have variations within them. The application of root is what distinguishes them in my mind.

"roots are roots" is like saying "dogs are dogs" or "cars are cars." It sounds silly, because we all know that there can be remarkable differences within those categories. However, on a fundamental level, all dogs share certain traits with all other dogs. All roots share certain principles with all other roots.

On the level of Structure, the rooting is the same. On the level of application, there is variation, which we covered above. On the level of intent, there is also variation, but less than is to be expected... self-preservation is a powerful organizing center!

It never ends... we all have a heck of a lot more to learn.

I honestly have no idea what's real or not in the realm of forum soap operas. Likewise, you have no idea who I am or if I've even trained a day in any Martial Art. All we know is that we're communicating about a common topic, and for any benefit to come from our discussion, there must be openness, acceptance, patience, and reason. Insults and old grudges do little to foster those.

Again, it sounds like you're describing the application of root, so no, I don't think so.

I agree with most if not all of what you have said.:)

I find it funny that we're all saying pretty much the same thing, only using slightly different focal points.
You are correct for the but IMHO while some of us know what we are saying and recognize the corellations with what others say, however there are others here that are clueless and do not admit it because they think that their black belts in Tae Kwon Do or BJJ make them kung fu experts....lol,lol.

It highlights the value of stepping back from someone's words and personality, and reading between the lines.

That is good advice (for me included) but I also believe that some of these people should step back and see TCMA methodology and principles for what they are and try and comprehend that there are concepts that are far removed from the external or the "McInternal" approach they are familiar with, instead of accusing me of being a troll and/or making other vile and slanderous remarks while claiming to be (hiding behind) the ignore button.

Thanks again for your post. Good to know that there are more kung fu practitioners here that I thought at first.:)

Wayfaring

04-02-2009, 04:44 PM

One of the biggest misconceptions about "rooting" that I've run into is that it is primarily concerned with your connection to the ground in your stances.

It is much more about the structure of your body and parts as they relate to each other first, and then in position to your opponent second.

Hardwork108

04-02-2009, 05:57 PM

....which is really just as simple as walking up the block to Haagen Daaz and tasting the double fudge ripple for yourself!

Haagen Daaz? Yaaaahkkkkkkkkkkk!!!. You know, when you decide to visit Colombia I will take you to taste some real and authentic ice cream.:D

Edmund

04-02-2009, 06:47 PM

Don't act like you know arts that you haven't studied.

Reading a book about internal arts is not training or true knowledge.
Hence your insight comes from your head not actual training. You have no grounds to put down other people who actually *have* studied and trained.

You said yourself that you trained with your mainland WC teacher for 2 years. That is not Xingyi.

You talk about basic common ground. Maybe you should listen to Hendrik. This "common ground" of rooting is a trap that leads nowhere. He keeps telling you.

Actually I got a little bit of Taiji (Yang) experience, but I could have told you what I did without that experience.

As far as kung fu roots go then there is a common ground that is understood by those of us who have been lucky enought to practice in authentic schools.

That is a lie. I have never said I was great. I am just surprised how some people here have not grasped basic concepts after having a some zillion years of experience in a zillion arts!

I am talking about basic stuff.

Hardwork108

04-02-2009, 07:57 PM

Don't act like you know arts that you haven't studied.
:confused:

Reading a book about internal arts is not training or true knowledge.
Of course it isn't, but there are reasons why such books are written. One of them includes providing information, sometimes basic, about given styles of kung fu. Perhaps you should buy Sun Lu Tang's book on Hsing I for your ex-sifu?

Hence your insight comes from your head not actual training.

You misunderstand. My insight comes from Sun Lu Tang's head.;)

You have no grounds to put down other people who actually *have* studied and trained.
The world (and this forum) is full of clueless "kung fu" practitioners. Unfortunately because of the Mcdojo/kwoon phenomenom saying that you practice kung fu does not mean much if your posts don't reflect even the most basic knowledge regarding something so fundamental as the roots.

You said yourself that you trained with your mainland WC teacher for 2 years.
That is funny because my profile says 8 years. Where have said this? Could it be something that you misunderstood or are jumping on the Lkfmdc/Sanjuro ronin/kansuke bandwagon?

That is not Xingyi.
But is is kung fu.

Hopping around like a boxer is definitely not Hsing I!!!

You talk about basic common ground. Maybe you should listen to Hendrik. This "common ground" of rooting is a trap that leads nowhere. He keeps telling you.
Since when do you agree with Hendrik?

Furthermore, I would rather listen to Hendrik than to you any day. He is a REAL kung fu practitioner something that seems to be rare in this forum.

Edmund

04-02-2009, 10:46 PM

Of course it isn't, but there are reasons why such books are written. One of them includes providing information, sometimes basic, about given styles of kung fu. Perhaps you should buy Sun Lu Tang's book on Hsing I for your ex-sifu?

Maybe you should put down the book and take some actual lessons in Xingyi before you offer any opinions about its basics.

That is funny because my profile says 8 years. Where have said this? Could it be something that you misunderstood or are jumping on the Lkfmdc/Sanjuro ronin/kansuke bandwagon?

I was on the forum when people asked you about who your sifu was and how long had you been studying WC. You were talking about WC groundfighting that you hadn't gotten to learn yet. You said you studied with him for 2 years.

I think I was among a quite a few who pointed out that you shouldn't be advocating WC groundfighting if you hadn't had any lessons in it.

Since when do you agree with Hendrik?

Furthermore, I would rather listen to Hendrik than to you any day. He is a REAL kung fu practitioner something that seems to be rare in this forum.

Please do listen to Hendrik. He's not telling you what you want to hear this time. He's giving his opinion which doesn't agree with your books.

CFT

04-03-2009, 02:53 AM

You misunderstand. My insight comes from Sun Lu Tang's head.;)It's not your insight then, it's his. You don't have the personal epiphany if you don't train it and make it work for yourself.

I could read everything anyone has to say about Wing Chun Kuen, and it may help me work on issues in the training, but unless I actually do the training it is "just all in my head". Physical skill requires physical training.

Kansuke

04-03-2009, 03:27 AM

The Two Year Grandmaster lives in his little imagination.

lkfmdc

04-03-2009, 06:38 AM

I was on the forum when people asked you about who your sifu was and how long had you been studying WC. You were talking about WC groundfighting that you hadn't gotten to learn yet. You said you studied with him for 2 years.

owned :D

(amazing how in one year, he gained 6 more years of experience!)

CFT

04-03-2009, 07:04 AM

He may have been studying CMAs for a longer period, just 2 years with the Wing Chun.

Kansuke

04-03-2009, 07:12 AM

He may have been studying CMAs for a longer period, just 2 years with the Wing Chun.

He claimed to 'study' something else in London, but he couldn't say what it was. It was a big secret so his 'foes' wouldn't know what deadly, deadly moves he has. :rolleyes:

Hardwork108

04-03-2009, 04:56 PM

owned :D

(amazing how in one year, he gained 6 more years of experience!)

Keep selling the lie Lkfmdc. Where are the forum's moral guardians (Dale Dugas?) now???

I have been posting here as Hardwork8 for much longer than a year. People who are interested can look up my posts.

However, don't let the truth stop your attempts at character assassination. Boy, my promotion of TCMAs must really be hurting your kickboxing dvd sales as you just can't stop yourself from making your constant malicious attacks!:rolleyes:

Hardwork108

04-03-2009, 05:08 PM

Maybe you should put down the book and take some actual lessons in Xingyi before you offer any opinions about its basics.
Rooting principles are the same. Furthermore, some people here may read actual kung fu books for entertainment purposes but some of these books have academic value. When Sun Lu Tang made his disciple train his roots for 3 years (if memory serves me correctly) then that points to significance of roots in Hsing I.

Nowadays finding a Hsing I sifu/master with the quality of Sun Lu Tang, specially in the west, is not such an easy task. Again, the Mcdojo/kwoon phenomenom would suggest that 95% plus of kung fu schools in the West are mediocre.

Now think about your own references regarding your opinions on the roots.;)

I was on the forum when people asked you about who your sifu was and how long had you been studying WC. You were talking about WC groundfighting that you hadn't gotten to learn yet. You said you studied with him for 2 years.
Your memory fails you. I studied with him for 3 and half years, training under him privately. Since then because of change of location, I have been studying with him on and off and alone in Wing Chun, together with other (style) sifu/kung fu training.

That is 8 years!

I think I was among a quite a few who pointed out that you shouldn't be advocating WC groundfighting if you hadn't had any lessons in it.
I was pointing out that stand up grappling (kum na/Chin.na) together with ground fighting existed in Wing Chun, while you (MMA) guys were ridiculing the notion and making stupid comparisons with BJJ and WITHOUT HAVING TRAINED IT YOURSELVES!

Please do listen to Hendrik.
I always listen to Hendrik. He has more kung fu knowledge in his little finger than all of you MMA "kung fu-ists" here put together.;)

He's not telling you what you want to hear this time.
I don't expect him or anyone to agree with me all the time. However, he knows his kung fu. Whereas there are others here that don't seem to distinguish the differences between a kung fu hop and a boxing hop. Now that is sad!

He's giving his opinion which doesn't agree with your books.
Not really the absorbing of force and following the force exist in internal styles. The roots training is not for one to have "solid" roots but to be able to flow in a manner that enables them to use earth energy. I am not talking about roots as making you an immovable object but roots that help you to "link" your body/structure and help you flow while using earth energy to contribute to your power. There is a KUNG FU way of doing that and there is Glorified Kickboxing way of hopping around a-la a boxer/TKD-ist.

I hope that you understand what I am saying now. If you don't, then I hope that you find some quality books to supplement your training.