Intent

[MightyB]

This is a response that I wrote in another thread on another board, but I'd like to read your thoughts about intent.

To me, the biggest thing isn't fighting to train, but training with the intent to fight. I don't think that's the case with 90% of the TCMA practitioners out there. Maybe 98%.

IMO you have to honestly train with the intent to fight... otherwise you're wasting yours and everyone else's time with something that amounts to little more than a yogic dance class mixed with a little pseudo-scientific yoda psychology in the guise of... martial arts. It's not MA.

The biggest hurdle to overcome is not knowing if you're training with the intent to fight because you may think that you are... but you're not. That can be found out easily in hard sparring or sport. You should be able to hold your own in that type of venue. And, if you're too old for that- someone in your gym isn't and they should be "holding their own" in a sport venue. That's a little vicarious validation, but still worthwhile meaning that at least what you're training has the capacity to work in a real fight.

I think intent is the biggest difference between modern MMA and TCMA.

[David Jamieson]

where are you getting these %'s from?

[MightyB]

where are you getting these %'s from?

My opinion. That's including people who think they are training with intent, but aren't in a school that can teach properly to give students the capacity to fight.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I competed since I was a lad, I fought full contact even as a teenager.
I never understood intent until I became a Sniper in the army.

[lkfmdc]

I competed since I was a lad, I fought full contact even as a teenager.
I never understood intent until I became a Sniper in the army.

for instructional purposes only

http://www.hotchickswithguns.com/files/hotchickwithguns/stripper%20with%20gun.jpg

[sanjuro_ronin]

for instructional purposes only

http://www.hotchickswithguns.com/files/hotchickwithguns/stripper%20with%20gun.jpg

Indeed.
:D

[lkfmdc]

pic explains intent most definitely, looking at it, I understand intent

[MightyB]

I'm using a mac and only see the question mark. Your pic isn't coming through d@mn it.

[David Jamieson]

I competed since I was a lad, I fought full contact even as a teenager.
I never understood intent until I became a Sniper in the army.

Interesting statement.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I'm using a mac and only see the question mark. Your pic isn't coming through d@mn it.

Lack of chi AND intent...*tsk,tsk*

[KC Elbows]

It's important to mention that it takes nine pounds of pressure to break the human neck. Without mention of that, it's hard to understand how 98% of people, or 90%, are failing in their training.

Also, dogs can't look up.

Can this thread also be about how to spell wing chun, or is that not overplayed enough for this thread?

I'd also like to add that, in China, there are people who can kill this thread without touching it, but you round eyes are not capable of learning that because you lack contact with women with sideways vaginas.

Also, Irish men have dinky winkies. They drink because of the irony that redheads all have gynormous beefcurtains.

[Lucas]

And KC Elbows delivers a stunning death blow early in the first round!

[KC Elbows]

Perhaps we should broaden the scope of this thread. Since it obviously gets nowhere focusing on what individuals are doing successfully, but on broad groups who aren't all doing the same thing(for ease of faulty generalization), I feel the 98% of people who use salted butter in their cookies deserve somewhere where the 2% who don't can take some sort of smug superiority in this fact.

Also, those who can't properly bar a chord on guitar, and, alternately, those who can't play in b flat major. I'd say 95% can't, and I feel limited in my choice of venues to talk about them.

Ultimately, this whole internet thing is a washout if it doesn't turn us all into grannies gossiping about the neighbors.

[KC Elbows]

And KC Elbows delivers a stunning death blow early in the first round!

It's not over until I give all 31 flavors to this zombie hooker of a topic.

[KC Elbows]

98% of mma guys with tats have inferior tats to most kung fu guys. Discuss.

[KC Elbows]

In the past, shaving your head was a cover for baldness.

Now, mma is.

Discuss.

[KC Elbows]

The more hugging one male does with another has a direct correlation with the likelihood that they will use the word 'hard' to complement themselves or other males. Discuss.

[Lucas]

98% of mma guys with tats have inferior tats to most kung fu guys. Discuss.

this is a fact.

[KC Elbows]

Do mma practitioners preen in private, looking at their gothic letter tattoos and pretending to be characters in American History X, or do they only do this in public?

[Lucas]

In the past, shaving your head was a cover for baldness.

Now, mma is.

Discuss.

this is also why the sales of hats has gone down 2% because 98% of the mma guys covering male pattern baldness wore hats 2% of the time, the other 98% of the time they shaved their heads.

[KC Elbows]

this is also why the sales of hats has gone down 2% because 98% of the mma guys covering male pattern baldness wore hats 2% of the time, the other 98% of the time they shaved their heads.

You are 98% correct. Your error is in not figuring in sales figures from trying to cover their girlfriends' mullets.

[Lucas]

ya...i forget about the girlfriend mullets 2% of the time... :o

[KC Elbows]

No problem, I made an error as well. I meant half-sister.

[KC Elbows]

98% of mma practitioners watch VH1 reality shows on a daily basis. This figure is most surprising since it is unclear how they are getting cable in their trailers.

[KC Elbows]

98% of mma practitioners couldn't choke out their wife.

Obviously, this statistic is identical for their half sisters.

[Lucas]

what about step sisters or 2nd/3rd cousins.

[KC Elbows]

what about step sisters or 2nd/3rd cousins.

What do you mean, 'or'?

[Lucas]

I am rife with errors this day!

[KC Elbows]

MMA practitioners who are twins are widely considered the least annoying twins due to the fact that they each can't even finish their own sentences.

[Lucas]

They can also simultaneously submit each other.

[KC Elbows]

When poled, 98% of mma practitioners thought being a barber to the mma stars would "pay some serious bank".

[KC Elbows]

They can also simultaneously submit each other.

Correct, but not each others' wife, sister, half sister, cousin, or aunt.

In many cases, this would be one female.

[KC Elbows]

Okay, I think I'm done. Time to give this thread its two dollars and tell it I've had better.

[MightyB]

The more hugging one male does with another has a direct correlation with the likelihood that they will use the word 'hard' to complement themselves or other males. Discuss.

Disturbing- but true.

[MightyB]

98% of people who root, never grow leaves.

[MightyB]

60% of the time, it works all the time.

[MightyB]

98.725% of people who practice tai chi don't realize it was a combat style.

100% of the aforementioned group will argue against the fact it was a fighting style even if you show them an actual application from their form.

[RenDaHai]

Actually this thread is a perfect example of the difference between Martial arts and Kung fu. So i am going to answer fully.

INTENT is the most important thing. FOr anyone whos ever actually been in a fight, you will realise that the mind, your intent to do what you do, to make your decision and carry it out, is more important than all the rest of your skills and physical attributes put together. Fighting IS intent.

HOWEVER, there are differences in Intent. If you know anything about actual TCMA you will know that 'Xin yu Yi he'.... mastery of intent is one of the ultimate goals and more important to kung fu than all the martial arts or 'wushu' that exist. SO actually I would say if you have ever trained real TCMA then intent is a goal above martial arts. BUT WE DON"T HAVE TO USE THAT MASTERY FOR COMBAT!!! Here is where the difference lies.

MURDEROUS INTENT, in chinese 'SHA QI' is immoral and no part of wushu. It is the easy way to train how to fight. when you strike someone to actually intend to cause them harm. This is a far more effective method of using martial arts, HOWEVER even though we know it is more effective we do NOT use it. That is the difference between real TCMA and a lot of MA. The more you practice pure 'fighting' styles, the more you excercise this murderous intent, the more you want to test it the more you WANT to fight. THis is contrary to kung fu. In kung fu we master the intent yes, but we do not use it in the same way.

Have you not noticed how (generalisation here, not true in all cases) people who train more fighting focused styles like say MMA, actually want to fight a lot more. A lot of them go out and actually will it to happen. They want to test it. HOwever those who train traditional kung fu actually want to fight less. It is because of the way we use intent. there is the difference. THis is not true in all cases as A lot of people try and make kung fu all about fighting (which it is NOT) so they probably train it with bad intent as well......

The point is INTENT is the most important thing, but while the goal of kung fu is good intent to the whole world, practiced through a path of martial arts, the pure Martial arts, combat arts, intent is only trained as bad intent to help you defeat your opponent. MA is like 'if someone hits you, batter them' but kung fu is higher than this, if someone hits you allow them to see their own mistake. So even IF MMa were more effective, the true kung fu man would not use it. The intent to continue to the end, even when you are beaten, this is kung fu, but this can easily go to far towards the intent to batter the crap out of someone.

So am i saying that MMA is for people who are thick and violent and kung fu is for scholars? no. certainly not. But check out an MMA audience next time you watch....

[sanjuro_ronin]

People that watch MMA are the same that watch wrestling and other "fighting sports", they watch because they like to watch fighting.
It has NOTHING to do with MMA or how it is trained or even the mentality of the fighters, though some fighters to like to play the role for their fans.
MMA is just the new "in thing" in regards to fighting fans.

[RenDaHai]

Yeah, I know. Still it disturbs me a bit that the fans are 10 times scarier than the fighters. Scary just to know that such people exist...

[sanjuro_ronin]

Yeah, I know. Still it disturbs me a bit that the fans are 10 times scarier than the fighters. Scary just to know that such people exist...

LOL !
At least scary in looks, that's for sure.

[RenDaHai]

I just want to add to my comments that I'm not having a go at MMA specifically, just at an attitude towards why we train martial arts, and trends in certain styles. I'm certainly not having a go at jiujutsu for example, which is actually and excellent higher martial art because it is possible to defeat someone without causing them any permanent harm. To be able to do this is TRUE great martial arts. To ground and pound someone is not however.

[KC Elbows]

People that watch MMA are the same that watch wrestling and other "fighting sports", they watch because they like to watch fighting.
It has NOTHING to do with MMA or how it is trained or even the mentality of the fighters, though some fighters to like to play the role for their fans.
MMA is just the new "in thing" in regards to fighting fans.

This group does sometimes become the base from which talent is drawn from, especially currently in the U.S, just as fans of cheesy kung fu flicks became the base from which kung fu drew from in many ways. Neither will yield the same results as when the base is drawn based on talent and love of the arts.

The guys who have been doing mma for years came from a completely different base than what currently is the majority. First, the brazilians, then martial artists who saw a value in it. Now, its public face and the fighters playing to the drama attract completely different people than the Gracies did, and this is not necessarily a good thing. This base will never make good training partners for the real martial artists in the fold.

Every field has good and bad crops of talent that come and go. In academic settings, this is limited by having standards for inclusion. In martial arts schools, the value of the current crop becomes the standard when the last crop fades away. Allow too many weeds, and the crop may yield a few good plants able to make the next crop better, but that is the best they can do: they cannot make the current crop worth a **** themselves.

RenDaHai,

Agreed on many points. The definition of intent this thread started with, the intent to fight, is not by definition a merit or a flaw. The intent to fight someone you are outclassed by who wishes to harm you could be idiotic. The intent to fight when the need arises could be a merit. Choosing to be in a fight and to keep fighting is presumed to be decided on based on the situation, not as a merit in itself. It is also presumed that, if training to be capable of using one's martial arts, gaining this narrow intent is a byproduct of training and accepting loss as a lesson; the intent presumes that the intent to flinch or flee unnecessarily is a real concern about self protection that may not apply to the situation, and so resorting to one's arts then is chosen in place of this. Training this intent by way of technique and conditioning is better, martially, morally, and socially, than training this intent as an overall attitude, imo.

[MightyB]

Agreed on many points. The definition of intent this thread started with, the intent to fight, is not by definition a merit or a flaw. The intent to fight someone you are outclassed by who wishes to harm you could be idiotic. The intent to fight when the need arises could be a merit. Choosing to be in a fight and to keep fighting is presumed to be decided on based on the situation, not as a merit in itself. It is also presumed that, if training to be capable of using one's martial arts, gaining this narrow intent is a byproduct of training and accepting loss as a lesson; the intent presumes that the intent to flinch or flee unnecessarily is a real concern about self protection that may not apply to the situation, and so resorting to one's arts then is chosen in place of this. Training this intent by way of technique and conditioning is better, martially, morally, and socially, than training this intent as an overall attitude, imo.

I think the above statements are kind've what I was saying... I think that, as a martial artist, you should demand that the style you do works and that there has to be a way to independently validate that it works (I think it's impossible to know if it works or not without some type of a litmus test). I think sport is a good, "safe" way to do that. Otherwise, you would have to go out and pick a fight. Think about the kung fu heroes in your lineage. They weren't saints... they picked fights and probably were a bit sociopathic.

[sanjuro_ronin]

The stories I can tell you of the kung fu masters that I have KNOWN and what they did and what TYPE of people they were.
It would make your ass hairs stand up.

[MightyB]

The stories I can tell you of the kung fu masters that I have KNOWN and what they did and what TYPE of people they were.
It would make your ass hairs stand up.

Those pesky SPM guys... that's a rowdy bunch you hang with.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Those pesky SPM guys... that's a rowdy bunch you hang with.

Actually, my SPM sifu ( brother of my HK sifu) is a nice guy, now, probably his age and all that but I have heard stories.
I was referring to some Kung fu guys I knew personally when I was younger.
When I took up HK in Chinatown, because I was a friend of the family, I got into some "closed door" training for a bit, one of 2 white guys at the time.
The **** that I saw...
Anyways...

[KC Elbows]

there has to be a way to independently validate that it works (I think it's impossible to know if it works or not without some type of a litmus test).

I agree.


I think sport is a good, "safe" way to do that.

The assumption that in many cases it's good or safe is debatable. Depends on the caliber of participants and the culture surrounding it.


Otherwise, you would have to go out and pick a fight.

I'm not sure it's as either/or as that. In fact, I know it's not.

The idea that once every few months or even once a month fights will sufficiently reveal not only what you need to know about your system, but what you need to deal with from other systems is not a very strong idea.

As an adult, when I selected a school, I chose schools that had a high percentage of experienced practitioners from other styles. Yes, the culture of kung fu schools at the time did not allow this to be taken advantage of as much as possible, but since I don't live in that culture now, this is irrelevant.

Now, my training involves nonchoreographed resisting drills that work the clinch, takedowns and throws, strikes, and spear work. When my knee is good and healed, ground will be added. Having the regular availability of people with other backgrounds trying to stop my stuff with theirs in a controlled manner allows me to have a better understanding of their styles, both traditional and modern, than a once a month fight really could, and allows me, more importantly, a greater opportunity to hone my responses than a few three minute rounds could reveal.

Thus, thirty to thirty-six rounds a week of controlled, unchoreographed, but resisting drills against varied opponents simply give more opportunity for study than the alternative, and a more reliable litmus of the techniques than a handful of full contact rounds in the same time is intended to.

Additionally, since the approach is not based around a specific school, but attracts varied stylists who can make use of it, it is becoming a year round, weekly activity that puts various stylists in cooperative approaches to their training. Competitions often do the opposite, so that, while whose approach happens to work best may be clear, that could easily be a relative best that does not represent any one group really aware of some things of use in each approach that could produce a far better 'best' than the current one.

This is not an argument against competition, but it does define the limits of its value. To assume that a few full contact fights yields enough knowledge of styles is faulty. Full contact fights, at their best, can ramp up the efforts of those who have a means to work toward understanding how to use their stuff against another's, but it is not that means. Full contact fights can test the results of what was learned in diverse training by the heightened pace and aggressiveness/intent, but they do not provide that diverse training, and they do not provide enough opportunity to hone the responses to diverse styles.

When the sport sees a new craze enter the ring, and everyone is surprised, it is often something many people were doing before. To find out what the other guy is doing in the ring is finding out late. Training with many different stylists of quality in a resisting, controlled manner is a better place to learn this: not by doing someone's class, since this is not practical and always limited to their games, but by fostering a culture of training one's responses in one's chosen styles primarily with diverse training partners, and thus having the opportunity to be on the losing end of someone else's bread and butter until you know what your response needs to be.

Roll with anyone, push hands with anyone in anyone's rules, chi sao with anyone in anyone's rules, spar with anyone with whatever rules make sense, and as long as 'anyone' means non-douchebags, which one can rule out in one's own choice of training partners, and as long as you meet consistently and in an organized manner, the constant improvement of all at fighting all will enable each to learn a lot, and if one decides to enter the ring, then one is better equipped if one does encounter douche bags, and far more likely to know their game.

Where the ring has problems is the inability to rule out douche bags. And if the culture encourages douche baggery...

The focus on testing who is good and who isn't does little good for any but the very best and hurts the middle as much as the worst in a lot of cases. Foster realistic training, stop basing how we train on the school we're in, but make it a priority to train at our schools and adopt a second required aspect of our training that involves peers from other styles and resisting drills, outside of the control of school owners, and be willing to lose any game in the process of using that game to make us aware of how to use our styles to approach it, or add ma to be able to address it, and the caliber of training partner will be better, more diverse, and more informed than most have the opportunity to train with.

I am not necessarily arguing that you are wrong, just 90% wrong.:D

As an aside, how do mma practitioners cut weight with the diet they are limited to by their food stamps?

[MightyB]

I agree.

Now, my training involves nonchoreographed resisting drills that work the clinch, takedowns and throws, strikes, and spear work. When my knee is good and healed, ground will be added. Having the regular availability of people with other backgrounds trying to stop my stuff with theirs in a controlled manner allows me to have a better understanding of their styles, both traditional and modern, than a once a month fight really could, and allows me, more importantly, a greater opportunity to hone my responses than a few three minute rounds could reveal.

Thus, thirty to thirty-six rounds a week of controlled, unchoreographed, but resisting drills against varied opponents simply give more opportunity for study than the alternative, and a more reliable litmus of the techniques than a handful of full contact rounds in the same time is intended to.

Additionally, since the approach is not based around a specific school, but attracts varied stylists who can make use of it, it is becoming a year round, weekly activity that puts various stylists in cooperative approaches to their training. Competitions often do the opposite, so that, while whose approach happens to work best may be clear, that could easily be a relative best that does not represent any one group really aware of some things of use in each approach that could produce a far better 'best' than the current one.



I am not necessarily arguing that you are wrong, just 90% wrong.:D



Actually - you're stating that I'm 100% right. That's basically how I train with my base art Mantis. Here's my basic story. New job, new city, didn't want to give up Ma. So I walked into a Judo club that was a series of clubs. Found out I wasn't as tough as I thought - but got tough and actually made my Mantis much stronger. Recently started going to a BJJ club. Found out I wasn't as tough as I thought - now my Mantis and Judo are mucho stronger. The clubs that I affiliate with are all a loose mix of many martial artists from diverse backgrounds under 1 banner. We train in much the same way you train. Occasionally one of us will do a MMA, Judo, or Jiu Jitsu competition. We routinely go to "like" organizations in the surrounding cities to test our hands and invite them to come in to our club. All egos are left at the door meaning that all of us expect to lose as much as we expect to win. In the end... it's a systematic approach to sharing.

[KC Elbows]

Actually - you're stating that I'm 100% right.

Now you're 95% wrong! Be careful, clearly the next is 98% wrong, and then you'll be compared to a wing chun practitioner!


That's basically how I train with my base art Mantis. Here's my basic story. New job, new city, didn't want to give up Ma. So I walked into a Judo club that was a series of clubs. Found out I wasn't as tough as I thought - but got tough and actually made my Mantis much stronger. Recently started going to a BJJ club. Found out I wasn't as tough as I thought - now my Mantis and Judo are mucho stronger. The clubs that I affiliate with are all a loose mix of many martial artists from diverse backgrounds under 1 banner. We train in much the same way you train. Occasionally one of us will do a MMA, Judo, or Jiu Jitsu competition. We routinely go to "like" organizations in the surrounding cities to test our hands and invite them to come in to our club. All egos are left at the door meaning that all of us expect to lose as much as we expect to win. In the end... it's a systematic approach to sharing.

I'm relieved to know you do judo. I thought you did bjj, and so I naturally assumed that you were the offspring of a drunken liaison between a Budweiser drinker and a drunk concessionaire at Wrestlemania III.

But yes, we are both representative of modern kung fu. Nice to hear.:)

[KC Elbows]

Before anyone points out that I work takedowns with some bjj guys, I want it known that, due to good breeding, I am immune to scabies, so no worries.