Styles/Sparring

[MightyB]

I find myself wondering if we'd lose the different styles if everyone really trained fighting because a lot of what traditionalists do isn't that smart from a fighting perspective.

Things like the traditional stance IMO - it'd go away because you can't give away your leg and you definitely can't extend an arm, you can't leave your head open, you have to hunch your shoulders in defense... in short, the traditional stance isn't very good at all for fighting. This guy explains it better than me: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qguQfn0QtBs

Anyway - I thought it'd be fun to hypothesize on what would happen to TCMA if everyone engaged in regular fight training.

So, how do you think TCMA would "evolve" if fighting (and regularly testing those concepts in competition and combat) became the true focus of Martial Arts?

[SPJ]

In Ba Ji

we were trained with horse stance, half horse stance etc

when in fight

the stance is some where in between, neither horse or half horse

etc

[Lucas]

chinese styles would pay much more attention to grappling.

[David Jamieson]

I find myself wondering if we'd lose the different styles if everyone really trained fighting because a lot of what traditionalists do isn't that smart from a fighting perspective.

Things like the traditional stance IMO - it'd go away because you can't give away your leg and you definitely can't extend an arm, you can't leave your head open, you have to hunch your shoulders in defense... in short, the traditional stance isn't very good at all for fighting. This guy explains it better than me: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qguQfn0QtBs

Anyway - I thought it'd be fun to hypothesize on what would happen to TCMA if everyone engaged in regular fight training.

So, how do you think TCMA would "evolve" if fighting (and regularly testing those concepts in competition and combat) became the true focus of Martial Arts?

what traditional stance are you talking about? that dude does a couple of poses. They aren't stances lol.

I love it when guys who don't do tcma try to explain it as wrong. awesome.

Anyway, that guy seems to be going on about the rodney king material on the sbg dvds...except he's doing it wrong. LOL He has no waist movement, low mobility and he's partially killing his field of view especially in regards to overhands.

so, take that for what it's worth. :)

[sanjuro_ronin]

I find myself wondering if we'd lose the different styles if everyone really trained fighting because a lot of what traditionalists do isn't that smart from a fighting perspective.

Nope and this is why:
Difference is good, when you bring something different and unique to the table, you have an advantage.
Southpaws know this, unorthodox fighters know this, BJJ showed us this in the 90's.

[MightyB]

Another thought though...

If we had the time to practice, like the theoretical masters... would we need to change? I guess what I'm trying to get at- are the styles a result of being extremely good at fighting?

I had a friend who went to China during the early 90's for some training. This was before China became the China we know now with the bright lights and big cities and the young hip urban attitude with lots and lots of stuff to do. He said that in between practice sessions - he was beyond bored. So imagine being in China as a kung fu practitioner when your work / business chores are done for the day and there's still a lot of day light left. What do you do? You practice kung fu.

[David Jamieson]

Another thought though...

If we had the time to practice, like the theoretical masters... would we need to change? I guess what I'm trying to get at- are the styles a result of being extremely good at fighting?

I had a friend who went to China during the early 90's for some training. This was before China became the China we know now with the bright lights and big cities and the young hip urban attitude with lots and lots of stuff to do. He said that in between practice sessions - he was beyond bored. So imagine being in China as a kung fu practitioner when your work / business chores are done for the day and there's still a lot of day light left. What do you do? You practice kung fu.

Practice is just that. It's enjoyable too.
Time is a provision to be made these days.
I make time to train and I take time to train.

One things for sure, whatever you devote your energies to, you will get good at.

[Iron_Eagle_76]

What he is doing is similiar to the peek-a-boo defense found in boxing.

Regarding traditional stances, I train them for conditioning and transitioning. Horse stance, bow and lunge stance, iron horse, leopard, ect. ect. are mostly not stances to fight out of, but more for transition. Conditioning was another main reason for low deep stances as is the Southern Kung Fu flavor.

Fighting out of these is not too smart, although I have seen some guys pull it off to an extent. Something has to constantly change and evolve to be perficient and fighting is no different. Like Ronin said, the element of suprise can be a good weapon.

[bawang]

northern kung fu has 5 or 6 fighting stances and theyre not horse stance bow stance cat stance

[MightyB]

what traditional stance are you talking about? that dude does a couple of poses. They aren't stances lol.

I love it when guys who don't do tcma try to explain it as wrong. awesome.


You're waayyy offf base with the "you don't do TCMA" thing... anyway- it's a nice fall back statement for when people don't want to question anything traditional. Nice try at trying to duck a theoretical question ;)

So, I did a random google image search on traditional kung fu fighting stance and found a couple but decided not to link to them because I didn't want to insult anybody. Instead I'll do a written breakdown of a typical northern fighting stance:

Right hand lead in a fist extended about 60 percent, left hand near the armpit or in front of the chest open palm. Spine is erect and over the hips, shoulders relaxed, head suspended as if by an imaginary string, right foot forward turned slightly in, hips not squared to the opponent... at least 45 degrees off center, weight is about 60 to 70 percent on the back leg, again keeping the hips, spine, and shoulders in line, and heels are down. Walking heel to toe, you know - the traditional northern fighting stance.

My criticism is that you need to be a little more square with the opponent to allow for the rear power hand to come into play and the weight in back makes it harder to sprawl to defend against a single leg. Plus, the hand positioning is bad because your head is too open. I prefer more of a traditional boxing hand position but I still tend to keep my weight back.

[brothernumber9]

That guy stole Ernie Moore Jr's squirrel defense style.

But back to the point. I get where MightyB is going. a lot of stylistics are lost or severely dminished when sparring or fighting. However I have seen some schools that fight just like they practice, unotrhodox stances and all. One in particular is Sifu Henry Poo Yee's jook lum students. They keep thier framework and fight stylistically just like thier hand sets. Some would argue that a number of wing chun schools also do the same, at least as long as they can protect center.

[David Jamieson]

You're waayyy offf base with the "you don't do TCMA" thing... anyway- it's a nice fall back statement for when people don't want to question anything traditional. Nice try at trying to duck a theoretical question ;) First off, I was talking about the dude in the video. NOt about you if you are inferring I was speaking about you. And that guy, was doing the peek-a-boo or "destruction" incorrectly. He had no waist movement and wasn't leaving a clear line of sight out of the cover. Just sayin....


So, I did a random google image search on traditional kung fu fighting stance and found a couple but decided not to link to them because I didn't want to insult anybody. Instead I'll do a written breakdown of a typical northern fighting stance:

Right hand lead in a fist extended about 60 percent, left hand near the armpit or in front of the chest open palm. Spine is erect and over the hips, shoulders relaxed, head suspended as if by an imaginary string, right foot forward turned slightly in, hips not squared to the opponent... at least 45 degrees off center, weight is about 60 to 70 percent on the back leg, again keeping the hips, spine, and shoulders in line, and heels are down. Walking heel to toe, you know - the traditional northern fighting stance.

My criticism is that you need to be a little more square with the opponent to allow for the rear power hand to come into play and the weight in back makes it harder to sprawl to defend against a single leg. Plus, the hand positioning is bad because your head is too open. I prefer more of a traditional boxing hand position but I still tend to keep my weight back.

For tcma practice, I do north shaolin (bsl) but not as much as black tiger, but in each, my stance for sparring, fighting or messing about in drills is same/same as a boxer stance. 60/40 lead with the left, shoulders up, hands up. :-)

If you look at people Like Lai Hung you can see how he changed the shape of the north shaolin he did to facilitate more fighting. hands are up as are shoulders.

[YouKnowWho]

the traditional stance isn't very good at all for fighting.

The Chinese throwing art is built on top of the 3 basic traditional stances, the

- horse stance,
- bow-arrow stance, and
- golden rooster stance.

The TCMA has the weight distributation in such a detail. You can start from

- empty stance (0% - 100%),
- Santi stance (30% - 70%),
- 4-6 stance (40% - 60%),
- horse (50% - 50%),
- bow-arrow stance (70% - 30%),
- monkey stance (90% - 10%),
- golden rooster stance (100%, 0%).

Different stance will give you different distance to reach to your opponent.


My criticism is that you need to be a little more square with the opponent to allow for the rear power hand to come into play and the weight in back makes it harder to sprawl to defend against a single leg. Plus, the hand positioning is bad because your head is too open. I prefer more of a traditional boxing hand position but I still tend to keep my weight back.
Boxer doesn't have to worry about foot sweep and low kick.

There are many trade off there.

- The more that you move your back shoulder forward, the more that you will expose the center of your body.
- If you cover your head too much, you will exposed your lower body for kick.
- The more weight that you put on your front leg, the more chance that your opponent will sweep you.

The best fighting stance is the stance that you can "spring" forward any time that you want to. In order to do that, you will need to put more weight on your back leg.

[MightyB]

So back on topic:

If no evolution is needed, what do we do to get a better representation out of fighters who are trying to utilize TCMA tactics and techniques?

[sanjuro_ronin]

Who said no evolution is needed?
Of course it is needed, and it will happen naturally when a member of system "A" fights full contact vs a member of system "Y" that he has never fought before.
Adjustments are made and techniques and principles evolve to deal with the "problems presented" by system "Y".

[ginosifu]

So back on topic:

If no evolution is needed, what do we do to get a better representation out of fighters who are trying to utilize TCMA tactics and techniques?

Everything evolves! All styles must be able to adapt to any given situation.

ginosifu

[MightyB]

so what are your observations then? It's just hypothesis and observations so have fun.

I already told people mine - I think the stances and the on-guard hand positioning need work.

[Yum Cha]

Nope and this is why:
Difference is good, when you bring something different and unique to the table, you have an advantage.
Southpaws know this, unorthodox fighters know this, BJJ showed us this in the 90's.

oh yea. Its like an arms race, everybody is always looking for the next big thing.

Also, stance is just a beginners perspective on footwork. You stand still, sure. Then you do moving, a,b,c,d, etc. Then you do dirlls, then you learn to do it fluidly by applying it. Unless someone gives you a pass to drop back into 'what comes natural' so you can work your "hand" magic.

Footwork is twice as hard as hand work, IMHO. And ringcraft is a big part of that too.

To my mind, with 'perfect' footwork, you could beat GSP with a toothpick covered in cotton. (ok, maybe steel wool).

Look what footwork did for Ali.

[MightyB]

I wonder if we just started beating the h3ll out of each other but forced ourselves to stay within the flavor of "system" what that would do in the long term.

so for me a mantis guy - try to stay within the 3 essentials for style and technique and just find someone who's willing to do the same but within their style. Sure we'd look like 2 monkeys trying to frock a football at first, but it'd probably eventually work itself out. The trick would be to try to develop proficiency without relying on san shou / san da technique that's not part of mantis.

Hypothesizing of course.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I wonder if we just started beating the h3ll out of each other but forced ourselves to stay within the flavor of "system" what that would do in the long term.

so for me a mantis guy - try to stay within the 3 essentials for style and technique and just find someone who's willing to do the same but within their style. Sure we'd look like 2 monkeys trying to frock a football at first, but it'd probably eventually work itself out. The trick would be to try to develop proficiency without relying on san shou / san da technique that's not part of mantis.

Hypothesizing of course.

What is the main characteristic of your style?
As long as you stay within that, you are doing "mantis".
The mantis of today, that deals with MMA, BJJ and so forth is not and can't be the Mantis of yesterday that didn't have those systems to deal with.

[MightyB]

What is the main characteristic of your style?
As long as you stay within that, you are doing "mantis".
The mantis of today, that deals with MMA, BJJ and so forth is not and can't be the Mantis of yesterday that didn't have those systems to deal with.

hard to explain but the zhai yao clip posted in the mantis forum under the thread of the same name that's on top of the mantis forum right now shows mantis in form really well.

guess you could say mantis is a trapping/deceptive style that relies heavily on footwork, speed, and misdirection. It tends to be hand heavy going against the common stereotype for a northern style.

[Yum Cha]

I wonder if we just started beating the h3ll out of each other but forced ourselves to stay within the flavor of "system" what that would do in the long term.

so for me a mantis guy - try to stay within the 3 essentials for style and technique and just find someone who's willing to do the same but within their style. Sure we'd look like 2 monkeys trying to frock a football at first, but it'd probably eventually work itself out. The trick would be to try to develop proficiency without relying on san shou / san da technique that's not part of mantis.

Hypothesizing of course.

Yea, sound's about right. You dance around all awkward, then you figure it out, just like anything else. Once you make it work a couple of time, you get a hint, you work it. For some reason, people just think footwork is 'different'.

[iunojupiter]

From my experience, novice fighters always look like "two monkeys trying to frock a football" when they are fighting each other.
As their experience grows and they learn to make their style work that it starts to smooth out and "look good" so to speak.
I think fighting with your respective style without resorting to generic kickboxing takes time and practice. You need to practice your combos over and over again, starting from stand still with a compliant opponent, and work your way up to doing it on a non compliant opponent. The opening to zhai yao is a perfect one to pratice. Once of my favorites is blocking with a downward press or pat (fu?) to knock the incoming punch out of the way and follow it up with a back fist (gwa choi?) from the opposite hand. Boom-boom, 1-2. Quick and effective.
Pick your poison and practice, practice, practice.

cheers

[YouKnowWho]

If no evolution is needed, what do we do to get a better representation out of fighters who are trying to utilize TCMA tactics and techniques?
I truly don't know how to make our fighting stance any better.

- Raising guard will invite kick.
- Dropping guard will invite punch.
- More weight on front leg will invite sweep.
- Less weight on front leg will invite "run down".
- Square shoulders will expose your center.
- Linear shoulders will give you one long arm and one short arm.

Since when your opponent punches or kicks at you is the best time for you to enter, it's up to you how you want to play your cheating game.

Please watch UFC 2 and see how Royce Gracie's fighting stance. This kind of fighting stance is used a lot in TCMA. It's like holding a sword with both hands and point your sword at your opponent's chest. This way, you can cover both your head and also your belly.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2535018954101188149#

[lkfmdc]

all the traditional stances in TCMA exist in "real fights"

BUT they don't exist as static postures like they are trained and conceived by many (most?)

[YouKnowWho]

I think the stances and the on-guard hand positioning need work.
It's up to the distance between you and your opponent. the on-guard posture may not be the best one. Royce Gracie is not a TCMA guy. But his fighting stance looks more like TCMA fighting stance.

http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/3513/rgfightstance.jpg

[lkfmdc]

Royce Gracie is not a TCMA guy. But his fighting stance looks more like TCMA fighting stance.



Royce also can't strike his way out of a wet paper bag...

[Frost]

Royce also can't strike his way out of a wet paper bag...

hey are you dissing on hapkido?!

[MightyB]

I truly don't know how to make our fighting stance any better.

- Raising guard will invite kick.
- Dropping guard will invite punch.
- More weight on front leg will invite sweep.
- Less weight on front leg will invite "run down".
- Square shoulders will expose your center.
- Linear shoulders will give you one long arm and one short arm.


From my perspective - I don't worry about raising the guard - I take what I call the 10 and 2 (term borrowed from drivers ed) approach for hand positioning which is knuckles about cheek height, elbows down and fairly tight resembling a southpaw boxing stance so that by simply dropping pulling in my elbows a bit I can cover my mid section fairly well.

I still keep my weight 60/40 transitioning either to 60 on front, or 60 on back. It's still the basic fighting stance with the exception that I tend to be more square to the opponent than most.

I don't worry about my center line - the elbows in and a good sense of distance take care of that -

Mainly, I want to be able to be offensive. I think TCMA takes on a quasi-Bhudhist approach of passive/defensive only and it's in the forms and the stance. Everything seems to be "if he does this then I do this".

Plus being a little more square facilitates my ability to throw and use my rear hand. Because of my preference for throwing, I use the southpaw stance when I probably should use a standard stance because I'm right handed.

But then again - this is my take and maybe it doesn't work for you.

[EarthDragon]

mightB

So, how do you think TCMA would "evolve" if fighting (and regularly testing those concepts in competition and combat) became the true focus of Martial Arts?
TCMA has been around for thousands of years... you dont think they have evolved and have been tested in competition and combat for centuries? seriously? and you dont think that fighting for your life is a true test?


Mainly, I want to be able to be offensive. I think TCMA takes on a quasi-Bhudhist approach of passive/defensive only and it's in the forms and the stance. Everything seems to be "if he does this then I do this".

its called self defense.. so you want to be the aggresser? or start the fight? im confused, MA is about being able to protect yourself, not the other way around.

[MightyB]

You forgot to ad this part -



Anyway - I thought it'd be fun to hypothesize on what would happen to TCMA if everyone engaged in regular fight training.

So, how do you think TCMA would "evolve" if fighting (and regularly testing those concepts in competition and combat) became the true focus of Martial Arts?

I'm all for seeing a truer representation of TCMA in the fighting world. As a matter of fact - I'd love it. But I'm not sure that it's possible in the given framework that we're operating out of. Maybe there's a way to get it - but I'm starting to suspect that "styles, forms, flavors" or what have you are imaginary constructs... something to pass the time because -

if we did engage in regular fighting, would we continue in the same way we are going now, or would we modify the approach, and would systems, theories, heirechies change because of that?

If not - then what can we do to get a truer representation of TCMA in the fighting world?

[TenTigers]

Also, stance is just a beginners perspective on footwork. You stand still, sure. Then you do moving, a,b,c,d, etc. Then you do dirlls, then you learn to do it fluidly by applying it. Unless someone gives you a pass to drop back into 'what comes natural' so you can work your "hand" magic.

Footwork is twice as hard as hand work, IMHO. And ringcraft is a big part of that too.

it seems to me that people simply don't understand stance. If you are posing, then you deserve what you get. Posing, Extending the hands, standing sideways or 45 at close range will get you killed quickly.

[MightyB]

mightB
its called self defense.. so you want to be the aggresser? or start the fight? im confused, MA is about being able to protect yourself, not the other way around.

"The best defense is a good offense.” - Vince Lombardi ;)

[MightyB]

"The best defense is a good offense.” - Vince Lombardi ;)

The quote is attributed to Clausewitz works 'On War', which is in turn based on the work of Sun Tzu and Mao tse Tung. In it he states that if party A does nothing but defend himself from party B then he will inevitably be worn down and defeated as the attacking party B is free to constantly regroup and attack endlessly. The only option to successfully defend against B is to go on the offensive and remove B's attacking capabilities.

[TenTigers]

If not - then what can we do to get a truer representation of TCMA in the fighting world?
have patience. It's starting to happen, but it's a numbers thing.
How many boxing gyms have guys going into the ring? Most are there for the workout and light sparring, as is with most MA schools, whether it's TCMA or MMA.
(Cage Fitness attests to this.MMA type training without the fighting, and it's selling like hotcakes)
As the numbers increase, as more Sifus alter their training, you will start to see TCMA in more fight comps.
The first UFC was twenty years ago,or so. Look how long it took for MMA to come mainstream.

[TenTigers]

all the traditional stances in TCMA exist in "real fights"

BUT they don't exist as static postures like they are trained and conceived by many (most?)
ah..this is what happens when you skip a page.
so, yeah..what he said...

[iunojupiter]

Earth,
As a Praying Mantis practioner, you should understand the mentality behind TangLang Chuan that MightyB is looking for... we don't start the fight, but sure as hell, we won't let you be the first to land a strike. If we think you're going to hit us, we'll hit you first.
I think that's the mentality Mighty is taking. He doesn't want to start the fight, but he wants to fight aggressively if he has to fight.

To get a truer TCMA representation, TCMA fighters need to fight. They need to train their style in a fighting manner. Train like an MMA fighter, get in the ring alot. Train your style's fighting tactics in the ring against someone who isn't going to let you hit them, someone who is going to make you work for it and hit you back.

This is how my Sifu trains his students who want to be able to really fight. I may not be the best, but I can fight with the "flavor" of my style. (TJMH TLC).

Cheers. :D

[MightyB]

ah..this is what happens when you skip a page.
so, yeah..what he said...

Gentlemen... I'm talking only about the on-guard stance. I've been known to show many a person that the Ma Sig to Goon Sig (horse stance to bow and arrow stance) is the foundation for the tai-otoshi throw in Judo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-RA8P-DY1g

[Iron_Eagle_76]

have patience. It's starting to happen, but it's a numbers thing.
How many boxing gyms have guys going into the ring? Most are there for the workout and light sparring, as is with most MA schools, whether it's TCMA or MMA.
(Cage Fitness attests to this.MMA type training without the fighting, and it's selling like hotcakes)
As the numbers increase, as more Sifus alter their training, you will start to see TCMA in more fight comps.
The first UFC was twenty years ago,or so. Look how long it took for MMA to come mainstream.

It's funny, my old boxing coach told me once only about 10 percent of people who go to his gym and train actually ever have a fight, most are simply there for the workout or for self defense purposes. This carries over into traditional and MMA gyms as well. Reading these forums one could get the sense that all MMA or combat sport gyms are filled with muscle bound, mohawk wearing, tatted up roid ragers who beat the sh**it out of each other six hours a night. The flip side of that coin is that traditional schools are a bunch of pasty white 95 pound nerds wearing silk pajamas and posturing around like a model on a runway.

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." ~Albert Einstein

[TenTigers]

that's what I'm saying-the on guard stance should be moving, alive, and changing.
I don't think anyone that has ever fought and been hit, will stand there in a pose, hands extended, etc. Outside critical distance, it doesn't matter.pose all you want. Inside, you'd better be hitting or moving. When do you have a pose?

[iunojupiter]

When do you have a pose?

When the camera man snaps the photo of your face mid concanve around your opponents fist?
Look at his 60/40! It's perfect!

[YouKnowWho]

More none boxing fighting stance.

http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/1601/fightstance1.jpg

http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/7665/fightstance2.jpg

http://www.ojirowashi.com/images/shioda.jpg

[Lucas]

if a cma is going to address not sparring/fighting just their own style, many people would need to account for the takedown, yet remain mobile enough to watch out for aggresive striking. a lot of cma you see spar would get taken down easily.

imo cma needs to allow clinch, takedown, sweep, and throwing in all advanced sparring.

[David Jamieson]

OK, so apart from pink Gi wearing chi chuckers of the cult of poo-bah, who on earth stands there and waits in a horse stance to be attacked?

I can't think of anyone outside the context of a chop sockey flick or maybe the off chance of a newbster of just about any style of ma.

point being, stance is your launching platform, motion is the vehicle to move the platform into the best place.

stay mobile. Having said that, who practices "bird stepping" (or something along those lines from your system, it's like really close to the floor hopping) as part of their foot work?
It's similar to t-stepping but doesn't move onto the cross and is a linear reverse of course while constantly changing lead, or an entry with the same or a follow round.

[MightyB]

if a cma is going to address not sparring/fighting just their own style, many people would need to account for the takedown, yet remain mobile enough to watch out for aggresive striking. a lot of cma you see spar would get taken down easily.

imo cma needs to allow clinch, takedown, sweep, and throwing in all advanced sparring.

THANK YOU - this is why I think the stance needs work.

[MightyB]

More none boxing fighting stance.

http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/1601/fightstance1.jpg

http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/7665/fightstance2.jpg

http://www.ojirowashi.com/images/shioda.jpg

I don't like this style of on-guard hand positioning because it makes it difficult to initiate an attack. These are great pics for what I have as a pet peeve. Maybe you guys are ok with it, I'm not. It's my opinion. Every jab is by default telegraphed when you hold your hands in this type of forward guard. Plus - they know your bridge. It's easy to see.

[Yum Cha]

it seems to me that people simply don't understand stance. If you are posing, then you deserve what you get. Posing, Extending the hands, standing sideways or 45 at close range will get you killed quickly.

uh, Yea, about right.

Why is it we have to actually re-state and reiterate the obvious so often?

[YouKnowWho]

Every jab is by default telegraphed when you hold your hands in this type of forward guard.
If you always initiate with a low kick or foot sweep (distraction) before moving in with your punch, the position of your hands won't be that important. The forward guard can draw your opponent's attention on your hands so he may not pay enough attention on your kick/sweep. Sometime telegraphing is a good thing.

实者虚之虚者实之(Shi Zhe Xu Zhi Xu Zhe Shi Zhi) - The real is fake and the fake is real.

This is why the fighting is so much fun. I can't understand why people are not crazy about the combat training.

[Frost]

I don't like this style of on-guard hand positioning because it makes it difficult to initiate an attack. These are great pics for what I have as a pet peeve. Maybe you guys are ok with it, I'm not. It's my opinion. Every jab is by default telegraphed when you hold your hands in this type of forward guard. Plus - they know your bridge. It's easy to see.

screw the telegraphed jabs, hands that low get your bell rung, theres a reason every on guard position where full contact strikes are allowed to the head look the same, boxing, sanda, thai boxing, etc because protecting the head is the main role of any on guard stance

[Frost]

If you always initiate with a low kick or foot sweep (distraction) before moving in with your punch, the position of your hands won't be that important.

if you always leave with a low kick and have your hands low you will get knocked the f&ck out mor often than not

[MightyB]

uh, Yea, about right.

Why is it we have to actually re-state and reiterate the obvious so often?

Nobody's talking about the individual pose/stances like "Rooster takes the golden shower" or "white ape punches the starfish" or "lonesome faery sucks crockidile". It t'aint that at all that's my concern. You throw a hard cross or reverse punch, you should end in a hill climber / bow and arrow stance for a split second. Pretty much everyone knows that. It's the basic on-guard or ready stance that some traditionalists use that I'm not a fan of. You know, the position you take when the guy screams "ready" just before you fight. The Cantonese guys always sound like they're saying "e-bay" when they want you to start.

[MightyB]

if you always leave with a low kick and have your hands low you will get knocked the f&ck out mor often than not

:eek: right on brother, right on. I like your "bell ringing" post too. It's such an obvious problem, yet by the responses I just don't get it.

My thought is Why would anyone drill such a rediculous on-guard stance constantly in their "applications" drills or sparring when it's obvious that it's not a good ready stance for really getting it in and mixing it up?

But the ready stance is just one of my pet-peeves. The other is I don't think TCMA really addresses or teaches attack properly.

It goes back to the rediculous on-guard stance. That stance is great for the "if he does this, then you do this" approach to teaching. It's fine for that... but that style of teaching is very counter productive to martial development. IMO, here's why: when you do that, you create a psychology of bad things happen if you attack. Maybe that's not a bad thing, but for a competitive martial artist, it's a terrible handicap. You don't learn how to open an oppenent through attacks, you don't learn ringmanship, you don't learn combinations, there's a lot that you miss out on and then you are left to make it up... often times when you're in the middle of things. And then you are psychologicaly are scared because in the back of your mind you're thinking that if you throw this kick or punch, bad things are going to happen to you. And then you really have a problem.

[YouKnowWho]

In combat, punch is not the only thing that you have to worry about. The "foot sweep" is the saftest initial attack in all MA systems.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwS0aPedoEo

[Yum Cha]

Nobody's talking about the individual pose/stances like "Rooster takes the golden shower" or "white ape punches the starfish" or "lonesome faery sucks crockidile". It t'aint that at all that's my concern. You throw a hard cross or reverse punch, you should end in a hill climber / bow and arrow stance for a split second. Pretty much everyone knows that. It's the basic on-guard or ready stance that some traditionalists use that I'm not a fan of. You know, the position you take when the guy screams "ready" just before you fight. The Cantonese guys always sound like they're saying "e-bay" when they want you to start.

Hey "B" sorry, not on the same page, really addressing another issue.

Starting stance has troubled me a long time too. So my answer was to give it up.

I try to alternate presenting right and left, arm and leg, moving head. Most fighters key off of recognising a certain position. The lateral movement also keeps me mobile so there is less momentum to overcome to strike, and less instinct to jump on the 'railroad tracks'. I don't present a certain position, other than the hands extended.

I also only move seriously when in range. Outside of range, relax, conserve, work the head space and setup.

[B.Tunks]

MB

I'll bite. My school is 'traditional' Tanglang and I'm pretty sure we use the standard guard position you don't like. You can see it in our 'chuji sanda' clips, where it's mostly open hand. However, the guard changes to fit the circumstance and is drawn in when we are largely punching full contact to the head and of course when not fighting against ourselves. In the case of sparring - using gloves changes things, for one, you can take shots on the glove, something you can't (and probably shouldn't) really do effectively without gloves. Anyone who fights using boxing gloves knows that they can not be held up in an extended guard for long and it goes without saying that the guard should be tightened. Open/extended guard is useful for catching, grappling and and takedowns. It has it's problems against certain opponents and when you are fighting against a predominantly head hunting striker such as a boxer, obviously best to bring the guard in tighter and of course withdraw/protect the chin. The chin was not a primary target traditionally, hence the general lack of fear of holding the head upright and confident use of extended guard as a controlling mechanism. On the other hand, extended guard and 'head on a beanpole' can be an intentional (but risky) way to entice certain attacks from the opponent.

The extended guard is not the only guard, it is only a snapshot of a guard that in actuality should shift to fit the purpose. The guard should not remain static and should not remain either permanently long or short. Ideally, at least one hand should at all times be within range to the guard the neck and head. Outside of range the guard can be wherever it likes or gone completely. In closing distance the guard should retract. On top of that, once fundamentals are mastered each fighter must develop their own unique guard. If you don't own it you can't use it.

I don't know about teaching this way being counter productive to martial development because if you are regularly fighting against boxers, kickboxers etc or fighting in your job or on the street, you will have to adapt or you will suffer the consequences. In other words if it doesn't work it gets quickly exposed and cannot be falsely imposed. 'Development' via exclusive intra-style fighting is always hampered. Doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't maintain the characteristics of your system, if they are worthwhile. If not, better to abandon your style and take up something better.

The guard position and waiting method that I gather you are referring to is a part of the basic fighting methodology/combat regulations of Tanglang. No doubt you would have already been taught this but the idea is that in a self defence, or for want of a better term 'street fighting' situation, unless you are initiating the attack (in which case there is really no need for a guard because you are already smashing them) you wait for your opponent to move first. This idea has been widely misunderstood because the second part is often ignored - when they do move you must beat them to the punch (to be specific - 'You attack, I simultaneously avoid and intercept') and if they do not move you definitely attack first, unless you want to avoid conflict. You should not just sit and wait, unless of course you choose to, which you may do if you are a counterfighter or if you are outnumbered, injured, gassed, thinking, looking for exits, weapons etc. In this case (i.e the case of a break in fighting) a guard is warranted, as may be a little 'sitting and waiting'.

In the ring, the extended guard and entrapment mentality is generally counterproductive (though not generally as big an issue in sanda). Besides which you will be penalised for inactivity. In a self defence/fighting situation it can be very useful if it has been trained effectively. Of course it can be a disadvantage against certain opponents.

BT

[SPJ]

The TCMA has the weight distributation in such a detail. You can start from

- empty stance (0% - 100%),
- Santi stance (30% - 70%),
- 4-6 stance (40% - 60%),
- horse (50% - 50%),
- bow-arrow stance (70% - 30%),
- monkey stance (90% - 10%),
- golden rooster stance (100%, 0%).



if your style is moving the steps all the time, then most of the time, you will be 90/10. when you land your attack, you will be 50/50.

in tong bei and many other styles, we focus on 3 tips aligned, the tip of your lead leg, the tip of your lead hand and your nose. san jian xiang zhao 三尖相照

personally, no particular stance for me.

1. in ba ji, we see the opponent's move, we hit his move. or counterattack against his move at the same time. jian zhao da zhao 见招打招

2. in tai chi, we see the opponent's move, we neutralize his move. jian zhao hua/chai zhao 见招化/拆招.

so the stance would be dependent on the opponent's move.

:)

[Frost]

In combat, punch is not the only thing that you have to worry about. The "foot sweep" is the saftest initial attack in all MA systems.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwS0aPedoEo

sure when you dont actually allow full contact continues strikes to the face :rolleyes:

care to point to any MMA, Sanda, thai boxing, or hell even K1 (where karate gys compete) when full contact head shots are allowed and where the foot sweep is the first line of attack?

[Frost]

:eek: right on brother, right on. I like your "bell ringing" post too. It's such an obvious problem, yet by the responses I just don't get it.

My thought is Why would anyone drill such a rediculous on-guard stance constantly in their "applications" drills or sparring when it's obvious that it's not a good ready stance for really getting it in and mixing it up?

But the ready stance is just one of my pet-peeves. The other is I don't think TCMA really addresses or teaches attack properly.

It goes back to the rediculous on-guard stance. That stance is great for the "if he does this, then you do this" approach to teaching. It's fine for that... but that style of teaching is very counter productive to martial development. IMO, here's why: when you do that, you create a psychology of bad things happen if you attack. Maybe that's not a bad thing, but for a competitive martial artist, it's a terrible handicap. You don't learn how to open an oppenent through attacks, you don't learn ringmanship, you don't learn combinations, there's a lot that you miss out on and then you are left to make it up... often times when you're in the middle of things. And then you are psychologicaly are scared because in the back of your mind you're thinking that if you throw this kick or punch, bad things are going to happen to you. And then you really have a problem.

the two points are linked and a result of not using correct protection equipment and sparring wth enough intensity (because of the lack of protective equipment)

Notice what happened to the karate on guard position when they allowed boxing gloves and full contact strikes to the head in there competitions? boxers started knocking them out and as a result their guard position changed and it became kick boxing (and the number of foot sweeps went way down :) )

[sanjuro_ronin]

Two things:
1) the fist basic counter to any low line kick is to step in and punch the face, doing a low line attack with hands down will get you punched in the face.
2) Low line hands in karate and aikido ( the two examples shown) are used to entice an attack and NOT used to attack from.

[Iron_Eagle_76]

I think this has already been said, but when I started in Karate and doing mostly point tournaments I noticed a lot of Karate guys keeping the same stance. Power hand back and chambered at the ribcage, other hand high and open for guard, fighting out of front or cat stance. The reason for this was the predominant use of the reverse punch. A solid reverse punch to the body scored, so it made sense to fight like this in those sort of competitions.

When I started Kung Fu one of my instructors had also boxed so he would jab the hell out of you for being in that kind of stance, so I learned quick it was not good for any full contact striking with head shots. This is not to down Karate but I do down Karate or any other style that trains predominately for point competitions because that is the kind of bad habits you are going to learn and how you will fight. Which will get you killed against someone with full contact experience.

[MightyB]

MB

I'll bite. My school is 'traditional' Tanglang and I'm pretty sure we use the standard guard position you don't like. You can see it in our 'chuji sanda' clips, where it's mostly open hand. However, the guard changes to fit the circumstance and is drawn in when we are largely punching full contact to the head and of course when not fighting against ourselves. In the case of sparring - using gloves changes things, for one, you can take shots on the glove, something you can't (and probably shouldn't) really do effectively without gloves. Anyone who fights using boxing gloves knows that they can not be held up in an extended guard for long and it goes without saying that the guard should be tightened. Open/extended guard is useful for catching, grappling and and takedowns. It has it's problems against certain opponents and when you are fighting against a predominantly head hunting striker such as a boxer, obviously best to bring the guard in tighter and of course withdraw/protect the chin. The chin was not a primary target traditionally, hence the general lack of fear of holding the head upright and confident use of extended guard as a controlling mechanism. On the other hand, extended guard and 'head on a beanpole' can be an intentional (but risky) way to entice certain attacks from the opponent.

The extended guard is not the only guard, it is only a snapshot of a guard that in actuality should shift to fit the purpose. The guard should not remain static and should not remain either permanently long or short. Ideally, at least one hand should at all times be within range to the guard the neck and head. Outside of range the guard can be wherever it likes or gone completely. In closing distance the guard should retract. On top of that, once fundamentals are mastered each fighter must develop their own unique guard. If you don't own it you can't use it.

I don't know about teaching this way being counter productive to martial development because if you are regularly fighting against boxers, kickboxers etc or fighting in your job or on the street, you will have to adapt or you will suffer the consequences. In other words if it doesn't work it gets quickly exposed and cannot be falsely imposed. 'Development' via exclusive intra-style fighting is always hampered. Doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't maintain the characteristics of your system, if they are worthwhile. If not, better to abandon your style and take up something better.

The guard position and waiting method that I gather you are referring to is a part of the basic fighting methodology/combat regulations of Tanglang. No doubt you would have already been taught this but the idea is that in a self defence, or for want of a better term 'street fighting' situation, unless you are initiating the attack (in which case there is really no need for a guard because you are already smashing them) you wait for your opponent to move first. This idea has been widely misunderstood because the second part is often ignored - when they do move you must beat them to the punch (to be specific - 'You attack, I simultaneously avoid and intercept') and if they do not move you definitely attack first, unless you want to avoid conflict. You should not just sit and wait, unless of course you choose to, which you may do if you are a counterfighter or if you are outnumbered, injured, gassed, thinking, looking for exits, weapons etc. In this case (i.e the case of a break in fighting) a guard is warranted, as may be a little 'sitting and waiting'.

In the ring, the extended guard and entrapment mentality is generally counterproductive (though not generally as big an issue in sanda). Besides which you will be penalised for inactivity. In a self defence/fighting situation it can be very useful if it has been trained effectively. Of course it can be a disadvantage against certain opponents.

BT

This is a good, thought provoking post.

[B.Tunks]

I could have probably been a bit more economical by just saying, yes it (the extended guard and the 'waiting' method) has its flaws but it also has it's place. I am confident it has it's place because I/we have both failed and succeeded with it.

I was also interested in the 'guard' method taught by your teacher and whether it conflicts with your current understanding.

BT

[MightyB]

I could have probably been a bit more economical by just saying, yes it (the extended guard and the 'waiting' method) has its flaws but it also has it's place. I am confident it has it's place because I/we have both failed and succeeded with it.

I was also interested in the 'guard' method taught by your teacher and whether it conflicts with your current understanding.

BT

I've modified what I was taught. It's still in-process. It's a modified "mantis guard" in the sense that it's still basically a mantis guard, but I've squared up more and keep the hands up and tight. This is mainly because of sport fighting and feeling that I wasn't free enough to initiate the attacks and I didn't feel that I was getting my rear hand into the game enough. I'm always working on it though and feel that's still a work in progress.

I'm not one for allowing too much freedom in the basic guard hand positioning. That's because I don't want any confusion. I don't want a student to mistake the range and I don't want any variance between using gloves or being bare-handed. Consistency leads to less doubt. Also, I don't like allowing the students to be too creative with the lead hand because I don't want them developing the habit of dropping it like Ali whether from fatigue, laziness, or trying to be fancy.

[B.Tunks]

I've modified what I was taught. It's still in-process. It's a modified "mantis guard" in the sense that it's still basically a mantis guard, but I've squared up more and keep the hands up and tight. This is mainly because of sport fighting and feeling that I wasn't free enough to initiate the attacks and I didn't feel that I was getting my rear hand into the game enough. I'm always working on it though and feel that's still a work in progress.

I'm not one for allowing too much freedom in the basic guard hand positioning. That's because I don't want any confusion. I don't want a student to mistake the range and I don't want any variance between using gloves or being bare-handed. Consistency leads to less doubt. Also, I don't like allowing the students to be too creative with the lead hand because I don't want them developing the habit of dropping it like Ali whether from fatigue, laziness, or trying to be fancy.

Reasonable and completely understandable. There are definitely holes as far as usage in sport fighting. You are right about rear hand use as well (particularly in the 'power hand forward' position). I agree about not allowing too much freedom when teaching guard to beginners. It is risky to teach a roving guard without developing solid defence and ability to strike effectively from the standard guard first.

Cheers.

BT

[gilbride100]

Change isn't always an evolution from inferior to superior, but an adaptation to changed circumstances. Modern boxers will sometimes put down the old bare-knuckle boxing stances and methods without considering that the rule-set and equipment was different. If you look at the way boxing was done in the 18th century vs the 19th century vs the 20th century and then consider the rules and the equipment for each of those eras, you can see that in each case the boxers were adapting their methods to the situation.

So, considering that empty-hand fighting in old China was not primarily for military or village-defense use (they had weapons for that), it makes sense to ask what it was probably used for. The obvious answer is that it was mostly used for boxing matches, i.e. platform challenges. The next obvious question is "what were the rules, whether written or unwritten, for platform boxing matches?"

I think the answer to that question will explain a lot of what we see in TCMA, and also why the same methods do not work as well under a different set of rules.

[Lucas]

Change isn't always an evolution from inferior to superior, but an adaptation to changed circumstances. Modern boxers will sometimes put down the old bare-knuckle boxing stances and methods without considering that the rule-set and equipment was different. If you look at the way boxing was done in the 18th century vs the 19th century vs the 20th century and then consider the rules and the equipment for each of those eras, you can see that in each case the boxers were adapting their methods to the situation.

So, considering that empty-hand fighting in old China was not primarily for military or village-defense use (they had weapons for that), it makes sense to ask what it was probably used for. The obvious answer is that it was mostly used for boxing matches, i.e. platform challenges. The next obvious question is "what were the rules, whether written or unwritten, for platform boxing matches?"

I think the answer to that question will explain a lot of what we see in TCMA, and also why the same methods do not work as well under a different set of rules.

who let all these realistic people in here? :mad:


j/k, good post.

[TenTigers]

who let all these realistic people in here? :mad:


j/k, good post.
freakin noobs...

[Lucas]

freakin noobs...

:eek::eek::eek:


;)

[KC Elbows]

I've been working on footwork drills for sparring in classes the last month. I've been having to weed out tendencies for students to use footwork learned from this kung fu or that for common manuevering that are actually intended for very specific locks and throws, and make no sense in the context of fighting for position at striking range. Trying to ingrain that normal motion is sometimes good, teach them about squaring up and not squaring up, etc.

[-N-]

im confused, MA is about being able to protect yourself, not the other way around.
It's ok to protect yourself by attacking and killing the other guy :)

[-N-]

I think TCMA takes on a quasi-Bhudhist approach of passive/defensive only and it's in the forms and the stance. Everything seems to be "if he does this then I do this".
Maybe for beginners.

But we definately train to take the fight to the other person.

I had an student that went to Japan and did aiki-jitsu there for 20 years. He knew how to use his techniques if the other person attacked, but some stuff he thought was useless.

After he started learning Mantis, he finally realized how to attack to setup his aiki-jitsu techniques. And he started liking the stuff that he thought didn't make sense before.

I actually have to work on defense with one of my students. He doesn't come to class regularly so when he does, I just drill him on methods of blitz attacking to end the fight quickly. The more traditional way compared to sport and sparring.

I took him to an open mat last weekend. He had no problem initiating and overtaking his opponents. But he was kind of lost unless he was attacking.

It was his first time outside our group. I had to tell him not to hit people so hard.

[-N-]

I had an student that went to Japan and did aiki-jitsu there for 20 years.

He got his black belt here in the US and went to Japan in his twenties. He was old school, but they still kicked his azz. He was a white guy who would go to the schools and ask the master to "Please teach me a lesson". He stayed for over 20 years because he saw he had a lot to learn. By the time he came back to the US, he had a 20 something year old half Japanese son with him.

The dad and I worked out together. He told his son to join us, but the son wanted to do Muay Thai instead. After a couple years, the dad was kicking the son's azz, so the son joined our group as well.