Mantis in 2100

[mooyingmantis]

Here are some questions that I have been considering for some time now:

Where would you like to see mantis in the year 2100? What are you personally doing to preserve tanglangquan?

Since we know that the forms practiced today bear little resemblance to the original forms of mantis (if mantis was even practiced through forms at the beginning), should we preserve them faithfully as we now have them?

Since we know that forms have been in a constant state of change over the last few generations, should we continue to develop forms to meet the needs of today?

Should forms be completely dropped from training for more progressive training methods?

What parts of mantis must be retained for it to still be the tanglangquan that we hold dear today? Keyword theories, Eight hard, twelve soft? What can go? What must stay?

[gunglihchuan]

A very relevant topic not just for mantis but for all kung fu systems in my opinion.

I would like to see mantis be reduced in material back to its essence and have mantis become so practical and effective that it will be as popular as Tai Chi Chuan.

I am focusing on the forms and techniques of the core of the mantis system, Bung Bu, Ba Zhao, and Lan Jie Chuan. I also practice the basics stances, strikes and kicking as well as the four basic weapons, staff, broadsword, straight sword, and spear.
I work on this five days a week about an hour an half a day.

I practice about 15-18 So Fa. I do these in many different ways practicing them in lines back and forth, around corners, in circles, and from seated positions. I really think that versatility in all your techniques are essential.

On the question of the change of forms. It was said that Bak Sil Lum Masters were allowed by their teachers to add one technique to a form when they became a Sifu. I do not know if this is the correct procedure but one should have a good deal of knowledge before changes are made.

Forms I think are essential but a small amount of them, perhaps something like six. I practice the core forms Bung Bu, Ba Zhao, and Lan Jie Chuan. The other three I practice are The eight basic stances and Gunglihchuan and Lien Her Zhang.
Bada Mabu and Gunglihchuan reinforce the proper footwork and give great fighting techniques. Lien Her Zhang is great in teaching northern kicking and I just love doing it.
I think you should have fun in your training.
The rest of my forms I do one a week and I think they are superfluous.

I know I was never taught the keyword theories but the essential information of a system should definitely be taught and drilled so it becomes second nature. I also think that chin na and iron skills, and the hidden weapon of the system should be taught.

I think in conclusion that Chinese Martial arts are fantastic but they have become huge in scope and will be largely forgotten by the public if they are made to be so inaccessible.

The study of a martial art should be the work of a lifetime but if it takes a lifetime to learn practical self-defense it will become only a legend and not a legacy.

[mooyingmantis]

I would like to see mantis be reduced in material back to its essence and have mantis become so practical and effective that it will be as popular as Tai Chi Chuan...

I think in conclusion that Chinese Martial arts are fantastic but they have become huge in scope and will be largely forgotten by the public if they are made to be so inaccessible.

The study of a martial art should be the work of a lifetime but if it takes a lifetime to learn practical self-defense it will become only a legend and not a legacy.

Gunglihchuan,

Excellent post!

I agree with your reductionist theory. Unfortunately, I don't see it happening soon. Some of the prominent players of the old guard have worked too hard to build political platforms that they believe elevate them above others.

IMHO, the following attitudes must be overcome for mantis to continue much longer:

1. "Only our lineage is the true lineage".
2. "Other lineages may also be valid, but we only recognize members of our political family."
3. "Though there are many instructors putting out the core of mantis through mass media, if you didn't learn the way I learned the material you do not really 'own' the material you have"
4. "You don't have the complete system because you don't have this or that secret set, even though others are sharing the material and no longer see the same sets as secret."

Mantis, like many CMA, at this point in time is too caught up in personality cults for practitioners to really work together.

I feel particularly blessed that my instructor wasn't an ego maniac and sought to learn from and work with as many other mantis practitioners as possible. I am glad he was such a good example to us. I am also glad he was humble enough to not try and create his own little personality cult and gave us freedom to expand and grow by training with others of other factions/families.

So, back to the original questions and Gunglihchuan's premise:

How do we reduce mantis down to its essentials without losing its essence? What can go? What must stay?

[-N-]

People can just ignore the politics, attitudes, and cults, and teach what they know.

Unfortunately, a lot of students will be unable to learn even when you try as hard as you can to give away the "secrets".

Other students will want to complicate things, and talk and post all over the internet. That doesn't help Mantis either.

I've noticed that when I post videos or comments relating to in depth knowledge I've gotten from my teacher, not many people seem interested.

I took one of my students to some open mat sparring sessions recently. He's still a kid, and its been his first times sparring with people outside of our group. He faced off against adult black belts, some outweighing him by 100lbs.

He consistantly has been able to blitz attack them with his Mantis where they have not been able to respond. He's still not very good, but he pretty much used the concepts shown in the videos I've posted.

Nobody here has been interested enough to follow up on any of the essence or essentials shown in the videos though.

[mooyingmantis]

-N-,
Please keep posting!
Some of us are observing, listening and taking the lessons to heart. I watch every video posted here and encourage my students and friends to do the same. Not everything is falling on deaf ears. :)

Congratulations on your students success! I am not surprised that mantis methods taught properly and applied properly have won the day.

[-N-]

I just hope that by the time that I am old and dead, that there will be at least one student that can pass on what little I learned from my teacher.

[B.Tunks]

Gunglihchuan,

Excellent post!

I agree with your reductionist theory. Unfortunately, I don't see it happening soon. Some of the prominent players of the old guard have worked too hard to build political platforms that they believe elevate them above others.

IMHO, the following attitudes must be overcome for mantis to continue much longer:

1. "Only our lineage is the true lineage".
2. "Other lineages may also be valid, but we only recognize members of our political family."
3. "Though there are many instructors putting out the core of mantis through mass media, if you didn't learn the way I learned the material you do not really 'own' the material you have"
4. "You don't have the complete system because you don't have this or that secret set, even though others are sharing the material and no longer see the same sets as secret."

Mantis, like many CMA, at this point in time is too caught up in personality cults for practitioners to really work together.

I feel particularly blessed that my instructor wasn't an ego maniac and sought to learn from and work with as many other mantis practitioners as possible. I am glad he was such a good example to us. I am also glad he was humble enough to not try and create his own little personality cult and gave us freedom to expand and grow by training with others of other factions/families.

So, back to the original questions and Gunglihchuan's premise:

How do we reduce mantis down to its essentials without losing its essence? What can go? What must stay?

MM,

Why come at it sideways? Name names, give examples. This should be good.

BT

[B.Tunks]

With all due respect, who the hell are you to lay down a road map for reforming Tanglang? I'm trying my best not to be rude here out of respect for your seniority, but seriously...

[mantis108]

A very relevant topic not just for mantis but for all kung fu systems in my opinion.

I would like to see mantis be reduced in material back to its essence and have mantis become so practical and effective that it will be as popular as Tai Chi Chuan.

Unfortunately, prolification of forms is inevitable. Such is the nature of "art".


I am focusing on the forms and techniques of the core of the mantis system, Bung Bu, Ba Zhao, and Lan Jie Chuan. I also practice the basics stances, strikes and kicking as well as the four basic weapons, staff, broadsword, straight sword, and spear.
I work on this five days a week about an hour an half a day.

IMHO, Lan Jie and Bazhou in our style is very much "one form" together.


I practice about 15-18 So Fa. I do these in many different ways practicing them in lines back and forth, around corners, in circles, and from seated positions. I really think that versatility in all your techniques are essential

I would keep all 64 Shou Fa. But in general even 8 of them are good enough.


On the question of the change of forms. It was said that Bak Sil Lum Masters were allowed by their teachers to add one technique to a form when they became a Sifu. I do not know if this is the correct procedure but one should have a good deal of knowledge before changes are made.

Well, I think to each their own.


Forms I think are essential but a small amount of them, perhaps something like six. I practice the core forms Bung Bu, Ba Zhao, and Lan Jie Chuan. The other three I practice are The eight basic stances and Gunglihchuan and Lien Her Zhang.

These days my program for forms looks like this:

Xiao Fan Che
Qi Shou
Lan Jie
Bazhou

wooden dummy
Mo Yun Zhang

Pai An (Xiao Kai Men)


Bada Mabu and Gunglihchuan reinforce the proper footwork and give great fighting techniques. Lien Her Zhang is great in teaching northern kicking and I just love doing it.

Ba Da Ma Bu actually have a lot to offer as it has a lot of the Tanglang techniques (ie Gou Lou Cai Shou) embedded in it. Gongliquan is a system on its own.


I think you should have fun in your training.
The rest of my forms I do one a week and I think they are superfluous.

Agreed.


I know I was never taught the keyword theories but the essential information of a system should definitely be taught and drilled so it becomes second nature. I also think that chin na and iron skills, and the hidden weapon of the system should be taught.

Well, GM Chiu hardly mention anything about keyword theory but there is no one who would doubt his Tanglangquan not being Tanglangquan as far as I am aware. So never mind too much about that.


I think in conclusion that Chinese Martial arts are fantastic but they have become huge in scope and will be largely forgotten by the public if they are made to be so inaccessible.

The study of a martial art should be the work of a lifetime but if it takes a lifetime to learn practical self-defense it will become only a legend and not a legacy.

IMHO Courage yields strength, strength gives substance to techniques. Techniques amplifies strength and strength in turn reinforces courage. Kung Fu isn't just about self preservation(so stop looking for mortal combat), it is also about self perfection(so start developing content of character).

Just some thoughts to share with you.

Warm regards

Robert

[MightyB]

My thought is that if you are teaching something - let's say 7* Mantis, then it's your obligation to teach it in it's entirety as it currently exists. It's OK to have your own interpretations... but, if it's 7* Mantis that you're teaching, then teach 7* Mantis. As it stands with this view, then lineage dilineates everything including the number of forms taught.

That being said - if you want change, make something new and let it stand on its own- but don't throw poo at your grandpa. That show poor taste and a lack of humility.

[mooyingmantis]

With all due respect, who the hell are you to lay down a road map for reforming Tanglang? I'm trying my best not to be rude here out of respect for your seniority, but seriously...

Who am I? Just a guy who likes to ask thought provoking questions that hopefully inspires peeps to think and share their thoughts so we can all learn and grow. :)

I never said mantis NEEDED "a road map for reforming Tanglang". However, change is inevitable. If the last 150 years of mantis has shown us anything, I would say it has shown us that.

The topic was not what I would do. I am just a minnow in a very large pond. So I have no road map for mantis. I only know what what I am going to do near my lilypad.

The topic was what everyone else who has a vested interest in the future of tanglangquan is planning on doing. Whether teacher or student, I think the subject is food for thought.

I do think it will be interesting to see what mantis is like in 25 years (if I am still alive), let alone 85 - 90 years from now.

Robert,
Excellent feedback! I always enjoy and learn from your posts.

MightyB,
Good points! I guess I have just never been afraid to call grandpa a drunk if I saw grandpa passed out on the couch. LOL!

Few have been afraid to express their opinions about me. :D And I actually appreciate such analysis. We grow more from the criticisms of our enemies than the a s s kissing of our friends.

BT,
No, I'm not into "naming names". I have no specific names to name. Yet, I don't think there is a mantis instructor in the US who is not aware of or has not had to work around the politics here in the US. I don't have an ax to grind against anyone specifically. I am open to sitting down and talking to anyone interested in exchanging ideas.

I don't think any one PERSON or ORGANIZATION is the problem. I think the problems have more to do with MINDSET. So, my comments were not an attack on anyone. Sorry if that is not "interesting".

I actually can't think of one mantis player on this forum for whom I don't have respect.

[B.Tunks]

I agree with your reductionist theory. Unfortunately, I don't see it happening soon. Some of the prominent players of the old guard have worked too hard to build political platforms that they believe elevate them above others.

IMHO, the following attitudes must be overcome for mantis to continue much longer:

1. "Only our lineage is the true lineage".
2. "Other lineages may also be valid, but we only recognize members of our political family."
3. "Though there are many instructors putting out the core of mantis through mass media, if you didn't learn the way I learned the material you do not really 'own' the material you have"
4. "You don't have the complete system because you don't have this or that secret set, even though others are sharing the material and no longer see the same sets as secret."

Mantis, like many CMA, at this point in time is too caught up in personality cults for practitioners to really work together.

I feel particularly blessed that my instructor wasn't an ego maniac and sought to learn from and work with as many other mantis practitioners as possible. I am glad he was such a good example to us. I am also glad he was humble enough to not try and create his own little personality cult and gave us freedom to expand and grow by training with others of other factions/families.


MM,

You're so god da.mned polite it makes it very hard to argue with you.

O.K, here's why I wrote what I wrote. I believe (and I’m no Charlie Sheen) that a fair chunk of the above post was directly addressing myself and also people such as Vance and Alex Tse (I am into naming names) who have pulled you up on at least a couple of the above listed items. I recently talked at length with you about the topic of learning mantis boxing from mass media and passing it on and I talked specifically about 'owning' material. Although I have no real right to drag Mr Tse and Mr Young into this, they also discussed with you the topic of publicly sharing material that is considered the treasured property of certain families and to which you have no true connection, which you at the time justified on the grounds that it is already in the public domain and no longer regarded as secret. That's all good and a valid viewpoint to which you are entitled, but in response to each of our criticisms at the time you replied in a well mannered and reasonable tone, even agreeing with some of the points raised. There was no animosity and everyone went on their merry way. So your recent post pointing out the ills of today's TLQ which highlighted such points came across to me as a sideswipe. I believe it may also imply that I am one of these egomaniacs and personality cult a.ssholes that you subsequently go on to describe in contrast to your own good teacher.

I don't care if you are implying that, in fact that would be pretty amusing, but I prefer direct communication instead of innuendo. Of course I may be deluding myself that any of this was about me, but you gotta admit you had me in mind at least at point 3. If you want to debate these things, let's have at it. Just be direct about it. I have very strong opinions about Tanglang and its past, present and future and I happen to care about what's recorded for posterity about it in the mass media, particularly the un-regulated internet where any person can build themselves up as an authority. My personal opinion if you must know is that people can reform whatever they want in their own personal practice but hands off the greater Tanglang. Any time anyone (particularly any governing body) attempts to regulate or modify these things they turn to sh.it. Refer modern wushu. Also, before one has grounds to reduce or streamline the system they should first have a handle on the whole thing. Again, in your own training, by all means go ahead. Passing it on as Tanglang? I don't think so.

And in case you're wondering, there is no connection between myself and Alex or Vance, beyond all being Tanglangmen. There is no evil political alliance or council of elders controlling the scene like a Mantis illuminati and there is definitely no need for a Wang Lang Skywalker to lead the rebel forces to victory and save us from the slavery of lineage. Many people in the Tanglangmen work together: across families; across cultural, regional and national barriers; both in a formal and informal manner and much is being shared. Many people are also not into sharing and would rather do their own thing and that's cool too because that's also how individuality is preserved. Tanglang is developing, not festering and decaying as your post seems to imply. If you're missing out on this then maybe look to yourself instead to find out what's up. To me it just seems like a bunch of sour grapes.

If I've misunderstood the intent of your post I apologise, but I'm fairly sure I'm not that slow.

BT

[bawang]

in 2100 mantis practionioners will fight in outer space as half human half mantis genetic engineered chiense communist super commandos
and taiwan will surrender

[ginosifu]

B. Tunks:
I have known Richard (Mooyingmantis) for a long time. I doubt very seriously that his remarks were aimed at you. In general everyone knows that there is political upheaval in the Praying Mantis community. This is the kinda stuff needs to be removed, so we can move forward into 2100.

15 years ago I told my Sifu (John Ervin, a student of Al Cheng), that I did not wish to continue my Mantis because of all the political cr.ap, name calling and baby games the Sifu above me were playing. Over the years I have learned Northern Shaolin, Hung Gar and a small Monkey system. I still have some of the Mantis forms like Bung Bo, but I don't want to teach it because of stupid stuff some people are doing even to this day.

Richard:
My opinion is that; Principle and Theory are the key to any system. Forms are just tools to convey the principles and theories. Sao Fa or Hand methods can relate the principles or theories just as well. When trying to say which forms are to be chosen is a difficult task because everyone like to pull their favorite techniques from their favorite forms.

Example:
I like Bung Bo, Baag Yune Tow Toe, Chop Choi and Sup Ba Sao. I think it is possible to convey the entire set of principles and theories from these 4 sets. Now you may pick 4 completely different sets and that is ok. Everyone likes different sets for different reasons, so I think forms should be left up to the individual.

Just my 2 cents

ginosifu

[mooyingmantis]

Gino,
Thanks for the input! This is the type of thing I was looking for!

BT,

I believe (and I’m no Charlie Sheen) that a fair chunk of the above post was directly addressing myself and also people such as Vance and Alex Tse (I am into naming names) who have pulled you up on at least a couple of the above listed items.

Nope! I have respect for all three of you. The attitudes I mentioned I disagree with, though I have no personal ax to grind with ANY individual. As I stated in my last post. If you have any of these attitudes, then we disagree. Period! It doesn't mean we are at war, or I think you are an ego-maniac.

I have been in personal contact with MANY CMA peeps over the years. Some were great, others were ego maniacs. I try not to judge others by posts they make on the Internet. I prefer to get to know peeps personally before I make a decision about their character.

Thank you for giving me the chance to make myself clearer! Sometimes I do go a bit overboard in what I say to spark discussion. I forget that hyperbole can be misunderstood. No feelings, nor bunnies were meant to be hurt in the above discussion.

As for Shihfu Tse, I think he has done a wonderful job sharing mantis with the world through his books, pictures on FaceBook and videos on YouTube. He is an excellent chronicler of decades of mantis history and technique. He will certainly be one of the men who will be instrumental in the development of mantis far into the future. So it would be great to hear his opinion on the questions from my first post.

I hope some day we can do like the Hung Gar people are trying to do and see that all mantis practitioners are brothers.

I have three younger brothers (though one is deceased). We may not always agree, but we can put aside our differences to work together when the need arises. I hope we can do the same in the mantis family. :)

[MightyB]

Making something new that's based on the concepts is ok with me (I myself am fascinated by mantis's intercepting hand) as long as you identify it as something new. But- remember where it comes from and show proper respect, there's no need to talk bad or talk down about where something comes from (and remember- you are where you're at because of -not in spite of- your previous training).

But- if you say you are "something", or you're teaching "something" - you have to live with the rules that are defined for that "something". That means the good and what you perceive as bad. All that is included has to be a part in order for it to be that "something".

[mooyingmantis]

Making something new that's based on the concepts is ok with me (I myself am fascinated by mantis's intercepting hand) as long as you identify it as something new. But- remember where it comes from and show proper respect, there's no need to talk bad or talk down about where something comes from (and remember- you are where you're at because of -not in spite of- your previous training).

But- if you say you are "something", or you're teaching "something" - you have to live with the rules that are defined for that "something". That means the good and what you perceive as bad. All that is included has to be a part in order for it to be that "something".

All good points!

But, what IS the "something" that makes it THE something? LOL!

To be more precise, HK Seven Star Lanjie looks almost nothing like Mainland Tai Chi Mantis Lanjie. Is one true and the other false? I don't think so. They are different methods of displaying the same themes. Is the point the movements, or the themes?

Another example, Babu Tanglangquan lacks many of the forms found in Seven Star and Tai Chi PM. Does it make it any less tanglangquan?

Since the keyword theories used in Qixing, Mimen, Babu and Tai Chi Mei Hua PM are different, how are they all still mantis?

So, we must define what makes mantis MANTIS? What must be preserved for an art to still be considered tanglangquan? At what point(s) will an art no longer be able to identify itself as tanglangquan?

If I teach Beng Bu (WHF version) exactly as I learned it from my instructor, I think most would agree that I am teaching tanglangquan. Correct me if I am wrong.
If I skip teaching the form, but still teach the combinations in the form, am I still teaching tanglangquan?
If I skip teaching the form and the combinations found within the form, but still teach the twelve keyword theories found in Beng Bu through the use of other combinations, am I still teaching tanglangquan?
If someone creates a new form that is faithful to one or all of the sets of keyword theories, and the eight hard and twelve soft principles, is it still tanglangquan?

[ginosifu]

If I teach Beng Bu (WHF version) exactly as I learned it from my instructor, I think most would agree that I am teaching tanglangquan. Correct me if I am wrong.
If I skip teaching the form, but still teach the combinations in the form, am I still teaching tanglangquan?
If I skip teaching the form and the combinations found within the form, but still teach the twelve keyword theories found in Beng Bu through the use of other combinations, am I still teaching tanglangquan?
If someone creates a new form that is faithful to one or all of the sets of keyword theories, and the eight hard and twelve soft principles, is it still tanglangquan?

I am not a Mantis player per say but the above teaching methods, could this not apply to any system? During periods when warfare and fighting were prominent, did martial artist spend heavy amounts of time perfecting forms? I would think that they were probably doing fighting drills, situational drills and heavy on application of technique.

At the end of the 1800's when firearms became prevelant and war was not the main steam, martial artists spent less and less time on combat and more time perfecting technique, staying in shape, performing and teaching. This is not saying that Chinese martial artists did not fight, I am sure they did during this period.

During the early 1900's when the Jing Wu era was prevelant, this is where we start to see all of these forms burst out into the kung fu world. I think that a lot of people became form mongers / form collectors. The Jing Wu had created it's own set of forms and other systems that were a part of this era started to create or modify forms to go along with the Jing Wu peeps. This is where we actually can verify the forms came from. I am not historian and there a lot forms that came from a long time ago... We just do not have enough info to verify when and where.

I myself was a forms collecter early on. As I grew in the martial arts I found that it is not neccessary to have 128 forms to be able to comprehand a system and it's theory and principle.

If you have the theories and principles of your given system... it think that it is possible to have just a few forms to convey them to the student.

ginosifu

[MightyB]

Machados teach Jiu Jitsu, but it's not Gracie Jiu Jitsu. SBG teaches Jiu Jitsu but it's not Machado JJ. All of those are based on Judo but they aren't teaching Judo. Judo is based on a variety of forms of Ju Jitsu but it's not Ju Jitsu. Ju Jitsu is definitely not Jiu Jitsu

7* isn't Wah Lum. WHF 7* is different than PRC 7*. Tai Chi Mantis isn't 8 Step. Pong Lai isn't...

To pull concepts and your favorite forms while combining it with techniques from other styles and creating your own thing is all right and has been done for a long time. Time is the true test. Name it as something new and go for it. But, like I said, sell it on it's merits without badmouthing where it came from.

When I sell television spots, I don't trash talk radio or newsprint, I just push the merits of television.

[MightyB]

If I were to create something new that's based on Mantis Concepts... what would I include or what would I like to see?

hmmm...

I would cut down on the emphasis on forms. I'm not against forms collecting per se, but I don't think you should attribute rank solely on the sheer number of forms that a person has memorized. Maybe there should be a limited number of base level core forms, but I don't know what those are.

to be continued after I give it some more thought...

[YouKnowWho]

I would cut down on the emphasis on forms.
Agree! Forms can be replaced by combo drills.


Maybe there should be a limited number of base level core forms, but I don't know what those are.

For 7*, I'll suggest:

beginner: 崩步(Beng Bu)
intermediate: 乱接(Luan Jie)
advance: 摘要(Zhai Yao)

[B.Tunks]

Thanks Gino. I understand MM's position.

It's shame that you have had both had a lot of negative experiences with martial arts politics.

BT

[B.Tunks]

Machados teach Jiu Jitsu, but it's not Gracie Jiu Jitsu. SBG teaches Jiu Jitsu but it's not Machado JJ. All of those are based on Judo but they aren't teaching Judo. Judo is based on a variety of forms of Ju Jitsu but it's not Ju Jitsu. Ju Jitsu is definitely not Jiu Jitsu

7* isn't Wah Lum. WHF 7* is different than PRC 7*. Tai Chi Mantis isn't 8 Step. Pong Lai isn't...

To pull concepts and your favorite forms while combining it with techniques from other styles and creating your own thing is all right and has been done for a long time. Time is the true test. Name it as something new and go for it. But, like I said, sell it on it's merits without badmouthing where it came from.

When I sell television spots, I don't trash talk radio or newsprint, I just push the merits of television.

Couldn't have said any of the above better. Nice one.

BT

[ironfenix]

for the record, let it be stated that the topic of "In the year 2100, Wang Lang Skywalker will lead the rebel mantis forces to victory over the Evil Political Alliance & Council of Mantis Illuminati (E.P.A.C.O.M.I.) with their secret army, a race of mantis-humanoid super commandos genetically engineered by the chinese communists, in an outer space battle brought about by the surrendering of Taiwan, the last rebel stronghold fighting the slavery of lineage" would make a great story!

I see most cma schools dwindling, and i feel richard's post is a thought provoking one. I personally feel the essential forms as being essential to mantis. to stay until 2100, mantis has to fight. forget the art, it has to be able to scrap. does it need to cut forms? maybe not. But initially, combat and skill should be enforced instead of collection of material.

[mantid1]

Get Oprah to promote mantis.....everyone will want to do it.

[Young Mantis]

I recently had a conversation with my Sifu about some of what has been stated here. As a student of any martial art, how much one "needs" all depends on what he/she wants from their practice. Our advancement system as passed down by WHF is influenced by the Jing Mo system. Can they advance simply by showing they have memorized the sequence of the required forms? No. They must also show a minimum proficiency in the execution of those forms to the standards of our school as well as the application of sahn sao techniques from our partner drills. Does every student who joins our school need to graduate or even reach advanced level? No. Do we expect everyone to strive to become disciples? Certainly not. It comes down to what their own personal goals are for studying Praying Mantis. But if that student wants to one day teach and represent our lineage, our style, then yes, we maintain that there is a minimum amount of knowledge, forms being only part of that knowledge, that the student must not only possess but show understanding and proficiency in. That doesn't mean that evolution or development does not exist, it certainly does and I have experienced first hand how my Sifu's teaching has evolved over the last 25 years.



7* isn't Wah Lum. WHF 7* is different than PRC 7*. Tai Chi Mantis isn't 8 Step. Pong Lai isn't...

Perfectly said. Each has evolved in its own way and there is no way to compare or debate whether one is "more" valid than the other. Yes, we are all TLQ but each branch is practically a different system with different shen fa and fa jing. If we were to look at HK 7* Bung Bo and PRC 7* Bung Bo, I think almost all would recognize both to be the "same" form based on sequence. But how each practitioner would apply the techniques within I believe would be very different.


If I teach Beng Bu (WHF version) exactly as I learned it from my instructor, I think most would agree that I am teaching tanglangquan. Correct me if I am wrong.
If I skip teaching the form, but still teach the combinations in the form, am I still teaching tanglangquan?
If I skip teaching the form and the combinations found within the form, but still teach the twelve keyword theories found in Beng Bu through the use of other combinations, am I still teaching tanglangquan?
If someone creates a new form that is faithful to one or all of the sets of keyword theories, and the eight hard and twelve soft principles, is it still tanglangquan?
If one omits the teachings of the past, then how will the future generations have any link to where the art comes from? I don't understand the thought that the forms taught to me are no good and that I need to create new forms to reinterpret the principles. How then did I achieve my own understanding of TLQ? What epiphany could I have that can be so radically different that I am compelled to throw away the material that got me to that enlightenment and create something new for my descendants to follow?

Time and again I feel that it is those without a legacy to propogate that feels the need to discredit and disrespect lineage by equating it to politics and portraying it negatively.

Vance Young

[Tainan Mantis]

If one omits the teachings of the past, then how will the future generations have any link to where the art comes from?
...

Well said Vance!
I think this is why 'teachings of the past' are so important.
Kevin

[sanjuro_ronin]

If Mantis has evolved to what it is NOW, why would ANYONE be against it evolving beyond what it is ?

[MightyB]

If Mantis has evolved to what it is NOW, why would ANYONE be against it evolving beyond what it is ?

Go play in your own park fool!!! :D

Each school and teacher is unique and everyone has their own unique style. No need to change how they get there- which- if they're traditional, is built on tradition.

Make up your own sh!t and name it, or accept how it's been done and follow the tradition. Simple as that. Just don't go claiming you're something you're not. EZ 'nuff.

[mooyingmantis]

I recently had a conversation with my Sifu about some of what has been stated here. As a student of any martial art, how much one "needs" all depends on what he/she wants from their practice. Our advancement system as passed down by WHF is influenced by the Jing Mo system. Can they advance simply by showing they have memorized the sequence of the required forms? No. They must also show a minimum proficiency in the execution of those forms to the standards of our school as well as the application of sahn sao techniques from our partner drills. Does every student who joins our school need to graduate or even reach advanced level? No. Do we expect everyone to strive to become disciples? Certainly not. It comes down to what their own personal goals are for studying Praying Mantis. But if that student wants to one day teach and represent our lineage, our style, then yes, we maintain that there is a minimum amount of knowledge, forms being only part of that knowledge, that the student must not only possess but show understanding and proficiency in. That doesn't mean that evolution or development does not exist, it certainly does and I have experienced first hand how my Sifu's teaching has evolved over the last 25 years.


Perfectly said. Each has evolved in its own way and there is no way to compare or debate whether one is "more" valid than the other. Yes, we are all TLQ but each branch is practically a different system with different shen fa and fa jing. If we were to look at HK 7* Bung Bo and PRC 7* Bung Bo, I think almost all would recognize both to be the "same" form based on sequence. But how each practitioner would apply the techniques within I believe would be very different.


If one omits the teachings of the past, then how will the future generations have any link to where the art comes from? I don't understand the thought that the forms taught to me are no good and that I need to create new forms to reinterpret the principles. How then did I achieve my own understanding of TLQ? What epiphany could I have that can be so radically different that I am compelled to throw away the material that got me to that enlightenment and create something new for my descendants to follow?

Time and again I feel that it is those without a legacy to propogate that feels the need to discredit and disrespect lineage by equating it to politics and portraying it negatively.

Vance Young

Excellent thoughts Vance! This is the type of well thought out answer I was looking for and others have also given.


If one omits the teachings of the past, then how will the future generations have any link to where the art comes from? I don't understand the thought that the forms taught to me are no good and that I need to create new forms to reinterpret the principles. How then did I achieve my own understanding of TLQ? What epiphany could I have that can be so radically different that I am compelled to throw away the material that got me to that enlightenment and create something new for my descendants to follow?

Vance Young

Yet Master Wong Hon Fan significantly changed the forms he was taught, repackaged them and taught them very differently. Master Jiang Hualong also significantly changed tanglangquan by mixing other styles into his tanglangquan, and by the time Wei Xiaotang finished developing Babu Tanglangquan, what are now considered core forms by other styles were discarded by Master Wei. What epiphany did they have?

I am NOT criticizing the work of any of these men. I just wonder how others responded to their efforts in their day and what makes them untouchable when future practitioners will certainly have to withstand criticism should they decide to modify what they learned and still call it tanglangquan.

I am also NOT criticizing how any instructor(s) today teaches tanglangquan today, lineage holder or not. The little criticism I have offered deals with attitudes, not individuals. Even if I am completely wrong in how I judge these attitudes, which is entirely possible, will the attitudes I mentioned advance mantis, hinder mantis, or be considered passe by the next generation. From the private messages I get from "lineage holding" friends, I think some of the attitudes I disagree with will die within the next 25 - 50 years at the latest. Then, what will we be left with??? That is part of the point of this whole discussion: what will be the face of mantis in 2100?

[ginosifu]

Richard
Much of the future of Mantis (or any style) still depends on what happens to our world in the next 90 years.

Lets back track about 300 hundred years. China was in political turmoil and rebel factions were fighting everywhere. I am not sure where firearms were at this point but hand to hand combat seemed prevelant.

I don't know really what went on back then but I have a feeling that more realistic combat drills were used instead of forms training. I am not saying that forms were not played, but it would seem prudent to practice 2 person situational drills.

In the late 1800's when firearms were prevelant and H2H combat was not quite the best way to fight against guns, I think that forms were now used for health, training, also promoting your school (forms might have been a good way to get people come train at your gym).

Getting back to the future? What does the future hold? Is our society going into a political upheval? Will we do something like egypt just did? Right now our society is calm and the focus of the poeple is more health and fitness. I think the future is still up for grabs.

ginosifu

[Young Mantis]

Yet Master Wong Hon Fan significantly changed the forms he was taught, repackaged them and taught them very differently. [/B]?

Would you mind sharing how you come to this conclusion? Do you have examples of forms that were "significantly changed" and "repackaged" and "taught differently" than how he learned them from LGY?

[-N-]

Would you mind sharing how you come to this conclusion? Do you have examples of forms that were "significantly changed" and "repackaged" and "taught differently" than how he learned them from LGY?

I was just about to ask what were the changes, but I see that Vance already did.

So I'll add that for Brendan Lai, I know of just 2 specific changes he made in 2 forms. But maybe others know of more... me not being a forms guy.

And as far as a change to the system, Brendan Lai identified to us only one "change". Which was more of an emphasis or focus even, rather than an outright change.

[mooyingmantis]

Would you mind sharing how you come to this conclusion? Do you have examples of forms that were "significantly changed" and "repackaged" and "taught differently" than how he learned them from LGY?

Certainly! Fair question.

Have you ever studied any of the Chiu Chi Man lineage forms? I am sure you know he was also a student of LGY. Their lineage's forms range from slightly different to completely different forms of the same name. Examples: Black Tiger Crossing (slightly different) and White Ape Steals Peach (completely different form).

An instructor friend who originally learned the WHF versions of the forms is now learning the CCM versions of the forms. He also noted the differences between the two families.

There is no doubt the changes even go back to LGY, since HK mantis looks significantly different than Mainland mantis. Yet LGY was trained on the mainland. We know LGY created and modified forms during his time with the Jing Wu organization. Certainly you have noticed that LGY Lanjie looks almost nothing like Mainland Lanjie/Luanjie. Where did he get his epiphany (as you asked)?

I have no problem with any lineage, lineage founder, or lineage practitioner. But to try and pretend there have been no changes is naive at best and fraudulent at worst. Which again brings us back to: who will have the next epiphanies that change the face of mantis?

Gino,
Excellent post! Yes, nothing happens in a vacuum. Modern and future events are sure to bring changes.

[YouKnowWho]

Do you have examples of forms that were "significantly changed"?
If I'm still a form guy, I'll change this move in Bong Bu. I just can't see that I'll use this move in combat. A right leg kick infront of your left leg will make more sense - pull your opponent's right arm toward you, at the same time kick his knee joint.

http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/1135/bongbu.jpg

[Tainan Mantis]

Taught as a kick in some schools. But in other schools not a kick at all.

[ginosifu]

I think that we to realize that "FORMS" are not the system. Principle and theory and for mantis the maybe keyword formula are actually the system.

Forms are an expression of the system theory, but not the entire system. Every CMA going back to the beginning has had different like experiences, different body types, different perceptions of techniques. That is why you see everyone play the same form a bit differently.

I have some examples of the same form played from different students of the same master:

Northern Shaolin / Bak Sil Lum Pai

Wing Lam Sifu, student of Yim Shom Mo under Ku YU Cheong Lineage
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXJhhEn3NJA

This is the same form but the next clip is from another student under Ku Yu Cheong, Leung Chi Cheung:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEmlmxcJlQ8&feature=related

Both clips are Tun Da #6 of the Northern Shaolin System. They played differently but contain the essence of the northern style.

Southern Hung Gar

Frank Yee, Tang Fang lineage student doing Tiger and Crane form:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOYR5FPeWbc&feature=related

Chu Chi Ling, Lam Tsai Wing lineage student doing Tier and Crane:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VQW55fdJxA

Both lineages are student of Wong Fei Hung but the forms look a bit different but still contain the essence of Hung Fist.

Overall I think we all can say that every person puts their own personality into the forms. Over the years certain masters have changed some of the techniques in the forms to meet their needs or personalities. I doubt very seriously that today's Bung Bo looks even close to the Bung Bo Wong Long created. Today's Bung Bo most likely contains the "Essence" of Mantis and the "Key Word Formula" but it has changed over 300 years because of the different personalities of the masters.

ginosifu

[sanjuro_ronin]

I think that we to realize that "FORMS" are not the system. Principle and theory and for mantis the maybe keyword formula are actually the system.

Forms are an expression of the system theory, but not the entire system. Every CMA going back to the beginning has had different like experiences, different body types, different perceptions of techniques. That is why you see everyone play the same form a bit differently.

I have some examples of the same form played from different students of the same master:

Northern Shaolin / Bak Sil Lum Pai

Wing Lam Sifu, student of Yim Shom Mo under Ku YU Cheong Lineage
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXJhhEn3NJA

This is the same form but the next clip is from another student under Ku Yu Cheong, Leung Chi Cheung:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEmlmxcJlQ8&feature=related

Both clips are Tun Da #6 of the Northern Shaolin System. They played differently but contain the essence of the northern style.

Southern Hung Gar

Frank Yee, Tang Fang lineage student doing Tiger and Crane form:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOYR5FPeWbc&feature=related

Chu Chi Ling, Lam Tsai Wing lineage student doing Tier and Crane:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VQW55fdJxA

Both lineages are student of Wong Fei Hung but the forms look a bit different but still contain the essence of Hung Fist.

Overall I think we all can say that every person puts their own personality into the forms. Over the years certain masters have changed some of the techniques in the forms to meet their needs or personalities. I doubt very seriously that today's Bung Bo looks even close to the Bung Bo Wong Long created. Today's Bung Bo most likely contains the "Essence" of Mantis and the "Key Word Formula" but it has changed over 300 years because of the different personalities of the masters.

ginosifu

VERY, VERY well said.
Forms catalogue a system and its core as passed down by THAT given Master.
Unless a form is done in such a way that it no longer looks like the core system, the differences are not that important.

[-N-]

i think that we to realize that "forms" are not the system.
[...]
forms are an expression of the system theory, but not the entire system.


qft!

+1

[mooyingmantis]

Overall I think we all can say that every person puts their own personality into the forms. Over the years certain masters have changed some of the techniques in the forms to meet their needs or personalities. I doubt very seriously that today's Bung Bo looks even close to the Bung Bo Wong Long created. Today's Bung Bo most likely contains the "Essence" of Mantis and the "Key Word Formula" but it has changed over 300 years because of the different personalities of the masters.

ginosifu

Excellent point!

My past instructor weighs in at between 170-195 lbs. (my best guess). He is built lean, thin and with arms that feel like he has steel cable for tendons. I would say his frame is comparable to Master Wong Hon Fan.

I am 250 lbs. with a 48" chest, 38" waist and 41" hips. I am probably closer to Fan Xu Dong in build.

Try as I may, my performance of forms will never look like my instructor's. I will issue power differently. I would be foolish to fight like he fights. Our body structures are too different. He is fast and stings! I am big and pound. He uses incredible speed and strategy. I use refined strength and strategy.

I think the above example shows one reason why styles/systems change with the individual. We each have different strengths and weaknesses based on how our bodies perform.

[-N-]

If I'm still a form guy, I'll change this move in Bong Bu. I just can't see that I'll use this move in combat. A right leg kick infront of your left leg will make more sense - pull your opponent's right arm toward you, at the same time kick his knee joint.

http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/1135/bongbu.jpg

It really depends on the context of application.

The theory is basically high/low attack.

In the context of the form, you have just tried to do a takedown but the other person escapes and tries to take your back.

You are in a relatively low position and weighted on your right leg, and the other person attacks from behind and around your left.

It will take extra time to twist left enough to use your right to grab his right attack.

It's slightly faster to use your right to parry left and throw the left palm so that the kick is hidden.

Also in application, the body is not so upright, and the kick is much extended and has a hard recoil. You also have the body weight transition from the right foot to the left foot to reinforce the right kick.

The kick is also is behind so you don't have to twist around your own supporting leg to get him. Since he is coming around from your left, you want to get him before he is fully in position, so the kick behind is faster.

If you both were squared off in a more evenly facing position, sure the right grab/pull with right kick in front makes a lot more sense.

[-N-]

I think the above example shows one reason why styles/systems change with the individual. We each have different strengths and weaknesses based on how our bodies perform.

Some call that change. I look at that more as emphasis.

I'm sure you pass on the full range of methods to your students, but emphasize different things depending on your own preference and the students' needs and aptitudes.

[mooyingmantis]

Some call that change. I look at that more as emphasis.

I'm sure you pass on the full range of methods to your students, but emphasize different things depending on your own preference and the students' needs and aptitudes.

Agreed!

Since I am NOT a "lineage holder" I use my own name for what I do. But if you were in my class you would see the same keyword theories, eight hard/twelve soft, one step, three strikes, etc. You would also see the same two man drills practiced in many Seven Star/Northern Praying Mantis schools, as well as drills from other lineages.

Yes, I do pattern things for the student and their needs, strengths and limitations.

[Young Mantis]

Have you ever studied any of the Chiu Chi Man lineage forms? I am sure you know he was also a student of LGY. Their lineage's forms range from slightly different to completely different forms of the same name. Examples: Black Tiger Crossing (slightly different) and White Ape Steals Peach (completely different form).

An instructor friend who originally learned the WHF versions of the forms is now learning the CCM versions of the forms. He also noted the differences between the two families.


So your basis for stating that WHF made significant changes to the forms taught to him by LGY is because they differ from those that are now being taught by the CCM lineage. How do you know that it was not CCM that changed his forms? Have you made comparisons with other LGY students? What about the forms of Chung Ho Yin, Wong Gum Hung, Chan Chun Yee, Kwok Cho Chiu? How do they compare to each other?

I have never argued that what we teach has been unchanged since the days of Wong Long. I agree with those who have said two students from the same teacher may express their forms differently. We are not cookie cut-outs of our Sifu's and actually each person's flavor should be different...to an extent so long as it is relevant to our body type and personal skills or attributes. But ideally, it should still resemble the same lineage and the techniques should still be close enough. That is not however the examples you gave in your original statement. To go from omitting techniques to then omitting forms to finally creating new forms to reinterpret the theories and principlesm and then give WHF as an example of this. I still do not see any clear proof that support your claims that WHF did this. Did he modify his teaching style? Yes. Did he change the naming conventions for the techniques and quanpu? Obviously. Perhaps even a few techniques and stances were modified as has been argued online before. But that still does not lead me to believe he made any significant changes. Perhaps then you would like to clarify what you consider to be significant changes.

My Sifu has studied with not only several of WHF's students, but also traveled in China to visit and learn from other LGY students as well. There is nothing in his experiences that would lead to such claims as you are making. My Sifu also made minor modification in his teaching career. For example, a seven star stance was modified for a bow stance because he thought it would be more practical in that technique's application. But it was full disclosured that he personally made the modification and why. And to me, that is not a significant change.

For someone to be able to make a change to a system, I believe they must have enough proficiency in it to do so. Dare I say, a master of the system so as to be able to judge what needs or could be changed or evolved. In regards to TLQ, I will say again, I believe each lineage can be its own system so I would have to master at least my own lineage before I would dare say to make any significant changes. Otherwise, what is my message to my students and to my Sifu? That what he taught me is wrong? Ineffective? Out dated? If I believed that, I would not have studied with him to begin with. If the change is minor, as in choosing a palm strike over a fist, or a bow stance instead of a horse, those are cosmetic and change nothing about what was taught to me.

So again I ask, what would cause one to think they need to abandon an existing form or even technique for that matter to express theories and principles. Some have argued that forms do not make a style, principles and theories do. I would argue that first and foremost came techniques. Individual techniques that were found to be effective just as is told in the 18 ancestors sonnet. From those techniques were born the fighting theories and strategies. And from those techniques were also born the forms that of themselves also have theories and strategies. Forms are more than just a random collection of techniques, at least in TLQ, and for those who don't understand that, then you have not been practicing the forms correctly. Perhaps you were not taught how to practice the forms correctly.

I have heard of some other sifus choosing to drop certain forms from their curriculum simply because they don't like them. That is fine for the every day hobbyist but one of the reasons this style has so many forms and techniques is because there is something for everybody. Not everyone has to master or even learn it all, but if I want to teach it someday, then I have to learn it all in order to have it to teach to the next generation. Otherwise, they would only get what worked for me and what I chose to keep.

What is fraudulent to me is someone who studies a little from here and a little from there and then claim to have mastered enough of the overall broader sense of the system to say that he can make a "significant change" to the system. It would be enough for me in my lifetime to master what has been taught to me. And if one day I should have the opportunity to have my own students, that I will be able to say to them that what they are learning has a deep history and has been authentically passed down from one generation to the next and not something I crafted on my own in my basement or garage.

[mooyingmantis]

Vance,
Every post you have made on one of my threads in at least the last year has turned into a personal attack against me, or at the very least a criticism of my actions.

You raise interesting points concerning mantis history and development. Yet, as usual, you take my opinions as a personal affront on you, your teacher, or your lineage.

My opinions are based on facts/opinions expressed to me by other mantis instructors. I didn't just pull my opinions out of my derriere.

Since you seem to have made it your personal mission to try and cast me in a bad light, I don't care to have any further communication with you. I have tried to be a gentleman with you, but that apparently doesn't work.

I don't come here for pi ss ing contests. And honestly, I don't personally care if I have your blessing on what I do or not, on what I post or do not post. And I don't feel the need to kiss anyone's a$$, Chinese or otherwise.

I come here to share in interesting discussions. I can't remember the last time YOU started one.

[Young Mantis]

Richard,

That's fine that you choose to ignore, frankly I don't care. It was not long ago that I often supported your inquiries and academic pursuits mostly because you chose to try translating the quanpu of WHF and when it was not accurate, I wanted to set the record straight so that it would not be recorded publicly incorrectly.

Sorry to disappoint you but it is not a personal mission of mine to "cast you in a bad light". I have too much going on in my life to waste on arguing personally with anyone's actions. What is my mission, particularly on this forum is to defend or in the least clarify any statements made about my lineage specifically that I believe are cast by those that are unqualified to do so.

I come here to share what I know about my lineage. I come here to set the record straight when others misinform the public intentionally or not. I don't conjecture or offer opinions about other lineages. I have nothing to promote, no agenda to push, and so no discussions to start. If I want to know something outside my lineage, I ask that person directly through PM or email. I don't need to advertise myself on a public forum.

[Luk Hop]

I have no credible lineage:


http://www.socalbubble.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/baby_crying_closeup.jpg

[mooyingmantis]

Richard,

That's fine that you choose to ignore, frankly I don't care. It was not long ago that I often supported your inquiries and academic pursuits mostly because you chose to try translating the quanpu of WHF and when it was not accurate, I wanted to set the record straight so that it would not be recorded publicly incorrectly.

Sorry to disappoint you but it is not a personal mission of mine to "cast you in a bad light". I have too much going on in my life to waste on arguing personally with anyone's actions. What is my mission, particularly on this forum is to defend or in the least clarify any statements made about my lineage specifically that I believe are cast by those that are unqualified to do so.

I come here to share what I know about my lineage. I come here to set the record straight when others misinform the public intentionally or not. I don't conjecture or offer opinions about other lineages. I have nothing to promote, no agenda to push, and so no discussions to start. If I want to know something outside my lineage, I ask that person directly through PM or email. I don't need to advertise myself on a public forum.

Fair enough!

After a good night's sleep I had a chance to rethink my original knee-jerk reaction.

As I said, my statements were not just MY opinion. They were opinions expressed to me by other mantis practitioners.

However, putting that aside, my intent was to say many have influenced mantis in significant ways. Some did it after decades of mastering a system. Some did it after a few years of mantis training. For example, Wang Yun Sheng of Fushan County, Shandong met and became a student of Li San Jian in 1888 A.D.. After two years of mantis study he founded Seven Star PM and created its forms in 1890 A.D. Quite an epiphany!

The emphasis of this thread has never been about me, it is about what OTHERS plan on doing to ensure mantis' will still be around in 2100 and what others think it may develop into.

[nubianmantis]

Fair enough!

After a good night's sleep I had a chance to rethink my original knee-jerk reaction.

As I said, my statements were not just MY opinion. They were opinions expressed to me by other mantis practitioners.

However, putting that aside, my intent was to say many have influenced mantis in significant ways. Some did it after decades of mastering a system. Some did it after a few years of mantis training. For example, Wang Yun Sheng of Fushan County, Shandong met and became a student of Li San Jian in 1888 A.D.. After two years of mantis study he founded Seven Star PM and created its forms in 1890 A.D. Quite an epiphany!

The emphasis of this thread has never been about me, it is about what OTHERS plan on doing to ensure mantis' will still be around in 2100 and what others think it may develop into.

Greetings, Family. How many here have heard or read the Major book titled A discourse on the history of praying mantis boxing in china for the last one hundred years,author Hon-chiu Wong. I know this will settle some major/minor issue here;also inform some who wish to learn the mindset of the Major Mantis Masters in China/Hong-Kong. Best Regards. NM.