Kung fu bashers only have our interest at heart

[Eric Olson]

With great personal sacrifice they come to this forum with a message to deliver--kung fu sucks and we have come to awaken you from your delusional fog.

Thank god for those brave souls who take the time to tell us how lame we are and how great they truly are because they practice <insert martial flavor of the week>.

What would we do without them?

EO

[YouKnowWho]

If you just go to a Judo forum and suggest those Judoka to compete in kick boxing tournament, you will get pretty much the same responses as we have here.

[Hardwork108]

What we do without them?

EO

Laugh a lot less than we normally do! ;)

[sanjuro_ronin]

Funny, I don't recall kung fu being bashed but I do see kung fu fantasy crap being bashed.
You shouldn't confuse the two.

[MightyB]

phuck it - I'm going all in, Death Touch and all b!tches!!! Where's my monk's robe???

[Hardwork108]

Funny, I don't recall kung fu being bashed but I do see kung fu fantasy crap being bashed.
You shouldn't confuse the two.

Personally speaking, I have never talked about "kung fu fantasy", unless people think that TCMA don't address the ground scenario; or that the Internals are about chi blasts; Iron Palm/body is fantasy; that there are valid methodologies that people have never heard of, and so on, but I have seen what I have said here bashed plenty of times.

[Robinhood]

Funny, I don't recall kung fu being bashed but I do see kung fu fantasy crap being bashed.
You shouldn't confuse the two.

Maybe you can not tell which one is the real one !.

Maybe you have them reversed.

[Robinhood]

With great personal sacrifice they come to this forum with a message to deliver--kung fu sucks and we have come to awaken you from your delusional fog.

Thank god for those brave souls who take the time to tell us how lame we are and how great they truly are because they practice <insert martial flavor of the week>.

What would we do without them?

EO

Is this the same guy that wrought a book ?. "Cultivating the Chi"

[David Jamieson]

Personally speaking, I have never talked about "kung fu fantasy", unless people think that TCMA don't address the ground scenario; or that the Internals are about chi blasts; Iron Palm/body is fantasy; that there are valid methodologies that people have never heard of, and so on, but I have seen what I have said here bashed plenty of times.

TCMA doesn't address ground fighting.

Actual grappling? Wrestling? No. I haven't seen it. The closest it comes is with the Throw Horn or the Free Style and neither of those deal with protracted ground scenarios. Certainly none of the big styles deal with it in any way that can be considered an adequate address of the range.

I'd like to know what style has guys actually rolling, learning positioning, learning how to take or give while tangled up on the ground. I have yet to see that style and I've been into Kung Fu for a long time now.

TCMA has a lot to offer, but ground fighting is not one of those things. That's fine, cross training makes us all better than the training you get in a bubble. Even old guys know this, that's why most of the good sifu out there had several sifu themselves.

Nowadays, it is a sea of choices and some of them are going to be bad wherever you go, but we shouldn't even try and sell a lie. Be honest and be truthful and be aware that TCMA simply doesn't address many tactical situations. It also addresses a lot of artism which is not practical or functional.

No big deal. It's better to be honest with your art and not betray it with lies you make up because your ego is too big to admit you don't have an answer to a question. That is even worse and in fact that is what I despise most about TCMA.

I refuse to celebrate lies. That's dishonest and frankly, it's stupid and kills the arts.

[Robinhood]

TCMA doesn't address ground fighting.

Actual grappling? Wrestling? No. I haven't seen it. The closest it comes is with the Throw Horn or the Free Style and neither of those deal with protracted ground scenarios. Certainly none of the big styles deal with it in any way that can be considered an adequate address of the range.

I'd like to know what style has guys actually rolling, learning positioning, learning how to take or give while tangled up on the ground. I have yet to see that style and I've been into Kung Fu for a long time now.

TCMA has a lot to offer, but ground fighting is not one of those things. That's fine, cross training makes us all better than the training you get in a bubble. Even old guys know this, that's why most of the good sifu out there had several sifu themselves.

Nowadays, it is a sea of choices and some of them are going to be bad wherever you go, but we shouldn't even try and sell a lie. Be honest and be truthful and be aware that TCMA simply doesn't address many tactical situations. It also addresses a lot of artism which is not practical or functional.

No big deal. It's better to be honest with your art and not betray it with lies you make up because your ego is too big to admit you don't have an answer to a question. That is even worse and in fact that is what I despise most about TCMA.

I refuse to celebrate lies. That's dishonest and frankly, it's stupid and kills the arts.

All styles and movements are secondary, and just expressions of the personality of their creator. What is missing in almost all TCMA is what comes before the movement.

This is what allows the movement to work.

[Hardwork108]

TCMA doesn't address ground fighting.

Actual grappling? Wrestling? No. I haven't seen it. The closest it comes is with the Throw Horn or the Free Style and neither of those deal with protracted ground scenarios. Certainly none of the big styles deal with it in any way that can be considered an adequate address of the range.

I'd like to know what style has guys actually rolling, learning positioning, learning how to take or give while tangled up on the ground. I have yet to see that style and I've been into Kung Fu for a long time now.

TCMA has a lot to offer, but ground fighting is not one of those things. That's fine, cross training makes us all better than the training you get in a bubble. Even old guys know this, that's why most of the good sifu out there had several sifu themselves.

Nowadays, it is a sea of choices and some of them are going to be bad wherever you go, but we shouldn't even try and sell a lie. Be honest and be truthful and be aware that TCMA simply doesn't address many tactical situations. It also addresses a lot of artism which is not practical or functional.

No big deal. It's better to be honest with your art and not betray it with lies you make up because your ego is too big to admit you don't have an answer to a question. That is even worse and in fact that is what I despise most about TCMA.

I refuse to celebrate lies. That's dishonest and frankly, it's stupid and kills the arts.

I would politely ask you not to call me a liar!

If you are not aware of the fact that some TCMAs address the ground scenario, then that is fine too, as you are in the majority who claim to train "Kung fu". Also, keep in mind that most kung fu out there is taught in an incompete manner, so there is no reason to think that your training has been otherwise - based on the point view you have just put across!

I will repeat again, the Mainland Chinese lineage of Wing Chun that I train has ground fighting training as part of its traditional curriculum. So, take that to the bank!

Sifu Mike Patterson, in another thread has stated that during his time of training Hsing I in Taiwan, he did ground fighting. He also said that this type of training was the norm in those days and in that part of the world.

I have posted a Tiger Claw style video which also shows ground fighting aspects.

So, it is a LIE to say that the TCMAs do not address the ground!

[Hardwork108]

As regards the TCMAs addressing groundfighting and in the name of enlightenment:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJR5Jb1oQPY

The caption below the above link says "Just sharing some knowledge for those who don't know there has been ground fighting and submission in Shaolin and all Kung Fu for centuries. Hope your knowledge is increased." ;)


This video is the link that I have posted before:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f20SLgNb9Ds&feature=related

Here are some pictures from an old Chinese Chin-na book. This link was first posted by Phil Redmond in the Wing Chun forum. Not all of it shows the ground that there some that show TCMA techniques addressing the ground:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2JlPEbfitI

I hope that the links have been enlightening.

If you have any doubts left, then feel free to ask sifu Mike Patterson, as he will be able to enlighten you further. I can't do more than this, because I am not a sifu.

[Indrafist]

My first TCMA teachers were three brothers who all cross-trained, and were all street fighters. Each cross trained at least three styles. The eldest of the brothers did both Dai-Shing Pek Gwa (with Chan Sau Chung) and, Japanese Judo, as well as SPM. The middle brother did Lion's Roar with Shuia-Chiao and Chin Na incorporated, plus Wing Chun, and Western Boxing. The youngest brother did Lion's Roar with Muay-Thai and Tai-Chi. The middle brother told me in no uncertain terms that if a fight went to the ground and I couldn't handle it, I'd be finished. He broke my arm by way of explanation. As well as their own styles, they regularly cross-trained with each other, and with invited people from outside. They made us fight full contact which was rare in 1973 in the UK. Did I ever compete in combat sporets? Nope. Did what I did in those early years help me defend myself/test myself? Yep, in 13 years of frontline law enforecment. Would I have been any good as a combat sports athlete? I doubt it. Did what I trained help me in my chosen area of pressure testing? Yep, absolutely (see above). Did what I did in groundwork match up to BJJ? Nope. Did I continue with TCMA? Yep, for the past 38 out of 44 years of my MA training. What did I start my own son on? Judo and Muay-Thai, before getting him some experience with BJJ and MMA. What's he doing now after that base? TCMA. Why? Coz it's what he wants to do. Is TCMA 'complete'? Unto itself, yep. Can it evolve? Yep. Should it evolve? IMHO, yeah.

[Dragonzbane76]

but I have seen what I have said here bashed plenty of times.

a lot of times its not What you state, it's how you state it. You honestly have the worst presentational skills I have come across.

[Hardwork108]

a lot of times its not What you state, it's how you state it. You honestly have the worst presentational skills I have come across.
Or perhaps truth and the consequent enlightenment hurt those who are "caught by surprise"?

[Iron_Eagle_76]

Or perhaps truth and the consequent enlightenment hurt those who are "caught by surprise"?

It must have sucked for you back in high school as the guy who always got beat up and never got laid.;)

[Hardwork108]

It must have sucked for you back in high school as the guy who always got beat up and never got laid.;)

Actually, the highschool I attended was a very civilized institution. I only have fond memories of the place.

As for getting laid, let me tell you that I have been working in nightclubs for over 22 years. That is in London, Rio de Janeiro and here in Cali. Basically, what I am trying to tell you is that I have gotten laid more times than you have had dinners.;)

So, it seems that not only I know more about authentic kung fu practice than you do, but also I have more fun and know more about the ladies too. ;)

[Dragonzbane76]

Or perhaps truth and the consequent enlightenment hurt those who are "caught by surprise"?

Nope usually its your abrasive demeanor.

[Taixuquan99]

Would you two like the rest of us to leave you alone?

[Hardwork108]

Would you two like the rest of us to leave you alone?
Sorry about that. It is just that Dragonzbane here likes to stalk me across this forum and "provoke situations". Apparently, every time I speak pro-TCMA in relation to his beloved MMA (I still don't know why him - and others of "MMA is best" persuasion - post in this kung fu forum), he sees it as "abrassiveness" on my part, hence the stalking.

Sign of the times, I say....;)

[David Jamieson]

HW108- You do all these things you complain about.

You continue to badger and bait people and continue to taunt with "clueless idiots" and so on and so forth.

You don't so much talk with people as you do talk at them.

So, be warned, if you continue down this path again the former result of that behaviour from you will be permanent.
So mind your P's and Q's I won't ask you again and it's not up for debate.

Be civil or be gone. Tired of it already.
:mad:

[Dragonzbane76]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taixuquan99

Would you two like the rest of us to leave you alone?
Sorry about that. It is just that Dragonzbane here likes to stalk me across this forum and "provoke situations". Apparently, every time I speak pro-TCMA in relation to his beloved MMA (I still don't know why him - and others of "MMA is best" persuasion - post in this kung fu forum), he sees it as "abrassiveness" on my part, hence the stalking.


Sign of the times, I say....


Me posting in multiple threads does not mean anything. In all truth most times i choose to skip conversations with u in them because it usually ends with a meaningless debate of the same crap. You think too highly of yourself for me to care in all events concerning u. Because you hate my opinions so much usually its u that illicits the conversations. Leave me alone and ill return the curtesy.

[Hardwork108]

Me posting in multiple threads does not mean anything. In all truth most times i choose to skip conversations with u in them because it usually ends with a meaningless debate of the same crap. You think too highly of yourself for me to care in all events concerning u. Because you hate my opinions so much usually its u that illicits the conversations. Leave me alone and ill return the curtesy.

:confused:

If you look at this very thread, you will see that it was you who started to "converse" with me, but yes, just ignore me!

As for my part, I should not have implied that I get laid a lot, it seems that the moderator got jealous. :p

[sanjuro_ronin]

I would politely ask you not to call me a liar!

If you are not aware of the fact that some TCMAs address the ground scenario, then that is fine too, as you are in the majority who claim to train "Kung fu". Also, keep in mind that most kung fu out there is taught in an incompete manner, so there is no reason to think that your training has been otherwise - based on the point view you have just put across!

I will repeat again, the Mainland Chinese lineage of Wing Chun that I train has ground fighting training as part of its traditional curriculum. So, take that to the bank!

Sifu Mike Patterson, in another thread has stated that during his time of training Hsing I in Taiwan, he did ground fighting. He also said that this type of training was the norm in those days and in that part of the world.

I have posted a Tiger Claw style video which also shows ground fighting aspects.

So, it is a LIE to say that the TCMAs do not address the ground!

You really need to re-read what Sifu Patterson said, really.

[pateticorecords]

thanks for sharing;)


My first TCMA teachers were three brothers who all cross-trained, and were all street fighters. Each cross trained at least three styles. The eldest of the brothers did both Dai-Shing Pek Gwa (with Chan Sau Chung) and, Japanese Judo, as well as SPM. The middle brother did Lion's Roar with Shuia-Chiao and Chin Na incorporated, plus Wing Chun, and Western Boxing. The youngest brother did Lion's Roar with Muay-Thai and Tai-Chi. The middle brother told me in no uncertain terms that if a fight went to the ground and I couldn't handle it, I'd be finished. He broke my arm by way of explanation. As well as their own styles, they regularly cross-trained with each other, and with invited people from outside. They made us fight full contact which was rare in 1973 in the UK. Did I ever compete in combat sporets? Nope. Did what I did in those early years help me defend myself/test myself? Yep, in 13 years of frontline law enforecment. Would I have been any good as a combat sports athlete? I doubt it. Did what I trained help me in my chosen area of pressure testing? Yep, absolutely (see above). Did what I did in groundwork match up to BJJ? Nope. Did I continue with TCMA? Yep, for the past 38 out of 44 years of my MA training. What did I start my own son on? Judo and Muay-Thai, before getting him some experience with BJJ and MMA. What's he doing now after that base? TCMA. Why? Coz it's what he wants to do. Is TCMA 'complete'? Unto itself, yep. Can it evolve? Yep. Should it evolve? IMHO, yeah.

[Hardwork108]

You really need to re-read what Sifu Patterson said, really.
I might just do that, but I remember reading it with a smile on my face. He did say that ground fighting was practiced during his time in Taiwan, and not just in his school. He also confirmed the Internal approach, hence its validity. On top of that he said that in his school, 50% of the training involves the forms practice.

All of the above and their validity have been discussed to death in this forum, and often with valid points on both sides, but what sifu Patterson said validates what me and people like me have been saying here for years - that the Internals exist; forms training is an important tool, and that the TCMAs do address the ground scenario.

If you remember, I have for a long time referred to my Mainland Chinese Wing Chun syllabus, where ground training is part of the curriculum. :)

[sanjuro_ronin]

I might just do that, but I remember reading it with a smile on my face. He did say that ground fighting was practiced during his time in Taiwan, and not just in his school. He also confirmed the Internal approach, hence its validity. On top of that he said that in his school, 50% of the training involves the forms practice.

All of the above and their validity have been discussed to death in this forum, and often with valid points on both sides, but what sifu Patterson said validates what me and people like me have been saying here for years - that the Internals exist; forms training is an important tool, and that the TCMAs do address the ground scenario.

If you remember, I have for a long time referred to my Mainland Chinese Wing Chun syllabus, where ground training is part of the curriculum. :)

Sifu Patterson made it clear that other practionmers and teachers of other systems were brought in and that is, presumably, where His system developed the skills to deal with them.
Sifu Patterson's views on "internals" don't seem to mesh with your though.

[Hardwork108]

Sifu Patterson made it clear that other practionmers and teachers of other systems were brought in and that is, presumably, where His system developed the skills to deal with them.
Sifu Patterson's views on "internals" don't seem to mesh with your though.


These are a few quotes from Sifu Patterson:





The internal arts as they were taught to me are complete. We do conditioning. We sweat. We bleed. We are not elitist snobs who are uinwilling to get dirty or roll around on the ground (ever heard of the three basin theory?).

We do mostly body weight strengthening exercises. But some are device driven. We hit things... lots of things.. in various ways. We fight. We do scenario training. We grapple. I will grant that I have encountered many in the USA who think this blasphemy but I have always just shrugged, smiled and then proven to them why they are misguided.

Here, sifu Patterson answers Dragonzbane76's question as to wether he had to go "elsewhere" to learn grappling:


"Chin Na", as taught to me from the three "internal" disciplines, contains the elements of locking, throwing and partial restraint/submission.

It is said of the "three basin theory" that all techinques can be perfomed upright, in a half crouch, or on the ground (obvious mechanical variants notwithstanding). It is also said that sometimes the hands must become the feet and the feet must become the hands.

With that said; as a combat philosophy we do not believe in staying on the ground. One must be willing to go there, yes. But our perspective is to do what is necessary to get back up on our feet as quickly as possible.

So if you're thinking modern perspectives of ring grappling, we can, but we prefer not to stay there. It's not our way.

But no, I did not have to go "elsewhere".

See, I did not misread Sifu Patterson. It is all there, and of course, and as always, ground fighting is still part of the traditional curriculum of the Mainland Chinese lineage of Wing Chun which I study.

[Hardwork108]

More quotes from Sifu Patterson:


In Taiwan, at least in my day, all styles trained to fight. Very few exceptions to this. As such, all practioners understood that the ground was just another range/venue/transition of combative potential. So we all did it.. I never met anyone of any stylistic persuasion there that did not practice ground technique. Although we all had our differences in terms of emphasis.

It is only in the USA that I have seen such seemingly insurmountable differences of opinion over what qualifies as this or that or what defines this or that. Silly if you ask me. I have already stated that there are only so many things that can be done with a hand or foot. The rest is stylistic persuasion via tactical overlay or perspective of efficiency of combat

It would seem that outside of the China/Taiwan, etc. the TCMAs are trained somewhat differently, for the most part, hence people's erroneous views and assumptions as regards what they contain and don't.

And this says it all:


So, I guess to elaborate... all old styles are complete. They need no outside help. It's all been done before. The bickering comes from mistaken perspectives, missing information or just plain obstinance in most cases I reckon.

[brothernumber9]

At face value, there are a number of standing applications that one can extrapolate for possible use on the ground. But theoretical extrapolation doesn't equate to styles that actively had or have practice and training in such scenarios.
I shake my head to the majority of what was on the videos that were posted as evidence of TCMA/Shaolin "ground fighting".

Those of us that train and have trained in a CMA, need to be honest with ourselves. The vast, vast majority of CMA does not include fighting on the ground outside of excapes and techniques designed to get back up.

The more than a little bit of "vs MMA" or "vs grappler" type videos and demonstrations I've seen are really not that practical. There are millions of guys and now a growing number of gals out there that have wrestled in highschool, or local club, or amateur athletics. And I'm sure many of them that watch so many of these vids showing how a "grappler" attempts a takedown against a kung fu stylist roll thier eyes at such ignorance.
I study a CMA, have for over twenty years now, but like a buch of other people on these boards, I also wrestled in highschool. I enjoy my training and have learned a lot. But we really need to get past this "vs MMA" mentality. If what we study doesn't have a practical method in a certain scenario or fighting range, well, it just doesn't have it. It doesn't invalidate everything else you train and learn.

[Vajramusti]

With great personal sacrifice they come to this forum with a message to deliver--kung fu sucks and we have come to awaken you from your delusional fog.

Thank god for those brave souls who take the time to tell us how lame we are and how great they truly are because they practice <insert martial flavor of the week>.

What would we do without them?

EO
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internet forums bring out the attention seekers. Kung fu is not the direct reason. Check out internet forums on dogs, and even speed chess- you will get similar jabberwocky.

joy chaudhuri

[David Jamieson]

The way past the mentality of x vs y is to participate in both and understand they are not "vs" at all but complimentary skill sets that strengthen each other.

[sanjuro_ronin]

See, I did not misread Sifu Patterson. It is all there, and of course, and as always, ground fighting is still part of the traditional curriculum of the Mainland Chinese lineage of Wing Chun which I study.

I think you are SELECTIVELY reading what you want t because he also said:

Perhaps I was fortunate to have open minded and knowledgeable teachers who encouraged me to explore other disciplines via "crossing arms" (this is what we said in those days) and to bring back any questions or dilemnas I had. There was always an answer waiting.


I think it always has MUCH to do with the teacher/environment. I also think it has to do with the individual.

Master Hsu had many, many accomplished friends from different disciplines. They used to drop by the school all the time to show us "their style's way" of doing things. This always prompted MANY questions in us regarding the whys and wherefores of our respective differences of technical persuasion and tactic.

I was fortunate.... no doubt about it.. to have open minded teachers that did not shun others that were different as being "wrong" but only as different.


I have had numerous discussions with practitioners/teachers that tell me that they feel that they are able to fight and fight well. Oftentimes, by asking just a few quick questions... Do you spar in your school? What are the rules if any? Do you engage with outsiders at all? Do you go to other schools/venues to play with unknowns in contact environments? What are the rules, if any?..... tells me where their respective heads are. It is amazing to me how many practitioners keep their metaphorical heads in the sand but yet profess that "they know" what they do is real and effective.


Yes. This is how were were in those days, how it was in my teacher's school when I trained and how I still am today.

We always welcomed outsiders to come by and train with us, fight with us, or do whatever they wanted to do at their comfort zone with us to invest in the learning process.

We have always been game to do such things. This is what I find sorely lacking in many schools in this country today (and not only kung fu schools), and have mentioned consistently since my beginning post in the first thread.

[Ray Pina]

My message is not that Kung Fu sucks. It's that self-proclaimed masters with no real combat experience suck... and that they talk out of their arse for personal financial or ego rewards.... and then they spawn kook students.


Also, these people are quick to play up how calm and emotionally balanced they are compared to competitive sport types but the best answer to every situation is to remove someone's eye, cripple them or knock them dead with one fatal, precisely aimed shot:)

TCMA is fine..... it's the delusional douche bags that train it that's the problem. They don't train real resistance, they don't go out to compete in open grappling or striking forums, have produced no notable champions anywhere .... and yet are the most opinionated.:) Even providing detailed instruction regarding their methods' superiority.:)

It's hilarious. Good entertainment.:)

[bawang]

kung fu is like chairman mao. 70% right, 30% wrong.

[MightyB]

kung fu is like chairman mao. 70% right, 30% wrong.

60% of the time, bawang is right all the time. :D

[MightyB]

why oh why does this never end... yes, I contribute to it - but in all it doesn't matter.

Here's some big secrets. Get strong, get tough - exercise, do some cardio, work on flexibility... get into a couple of fights. Spar. Take a BJJ class, supplement with Judo or Shuai Jiao. Fight some more. Get it out of your system. Take a chill pill, and then get back to TCMA if that matters to you. If not - quit. In the immortal words of Hank Williams the Third when referring to some people's bias against his style of country... "If you don't like ****** Tonk music, then go - F_CK You"

[wenshu]

60% of the time, bawang is right all the time. :D

He's also illegal in 9 countries and smells like pure gasoline.

[sanjuro_ronin]

He's also illegal in 9 countries and smells like pure gasoline.

Is there anything more awesome than Anchorman references?
I think not !!
Why?
Cause I killed a man with a trident !

[wenshu]

You should find yourself a safehouse or a relative close by. Lay low for a while, because you're probably wanted for murder.

[Fa Xing]

Is there anything more awesome than Anchorman references?
I think not !!
Why?
Cause I killed a man with a trident !

****, wenshu beat me to it!

[sanjuro_ronin]

You should find yourself a safehouse or a relative close by. Lay low for a while, because you're probably wanted for murder.

I love lamp.

[MightyB]

Oh I'm sorry Sanjuru. I think I ate your chocolate squirrel.

[wenshu]

I love lamp.

Ah yes, back when Steve Carell was actually funny.

[wenshu]

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_llf8qh9HVN1qi95b6o1_500.gif

[Fa Xing]

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_llf8qh9HVN1qi95b6o1_500.gif

Are you trying to say that there is a party in your pants and I am invited?

[Hardwork108]

I think you are SELECTIVELY reading what you want t because he also said:

I quoted you exactly what Sifu Mike Patterson wrote. His words not mine.

What you have quoted from him refers more to cross testing than to cross training aspects such as ground fighting that already exist in his core style (and that of other TCMA stylists during his time in Taiwan).

ONE MORE TIME:


Originally Posted by Mike Patterson
In Taiwan, at least in my day, all styles trained to fight. Very few exceptions to this. As such, all practioners understood that the ground was just another range/venue/transition of combative potential. So we all did it.. I never met anyone of any stylistic persuasion there that did not practice ground technique. Although we all had our differences in terms of emphasis.

It is only in the USA that I have seen such seemingly insurmountable differences of opinion over what qualifies as this or that or what defines this or that. Silly if you ask me. I have already stated that there are only so many things that can be done with a hand or foot. The rest is stylistic persuasion via tactical overlay or perspective of efficiency of combat

And again! :


So, I guess to elaborate... all old styles are complete. They need no outside help. It's all been done before. The bickering comes from mistaken perspectives, missing information or just plain obstinance in most cases I reckon.

It is all there in black and white. "ALL OLD STYLES ARE COMPLETE"! "THEY NEED NO OUTSIDE HELP"!

"ALL BICKERING COMES FROM........MISSING INFORMATION (which is what I have been saying in one way or the other, for years, and have been seen as "insulting" people, just because of that!:confused:

"MISSING INFORMATION", merely means that people have not been exposed to the real deal training, depite training in "TCMAs" for decades.

In my humble opinion, people should put aside their egos and try and dig deeper into the TCMAs, as there are always "new" material to explore.:)

[David Jamieson]

So, if you like what he has to say, how is it that you don't like mma or the idea of Kung Fu in that schema? that's exactly what mma is about and Kung Fu is not about that.

Have you in your kung fu experience been in a nhb contest? Do you know anyone who has?

[sanjuro_ronin]

What you have quoted from him refers more to cross testing than to cross training aspects such as ground fighting that already exist in his core style (and that of other TCMA stylists during his time in Taiwan).

This isn't a chicken or the egg argument.
The reason his system is, in his view, complete is BECAUSE it was cross-tested and cross-trained with other systems and the gaps were filled in.
Of course the degree of completeness depends on the format of the competition.
Another student of his system, Tim Cartmel, realized that MORE specialization in ground grappling was needed for students to compete in MMA and grappling tournaments and, taking a lesson from his parent systems ( the same as Shifu Pattersons) he brought in people from BJJ and add the specialised grappling art to his curriculm.
Just as Shify Patterson's teachers has done before them.

[sanjuro_ronin]

It is all there in black and white. "ALL OLD STYLES ARE COMPLETE"! "THEY NEED NO OUTSIDE HELP"!

On this I will disagree with Shifu Patterson.
Having seen his students ( from his videos) and having seen what it takes to be competitive in current MMA, it seems to me that they NEED to get some "outside help".
In the area of Ground grappling.

[David Jamieson]

On this I will disagree with Shifu Patterson.
Having seen his students ( from his videos) and having seen what it takes to be competitive in current MMA, it seems to me that they NEED to get some "outside help".
In the area of Ground grappling.

Yes, I agree as well. i don't believe old arts are complete fighting systems at all, but then, I don't believe grappling + striking = complete.

Just robust.

No martial art is "complete" without weapons. And when I say weapons, I mean WEAPONS!

[Fa Xing]

Yes, I agree as well. i don't believe old arts are complete fighting systems at all, but then, I don't believe grappling + striking = complete.

Just robust.

Agree with the above, but would add to that 'principles.' You can know the "how" (ie techniques) but if you don't the why (ie principles) then it will be a lot harder to be successful when faced with a situation.

[sanjuro_ronin]

As we know, all those guys and their systems going into the UFC ( and even before that in Vale Tudo matches around the world) THOUGHT they were "complete" and they had a "ground game" and that they could fight "on the ground" and the vast majority were all wrong ( the only exceptions were guys that actually trained the ground grappling like judo and wrestling).

It's not about how complete we THINK our system is, it is about how complete it is PROVEN to be.

[Mike Patterson]

On this I will disagree with Shifu Patterson.
Having seen his students ( from his videos) and having seen what it takes to be competitive in current MMA, it seems to me that they NEED to get some "outside help".
In the area of Ground grappling.

All due respect.. your ascertainment is made from a flawed perspective in two ways;

1) You cannot compare amateur students to professional fighters (assuming that's what you meant) in any venue, even the same one, other than in terms of tactics and principles learned/utilized within said venue.

2) Kuoshu rule structures have never allowed any sort of continued ground fighting. The closest the rule set came was way back in my day when we were allowed to strike once as a finishing move as the opponent hit the ground.

To have first hand knowledge of what we do on the ground, I guess you'd have to come visit. As I am certainly now too old to compete any more. ;)

Also, both you and HW108 seem to be ignoring something else I said. So I'll restate it here: Although we CAN go to the ground and stay, it is not our way. Our way is to punish and get back up. This is something that has been stated by others as well.

Seems to me that there is a bit of confusion (or maybe it's just me) over the terms "ground grappling" and "ground fighting". TCMA can do the latter. It is not our way to engage in the former.

A "submission" in current sport framework translates usually to a damaged/broken limb or neck in old style framework.

Our way is to stay mobile and not engage longer than necessary on the ground.

But hey, I'm not here to convince anyone. In person is better. :)

[Drake]

It going to the ground was an actual choice, no TCMA would do it. But it's not. Ergo, you have to learn to roll on the ground like a "dog". That or get your face smashed in... choice is yours.

[Ray Pina]

It's not about how complete we THINK our system is, it is about how complete it is PROVEN to be.

That says it all right there.

And then a layer even deeper, how complete is the individual? We all know to what level we have been tested, tested ourselves in life.

[Hardwork108]

So, if you like what he has to say, how is it that you don't like mma or the idea of Kung Fu in that schema? that's exactly what mma is about and Kung Fu is not about that.
I am not sure what you trying to say here. Let me just make it clear. MMA is fine for those who like MMA. Tae Kwon Do is fine for those who like Tae Kwon Do. My issue is with people make blanket statements about the TCMAs, while not having had genuine instruction in them for any valid amount of time.

How do I know that they are "lacking" in the TCMA department? I know from statements such as, "TCMAs do not address the ground scenario"; "Forms training is useless or fantasy"; "The Internals don't exist"; "Internals are the same as Externals"; and a dozen other "lost in the woods" comments from people who claim TCMA EXPERIENCE (together with of course, BJJ, Muay Thai, wrestling, western boxing, etc. etc.)!


Have you in your kung fu experience been in a nhb contest? Do you know anyone who has?
Do street fights count as NHb? LOL!

[Mike Patterson]

It going to the ground was an actual choice, no TCMA would do it. But it's not. Ergo, you have to learn to roll on the ground like a "dog". That or get your face smashed in... choice is yours.

I absolutely agree with this.. you have to be willing to go there. Where you get into the most trouble is trying to "stop" this from happening.

Years ago, Dave Cater of IKF when interviewing me, called me on a statement I made about the bridge. I said if the opponent wants to bridge, why should I try to stop him? He stopped the interview and asked me if I meant to say that. When I said yes I did, he asked why would I want to allow an opponent to bridge on me? I said because now he has come out of his "house" and has momentum. This gives me opportunity. Why would I want to stop him and allow him to reset himself?

The same thing can be applied to the willingness to go to the ground. Once there, it is up to stylistic perspectives what you do, don't do, can and can't do. All positions are subject to counter. All dominance is subjective until conclusion. This is a simple truth. Nothing is a "be all and end all". If it were, that's all any of us would do.

[Mike Patterson]

That says it all right there.

And then a layer even deeper, how complete is the individual? We all know to what level we have been tested, tested ourselves in life.

Actually, Ray. I agree with you. (who knew right?:)) But I agree more with your amendment. At the end of the day, it is not the style, but the man. Those who train broadly and deeply, those who ingrain their methods into themselves. It is those people who win. The "style" is only a means to an end and not the end unto itself.

[Mike Patterson]

Do street fights count as NHb? LOL!

Well, I have a scar on my frontal skull that runs down from just under my hair part into the top of my forehead from an impact delivered by a makeshift club in the form of a pipe with a bit of concrete slag on the end of it by my third adversary in that fight that says.. ummm.... yeah.... I think street fights are about as NHB as one can get. ;)

[Drake]

I absolutely agree with this.. you have to be willing to go there. Where you get into the most trouble is trying to "stop" this from happening.

Years ago, Dave Cater of IKF when interviewing me, called me on a statement I made about the bridge. I said if the opponent wants to bridge, why should I try to stop him? He stopped the interview and asked me if I meant to say that. When I said yes I did, he asked why would I want to allow an opponent to bridge on me? I said because now he has come out of his "house" and has momentum. This gives me opportunity. Why would I want to stop him and allow him to reset himself?

The same thing can be applied to the willingness to go to the ground. Once there, it is up to stylistic perspectives what you do, don't do, can and can't do. All positions are subject to counter. All dominance is subjective until conclusion. This is a simple truth. Nothing is a "be all and end all". If it were, that's all any of us would do.

I think this was brought up earlier, but if you come from a place where everyone just kicks and punches, then you will do the same, and try your best to be better than those around you at it. As nobody is on the ground wrestling about, there really wasn't much need to be good at that. You'd spend the time perfecting your other aspects instead. Because if you are wasting your time working on a fighting method that nobody uses, your opponents/friends/competitors are all busy getting better at the methods they DO use.

It's not BAD that TCMA doesn't have groundfighting, because it's simply an indicator of the culture and the time. It's BAD if you think it'll get you through a fight with some good ol' boys who have a fondness for "rasslin'".

[Mike Patterson]

I think this was brought up earlier, but if you come from a place where everyone just kicks and punches, then you will do the same, and try your best to be better than those around you at it. As nobody is on the ground wrestling about, there really wasn't much need to be good at that. You'd spend the time perfecting your other aspects instead. Because if you are wasting your time working on a fighting method that nobody uses, your opponents/friends/competitors are all busy getting better at the methods they DO use.

It's not BAD that TCMA doesn't have groundfighting, because it's simply an indicator of the culture and the time. It's BAD if you think it'll get you through a fight with some good ol' boys who have a fondness for "rasslin'".

Right. See... I personally don't come from a place where everyone was just punching and kicking. I come from a place where people did anything and everything in a street fight, including pull a blade, a stick or a chain. So my perspectives are perhaps a bit different than some. :)

But to each his or her own, I reckon.

[Drake]

Right. See... I personally don't come from a place where everyone was just punching and kicking. I come from a place where people did anything and everything in a street fight, including pull a blade, a stick or a chain. So my perspectives are perhaps a bit different than some. :)

But to each his or her own, I reckon.

I have never in my life seen someone use a chain in a fight. Knives, even guns... but never a chain. I know it happens, but I've never seen it.

[Mike Patterson]

I have never in my life seen someone use a chain in a fight. Knives, even guns... but never a chain. I know it happens, but I've never seen it.

Product of the era and location I suppose, Drake. In my early days in Taiwan, the street gangs favored two weapons because of easy concealment and range I reckon. One was a short stick with a straight razor imbedded and secured into one end, often fashioned into a half hook. It could be kept up the sleeve of the jacket. The second, a length of chain which could be put around the waist and under the jacket. Sometimes an actual chinese whipchain. Sometimes just a length of heavy chain.

A friend of mine was beaten to death with such weapons in front of the President Hotel in the mid 70's right after Carter had stated he was going to oust Taiwan in favor of Mainland China in some over the top political move. The U.S. flag was burned in protest and U.S. Citizens (or even those just looking like such) became targets for awhile. My friend was actually a British foreign national.

Ah, the good old days. :rolleyes:

[Shaolindynasty]

I have never in my life seen someone use a chain in a fight.


I have but he took it out wrapped it around his hand and punched the other guy

[Hardwork108]

Well, I have a scar on my frontal skull that runs down from just under my hair part into the top of my forehead from an impact delivered by a makeshift club in the form of a pipe with a bit of concrete slag on the end of it by my third adversary in that fight that says.. ummm.... yeah.... I think street fights are about as NHB as one can get. ;)

Agreed! :)

[Hardwork108]

.

It's not BAD that TCMA doesn't have groundfighting, because it's simply an indicator of the culture and the time. It's BAD if you think it'll get you through a fight with some good ol' boys who have a fondness for "rasslin'".

....But the fact is that TCMA does have ground fighting. How many times do you guys need the facts repeated?:confused::mad:

[YouKnowWho]

I have never in my life seen someone use a chain in a fight. Knives, even guns... but never a chain. I know it happens, but I've never seen it.
This is one of my favor weapon. I can pull it out quickly if needed. I truly don't know whether it's leagal or not to have it on my wasit in US.

http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/2649/beltn.jpg

The chain was quite popular in Taiwan when I was in elementary school (bicycle chain was easy to get). There was one street fight that I saw, one side was the local tricycle ridders (similiar to our taxi drivers today) and the other side was the local gang. My elder cousin was in it. The tricycle ridders was using sticks and the local gangs all use chains and canvas belts with metail belt buckles.

[Dragonzbane76]

It's not BAD that TCMA doesn't have groundfighting, because it's simply an indicator of the culture and the time. It's BAD if you think it'll get you through a fight with some good ol' boys who have a fondness for "rasslin'".

I agree i dont think its a bad thing. Many "styles" dont have it. Just presents a chance to gain that knowledge someplace else. Like i said learning ground work just helps u with all round self def. Being able to get off the ground and escape is key in some situations. Learning ground work greatly improves this.

[sanjuro_ronin]

All due respect.. your ascertainment is made from a flawed perspective in two ways;

1) You cannot compare amateur students to professional fighters (assuming that's what you meant) in any venue, even the same one, other than in terms of tactics and principles learned/utilized within said venue.

2) Kuoshu rule structures have never allowed any sort of continued ground fighting. The closest the rule set came was way back in my day when we were allowed to strike once as a finishing move as the opponent hit the ground.

To have first hand knowledge of what we do on the ground, I guess you'd have to come visit. As I am certainly now too old to compete any more. ;)

Also, both you and HW108 seem to be ignoring something else I said. So I'll restate it here: Although we CAN go to the ground and stay, it is not our way. Our way is to punish and get back up. This is something that has been stated by others as well.

Seems to me that there is a bit of confusion (or maybe it's just me) over the terms "ground grappling" and "ground fighting". TCMA can do the latter. It is not our way to engage in the former.

A "submission" in current sport framework translates usually to a damaged/broken limb or neck in old style framework.

Our way is to stay mobile and not engage longer than necessary on the ground.

But hey, I'm not here to convince anyone. In person is better. :)

I was looking at it SOLELY form the perspective of ground grappling and ground work and yes, indeed comparing it to MMA BUT I was NOT comparing it to professional MMA but the typical amateur level that is far more valid under the circumstances.
And yes, you are correct that there seems to be a confusin between ground grappling and ground fighting and what I and others have been making VERY clear is that TCMA do NOT have specialised ground grappling at the level of BJJ or MMA.
And thank you for the invitation Sifu, I would be very honoured to visit you and see for myself.

[Ray Pina]

....But the fact is that TCMA does have ground fighting. How many times do you guys need the facts repeated?:confused::mad:

There's the ground fighting you think you have, and then there's the ability to compete with wrestlers, BJJers, Judo, etc. in open competition.

BJJ has straight self defense moves. Classics.... we all have to learn them to get rank. I never use them in sparring or fighting because there are much better options available to me.

Your martial arts should be like a custom entertainment system. You go out and buy the best components. The maker of the best TV will not be the maker of the best gold wires, the maker of the best DVD, the maker of the best game system, the maker of the best speakers.

If TCMA had legit ground game they wold have respectable, not have to win a majority, just respectable showings in open grappling tournaments. Essentially, they're not even presented. Same for MMA....... what does that tell you?

[Hardwork108]

There's the ground fighting you think you have, and then there's the ability to compete with wrestlers, BJJers, Judo, etc. in open competition.
The issue I was discussing was the fact that the TCMAs addressed the ground scenario, and they DO! The do so both, as regards prevention and survival, once on the ground.

How well they would do on the ground will depend more or less on the same factors as determine how well they would do standing up, and that is how hard and realisitically they train their methodologies.


Your martial arts should be like a custom entertainment system. You go out and buy the best components. The maker of the best TV will not be the maker of the best gold wires, the maker of the best DVD, the maker of the best game system, the maker of the best speakers.
I believe that as far as at least some of the old/major TCMA styles are concerned, the best components have already been put together for us. The question is wether most of those who are learning these methodologies, are doing so as intended by the masters who first combined all the necessary components as regards a given Kung fu style?

The answer to that question seems unfortunately to be a big NO, as far as most practitioners are concerned, not least most who post in this forum.


If TCMA had legit ground game they wold have respectable, not have to win a majority, just respectable showings in open grappling tournaments. Essentially, they're not even presented. Same for MMA....... what does that tell you?
That tells me the same thing that it tells me as far as TCMA stand up is concerned, which is also relatively invisible in the sports tournament scenario.

The important point is that by training hard in an authentic kung fu kwoon that teaches a given style as it was meant to be taught - covering ALL of its fighting ranges, one can be a functional fighter. That is all that matters. If the practitioner want to take things further then he should adapt his training to the sports arena, and that is fine too.:)

[sanjuro_ronin]

Hey HW8, you never answered my question on one of the other threads, don't know if you saw it...
I asked how does your system of WC deal with:
Single leg takedown?
Defending the arm bar?
Defending the triangle? and if I can add one more:
Getting out from under the mount?

[Hardwork108]

Hey HW8, you never answered my question on one of the other threads, don't know if you saw it...
I asked how does your system of WC deal with:
Single leg takedown?
Defending the arm bar?
Defending the triangle? and if I can add one more:
Getting out from under the mount?

I answered your question but for someone else, because I missed it the first time, and the someone else reminded me of it, but I can't find it now!:eek::confused:

Anyway, to cut a short story shorter, I will answer your question as soon as I reach the ground fighting level of the syllabus. As you may know, even though I have other kung fu experience, I only train with my WC sifu on more or less, regular visits to Rio, and most of that is to maintain skills, so new material is not covered that much.

I should hopefully be living in Brasil once again, within the next 2 years, so I will have more info in that department.;)

[Mike Patterson]

I was looking at it SOLELY form the perspective of ground grappling and ground work and yes, indeed comparing it to MMA BUT I was NOT comparing it to professional MMA but the typical amateur level that is far more valid under the circumstances.
And yes, you are correct that there seems to be a confusin between ground grappling and ground fighting and what I and others have been making VERY clear is that TCMA do NOT have specialised ground grappling at the level of BJJ or MMA.
And thank you for the invitation Sifu, I would be very honoured to visit you and see for myself.

I took issue with your original statement:


On this I will disagree with Shifu Patterson.
Having seen his students ( from his videos) and having seen what it takes to be competitive in current MMA, it seems to me that they NEED to get some "outside help".
In the area of Ground grappling.

Since the kuoshu rule set does not permit ground grappling, I don't see how you can make a judgement on what we may or may not be able to do "in the area of ground grappling".

If you wish to make a comparison between amateur MMA sans ground aspects, e.g. striking and throwing methodologies, then I think that can be discussed perhaps given the evidence you are familiar with. But the ground grappling and/or fighting aspects would have to be left out as you have seen nothing of that from us to this point, yes?

[sanjuro_ronin]

I took issue with your original statement:



Since the kuoshu rule set does not permit ground grappling, I don't see how you can make a judgement on what we may or may not be able to do "in the area of ground grappling".

If you wish to make a comparison between amateur MMA sans ground aspects, e.g. striking and throwing methodologies, then I think that can be discussed perhaps given the evidence you are familiar with. But the ground grappling and/or fighting aspects would have to be left out as you have seen nothing of that from us to this point, yes?

Fair enough.
No, there was no ground fighting on those clips, it seems that one of the links that I clicked off your original video, that showed ground work was NOT one of yours so I apologise for the confusion there.
But since we are on the subject I am wonder in what way would your fighters fight differently IF ground fighting was permitted?
Have they ever fought when ground fighting was permitted?

[Ray Pina]

The important point is that by training hard in an authentic kung fu kwoon that teaches a given style as it was meant to be taught - covering ALL of its fighting ranges, one can be a functional fighter.
That can only be proven in open competition. Functional is relative. Competition puts how relative in perspective.



If the practitioner want to take things further then he should adapt his training to the sports arena, and that is fine too.:)

The best golfers, footballers, baseballers, runners, walkers, ping-pong players, surfers, skiiers..... they compete at the professional level.

There are 0 straight TCMA pro MMAers.

[Ray Pina]

I don't mind someone bridging me. I know where there hand is.... and its so kind of them to bridge me instead of beat my flesh.

[David Jamieson]

That can only be proven in open competition. Functional is relative. Competition puts how relative in perspective.




The best golfers, footballers, baseballers, runners, walkers, ping-pong players, surfers, skiiers..... they compete at the professional level.

There are 0 straight TCMA pro MMAers.

"mma" isn't a style. By that logic there is no one competing in mma that isn't a cross trained individual who looks at what is required by the rule set (pretty much established as UFC ruleset)

there are plenty of guys with TCMA in MMA.

[Mike Patterson]

Fair enough.
No, there was no ground fighting on those clips, it seems that one of the links that I clicked off your original video, that showed ground work was NOT one of yours so I apologise for the confusion there.
But since we are on the subject I am wonder in what way would your fighters fight differently IF ground fighting was permitted?
Have they ever fought when ground fighting was permitted?

No harm done. Thank you for owning up to the error. :)

As to the second and third question issues:

Funny and long story which I'll try to abbreviate to answer.

Not in competition, no. I re-involved myself in full contact coaching (after taking a hiatus upon my teacher's passing) for competition in the early 90's simply because I got very tired of hearing people say that internal martial arts were not useful for fighting.

We have always fought full contact in my school, with only one rule; If you can't use a technique with reasonable precision and control, wait until you can do so to use that technique. So anything went, including ground fighting.

So I looked around at what venues had a solid operating structure and came up with only three. There was kuoshou (my personal old venue), but the rules had changed substantively so initially I kept looking. But found only the sanshou federation as it was then and they were using too much padding for my tastes. I also found the kyokushin structure. But they weren't allowing hand strikes to the face. Again, not to my tastes. So it was back to Kuoshu.

The UFC, as you may remember, was just getting started and honestly had I been able to predict how popular it would become, I likely would have made the choice to take my teams that route. But, alas, I did not have that particular crystal ball. :(

So initally, I pulled my first team right out of my full contact classes. They did well (one gold and four silver in internationals that year) but we lost a few finals due to "fouling" by hooking the head and hitting or neck cranking and also hitting after taking down the opponent. Which were all now illegal.

I consider myself a decent coach and always there for my fighters, so we adapted training of the teams to the venue, shifting the emphasis to that which we were most likely to deal with. The Belgians loved to shoot and other foreign teams loved to "bullrush" so from that point forward, the "teams" focused more on counter methods to those types of attempts at grappling.

I've always believed in training people completely and then having them adapt their technique to the venue, whether that be the platform or the street. But I will admit that the goal of building a winning team does require priortizing their training emphasis. And I did just that.

This is already longer than I intended and I have another session, so will end here for now with one last comment. We would transition to the ground as well when necessary. How well we would have done? I don't know. But we do work the tools.

[RWilson]

A session of what? What exactly did you teach?

[Hardwork108]

That can only be proven in open competition. Functional is relative. Competition puts how relative in perspective.
So do street fights and challenge matches. And again, competition has its place, but in my humble opinion, one cannot judge the effectiveness of a fighting style or a even a given fighter, solely by competition performance.





The best golfers, footballers, baseballers, runners, walkers, ping-pong players, surfers, skiiers..... they compete at the professional level.
An important point there is that the rules don't change when you take your football or tennis to the competition arena, but when it comes to fighting/self defense training the rules in a given competition will change.


There are 0 straight TCMA pro MMAers.

I can't speak for others, but personally speaking, participation in sports competitions do not appeal to me, and I would not enter them even if I was 100% sure that I could beat my MMA opponents with one hand tied behind my back. I do not see any point in it personally, but I respect the wish of others to participate and I even enjoy watching such matches.

The point is that I am just a student, but I know sifus who are good fighters - fit and strong. Train hours every day of their lives, but they still not see any relevance in participating in sports competitions, different strokes, I say....

[Northwind]

I can't speak for others, but personally speaking, participation in sports competitions do not appeal to me, and I would not enter them even if I was 100% sure that I could beat my MMA opponents with one hand tied behind my back. I do not see any point in it personally, but I respect the wish of others to participate and I even enjoy watching such matches.


Badaa and Bing.
These ring true to my sentiments as well.

[Robinhood]

So do street fights and challenge matches. And again, competition has its place, but in my humble opinion, one cannot judge the effectiveness of a fighting style or a even a given fighter, solely by competition performance.





An important point there is that the rules don't change when you take your football or tennis to the competition arena, but when it comes to fighting/self defense training the rules in a given competition will change.



I can't speak for others, but personally speaking, participation in sports competitions do not appeal to me, and I would not enter them even if I was 100% sure that I could beat my MMA opponents with one hand tied behind my back. I do not see any point in it personally, but I respect the wish of others to participate and I even enjoy watching such matches.

The point is that I am just a student, but I know sifus who are good fighters - fit and strong. Train hours every day of their lives, but they still not see any relevance in participating in sports competitions, different strokes, I say....

I second that!

Competition only exploits the rules as they are laid out, and don't have much to do with a no rule event. But if the other guy is using the same rules it would then help. But if you don't have those guidelines in a real event, you could be in trouble.

Sports are competition and entertainment combined, and the rules are built off of those conditions

[Scott R. Brown]

Sports are competition and entertainment combined, and the rules are built off of those conditions

And for the the purpose of staying healthy enough to continue to compete for multiple years, which streetfights don't always afford.

[David Jamieson]

And for the the purpose of staying healthy enough to continue to compete for multiple years, which streetfights don't always afford.

well, maybe a decade, barring serious injury.
Truth of it is that 99% of everyone into it is not gonna really make
it as a sport fighter of any merit. That's in any venue.

Fighting isn't and never has been a ways or means to stay healthy.
It has always been a ways or means to do damage to another human body.

sport fighting is safer. I wouldn't say it's healthy. Training is healthy I suppose, but fighting regularly? pretty much a no-brainer that regular involvement in physical conflict is not healthy.

Sh1T i know people who have picked up long term injuries at a seminar!
That is not the way to go about things.

[sanjuro_ronin]

No harm done. Thank you for owning up to the error. :)

As to the second and third question issues:

Funny and long story which I'll try to abbreviate to answer.

Not in competition, no. I re-involved myself in full contact coaching (after taking a hiatus upon my teacher's passing) for competition in the early 90's simply because I got very tired of hearing people say that internal martial arts were not useful for fighting.

We have always fought full contact in my school, with only one rule; If you can't use a technique with reasonable precision and control, wait until you can do so to use that technique. So anything went, including ground fighting.

So I looked around at what venues had a solid operating structure and came up with only three. There was kuoshou (my personal old venue), but the rules had changed substantively so initially I kept looking. But found only the sanshou federation as it was then and they were using too much padding for my tastes. I also found the kyokushin structure. But they weren't allowing hand strikes to the face. Again, not to my tastes. So it was back to Kuoshu.

The UFC, as you may remember, was just getting started and honestly had I been able to predict how popular it would become, I likely would have made the choice to take my teams that route. But, alas, I did not have that particular crystal ball. :(

So initally, I pulled my first team right out of my full contact classes. They did well (one gold and four silver in internationals that year) but we lost a few finals due to "fouling" by hooking the head and hitting or neck cranking and also hitting after taking down the opponent. Which were all now illegal.

I consider myself a decent coach and always there for my fighters, so we adapted training of the teams to the venue, shifting the emphasis to that which we were most likely to deal with. The Belgians loved to shoot and other foreign teams loved to "bullrush" so from that point forward, the "teams" focused more on counter methods to those types of attempts at grappling.

I've always believed in training people completely and then having them adapt their technique to the venue, whether that be the platform or the street. But I will admit that the goal of building a winning team does require priortizing their training emphasis. And I did just that.

This is already longer than I intended and I have another session, so will end here for now with one last comment. We would transition to the ground as well when necessary. How well we would have done? I don't know. But we do work the tools.

Thank you Sifu :)
I appreciate your willingness to share your views and opinions.
Have you contemplated competing in MMA at this point?

[sanjuro_ronin]

RE: Competitions.

People that have competed have a very different view then those that haven't so I will say this as not only someone that has competed but also someone that has quite a number of years dealing with "real world" scenarios:
You will NOT find anyone on "the street" that will push you and test your MA skills as much as you will find in the ring.
Period.
In terms of skill testing and skill development, full contact MA competitions are indespensible for a fighter or anyone that views their MA as a fighting MA.
That said, you will NOT develop the awareness need for "street survival" in the ring but that is NOT what competition was designed for anyway.
The only way to develop that street awareness is by, well, exposing yourself to the dangers of "the street" and I don't see many of those "reality fighters" doing that either.

[Frost]

Lord 6 pages and we are back on the same topic, (and someone does really have a selective memory) no one has I think ever said TCMA doesn’t address the ground in some capacity, what has been said is that it wasn’t a priority and as such doesn’t address the ground in a way that can be compared to BJJ, western wrestling or submission grappling. And really cant compare to ground grappling (or even ground fighting as it is today), ie training to get up against another none ground trained fighter who really doesn’t want to be there is one thing, training to stand up against a college level wrestler or blue belt in BJJ quite another and some sort of cross training is needed to fill the gaps, if it’s a concern to you that is.

So far we seem to have two people posting who feel TCMA does address this aspect of ground fighting, ie is comprehensive enough to deal with the modern ground fighters, one of those cant answer simple questions like how would you defend an arm bar or escape mount because he hasn’t actually trained the ground yet…but he know it there and is comprehensive ….but cant post one clip from his lineage showing it in action (which does raise serious questions about credibility)

The other has trained fighters to compete very successfully in stand up comps but I don’t think has entered anyone in MMA, or has any students in comps where the ground is covered so again no proof there although the fact he has produced guys that have fought well obviously adds a lot of weight to what he says.

On the other side we have people who have trained in TCMA for a long time, all over the world saying its not covered and cross training is needed, we also have books written by the likes of tim cartmell and bruce franzis saying the same thing and advocating cross training in grappling arts to learn the ground game

Until someone actually steps up and enters a ground comp or a comp that includes ground work in it and does well using ground grappling from a TCMA style I suggest we shelve these arguments because no one is going to change there mind anytime soon

[sanjuro_ronin]

Lord 6 pages and we are back on the same topic, (and someone does really have a selective memory) no one has I think ever said TCMA doesn’t address the ground in some capacity, what has been said is that it wasn’t a priority and as such doesn’t address the ground in a way that can be compared to BJJ, western wrestling or submission grappling. And really cant compare to ground grappling (or even ground fighting as it is today), ie training to get up against another none ground trained fighter who really doesn’t want to be there is one thing, training to stand up against a college level wrestler or blue belt in BJJ quite another and some sort of cross training is needed to fill the gaps, if it’s a concern to you that is.

So far we seem to have two people posting who feel TCMA does address this aspect of ground fighting, ie is comprehensive enough to deal with the modern ground fighters, one of those cant answer simple questions like how would you defend an arm bar or escape mount because he hasn’t actually trained the ground yet…but he know it there and is comprehensive ….but cant post one clip from his lineage showing it in action (which does raise serious questions about credibility)

The other has trained fighters to compete very successfully in stand up comps but I don’t think has entered anyone in MMA, or has any students in comps where the ground is covered so again no proof there although the fact he has produced guys that have fought well obviously adds a lot of weight to what he says.

On the other side we have people who have trained in TCMA for a long time, all over the world saying its not covered and cross training is needed, we also have books written by the likes of tim cartmell and bruce franzis saying the same thing and advocating cross training in grappling arts to learn the ground game

Until someone actually steps up and enters a ground comp or a comp that includes ground work in it and does well using ground grappling from a TCMA style I suggest we shelve these arguments because no one is going to change there mind anytime soon

Tim came from Sifu Patterson's system and I think that the reason Tim added BJJ is quite simply because the system did NOT address ground grappling and ground fighting to the extent that Tim and his fighters NEEDED it to.
And that is another crucial element of open competition:
You are only as good as those you compete against and the better quaility of competion, the better you get.
Winning is irrelevant, learning and developing is everything.

[Iron_Eagle_76]

well, maybe a decade, barring serious injury.
Truth of it is that 99% of everyone into it is not gonna really make
it as a sport fighter of any merit. That's in any venue.

Fighting isn't and never has been a ways or means to stay healthy.
It has always been a ways or means to do damage to another human body.

sport fighting is safer. I wouldn't say it's healthy. Training is healthy I suppose, but fighting regularly? pretty much a no-brainer that regular involvement in physical conflict is not healthy.

Sh1T i know people who have picked up long term injuries at a seminar!
That is not the way to go about things.

My old boxing coach told me one time that of all the people that came to his gym to train, only about 10 percent ever got into the ring and fought in an actual match. So even in combat sports such as boxing, MMA, Muay Thai, ect. I would venture to say that number is accurate. Competing in striking arts is not a healthy activity and while it certainly makes you a better fighter, there is much more risk to your health than merely training. Translate that over to Kung Fu and it would be similiar for San Shou.

That being said, grappling competitions tend to attract more people because the long term effects are generally not as detrimental. Kung Fu schools who teach and have a Shuai Jiao program could have competitors competing in it over San Shou. BJJ and Judo have people competing well into the upper ages because as I said before the long term potential for damage is not there like in striking competitions.

Masters division boxing, however, is quickly becoming a popular sport among the upper ages.

[Hardwork108]

Tim came from Sifu Patterson's system and I think that the reason Tim added BJJ is quite simply because the system did NOT address ground grappling and ground fighting to the extent that Tim and his fighters NEEDED it to.
I cannot speak for Tim, but there are many out there that cross train their core kung fu style with Muay Thai, because somehow they think that their kung fu system lacks certain striking arsenal. A notion which -depending on the core TCMA style - is ludicrous. Again, this kind of cross training attitude comes from flawed understanding of one's TCMA style because:

A. The person trained it incompletely in mediocre school (like most who train the TCMAs in the West).

B. The practitioner did not have the attention span to deepen his knowledge.



And that is another crucial element of open competition:


You are only as good as those you compete against and the better quaility of competion, the better you get.
True, but all of that within a given rules setting.

Take Mike Tyson and his loses in the ring. How many here would bet against Mike Tyson fighting the same opponents in street fights?



Winning is irrelevant, learning and developing is everything.

I agree!

[Frost]

Tim came from Sifu Patterson's system and I think that the reason Tim added BJJ is quite simply because the system did NOT address ground grappling and ground fighting to the extent that Tim and his fighters NEEDED it to.
And that is another crucial element of open competition:
You are only as good as those you compete against and the better quaility of competion, the better you get.
Winning is irrelevant, learning and developing is everything.

Yep I am aware of that, I simply don’t want to drag them into an arguemnet about what their teachers actually taught, it is as you say simpler to say Tim Cartmell see’s the need for his guys to cross train if they are competing in a venue where ground fighting is allowed, Mr Patterson’s guys might feel the need to do the same, they might not it would be nice to see them in a venue that allowed this, but I understand if he has had enough of training fighters,

Oh and i agree with everything you say !

[wenshu]

I cannot speak for Tim, but there are many out there that cross train their core kung fu style with Muay Thai, because somehow they think that their kung fu system lacks certain striking arsenal. A notion which -depending on the core TCMA style - is ludicrous. Again, this kind of cross training attitude comes from flawed understanding of one's TCMA style because:

A. The person trained it incompletely in mediocre school (like most who train the TCMAs in the West).

B. The practitioner did not have the attention span to deepen his knowledge.


Many people just happen to enjoy muay thai (or boxing, judo, JJ) and happily train it along side gong fu. I guess they should have checked with you first to make sure it was ok.

[David Jamieson]

Many people just happen to enjoy muay thai (or boxing, judo, JJ) and happily train it along side gong fu. I guess they should have checked with you first to make sure it was ok.

Got a guy coming and training with me and my training partner right now who does that. He's proficient in MT and likes to learn hard qigongs and more esoteric kung fu stuff.

I also know a group of guys that are all over the map in their training from one to the next, all proficient and all ready to suck up whatever they can from someone else art.

[Hardwork108]

Many people just happen to enjoy muay thai (or boxing, judo, JJ) and happily train it along side gong fu.

They can train whatever else they "enjoy", but my point is that they should not justify this by what they cluelessly see as "weaknesses" in the TCMAs (in some cases ALL of the arts :eek:!), when they have never been exposed to authentic kung fu methodologies.



I guess they should have checked with you first to make sure it was ok.
That would be even better. :D

[maxattck]

when they have never been exposed to authentic kung fu methodologies.


You keep repeating the same phase. My question to you is, how do you know they have not been "exposed to authentic kung fu methodologies". For all you know they have and you have not.

What exactly do you mean by "authentic kung fu training" can you give me examples of what this entails.

To me examples of this would be strength(squats deaplifts ect), flexibility, and cardo training to build your body foundation to be a fighter. Drills to develop striking, combinations, the ability to take a hit and keep fighting(only developed though hard sparing). Then lastly forms.

Just curious cause you use that phase alot, but it doesn't acually say anything, unless you define it.

[TenTigers]

@HW108:
I certainly have "been exposed to" traditional TCMA methodologies.
I incorporate Muay Thai roundhouse into my training/teaching for several reasons;

Due to its popularity (based on its effectiveness) you will be facing more and more people who know this technique. If you don't understand the mechanics, and strategies of the technique, you will not be able to effectively counter/defend against it. It is out of your experience.

Although we have the roundhouse kick in our arsenal, we have not developed it nearly to the extent as the Thais. "Tools is Tools," I always say, and this is tool development.

BTW- I also practice the roundhouse TKD method-snapping, lead leg, rear leg, low trajectory, closed hip, open hip, descending, spinning, jumping, tornado, ball of foot, shin, instep, knife-edge.

Do you know/practice any of these? If not, no matter how much TCMA methodologies in your own style you train, if you are not well-versed in these techniques, I WILL kick you, and you won't even see it coming.

This is the same old, tired argument, as with the shoot. If you don't KNOW the technique, you can't defend against it. Too many people say,"Oh, I would just do this.." never realizing that nobody ever simply comes in for a takedown, they set it up, enter with strikes, do it off of your technique,or do it from the clinch. When done properly, it is fast and explosive and overwhelming.

[Lucas]

My first and longest CMA teacher was raised/trained in a temple in Cambodia after being an orphaned refugee at the age of five. Solid temple training, was required to test in muay Thai fights. His grand master had him cross train in judo. He got serious CMA training in old world eastern fashion. That's a nice way of saying you get punished and beaten for mistakes by your teachers. Yet even still his grand master, the man he still pays tribute to to this day thought ot wise to cross train him. That's the shaolin way. He learned the shaolin arts and taijiquan there. The mindset make s sense to me, moreso since I've started judo myself.

[Iron_Eagle_76]

if you are not well-versed in these techniques, I WILL kick you, and you won't even see it coming.

Video of TT showing off!!:p

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkDE8mWJWOA

[Hardwork108]

You keep repeating the same phase. My question to you is, how do you know they have not been "exposed to authentic kung fu methodologies". For all you know they have and you have not.

What exactly do you mean by "authentic kung fu training" can you give me examples of what this entails.

To me examples of this would be strength(squats deaplifts ect), flexibility, and cardo training to build your body foundation to be a fighter. Drills to develop striking, combinations, the ability to take a hit and keep fighting(only developed though hard sparing). Then lastly forms.

Just curious cause you use that phase alot, but it doesn't acually say anything, unless you define it.

Here goes. The TCMAs are rich fighting systems. They were designed to finish an encounter in the shortest possible time.

The hundreds of TCMAs out there incorporate thousands of techniques and approaches to combat. As proven recently, they include ground fighting methodologies as well.

Also, putting aside the technical aspects. The TCMAs incorporate the Internal and External within most, probably all styles.

The styles that focus more on the Internal methodologies, are referred to as Internal styles. These methodologies are distinct and there is more than one INTERNAL approach, some which you cannot even find in books as they are kept kind of "under the hat".

Forms are a valid and important TCMA training tooks. You can generally divide them into two areas - fighting forms and what are known as "development" forms, that range from soft chi kung to harder variants that also emphasis tendon training and body unity faculties.

Authentic TCMA schools will teach you combat effectiveness, that implies hard sparring practice.

Given all the above FACTS, when people who claim "decades" Kung fu experience, come out and say that "forms training is useless, all we need is to spar"; "Internals don't exist/they are fantasy"; "The TCMAs do not address the ground scenario"; "Wing Chun lacks kicks, that is why I do Tae Kwon Do"; "Wing Chun lacks elbows, that is why I do Muay Thai"; "Iron Palm (and other Iron skills) are useless/fantasy", and other utterly clueless and uninformed comments, then all I can do is assume that they have not trained in authentic kung fu kwoons, despite their "decades" of "kung fu experience".

My assumption correlates within the parameters of what is know as the Mcdojo phenomenon, which has resulted in over 90% of openly taught TCMAs being bad/made up or plain mediocre empty shell versions what they are supposed to be. If over 90% of people who train or have trained in TCMAs have been taught incompletely, then why should over 90% of people who post here be any different?

[TenTigers]

Video of TT showing off!!:p

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkDE8mWJWOA
y'know, I was hoping someone was going to post that....

[wenshu]

I think Hardwork108 represents a phenomena that many of us are familiar with: inherited Han centric prejudice syndrome.

He has adopted prejudices about the martial arts that are culturally based and he has little to no awareness of the cultural background out of which those prejudgments originated.

It doesn't really make sense for me to make an effort to broaden my cultural horizons only to adopt narrow minded prejudices that have no basis in my own cultural subconscious.

[Hardwork108]

Video of TT showing off!!:p

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkDE8mWJWOA

Ironically, that was more of a kung fu kick tham MT one. ;)

[TenTigers]

Ironically, that was more of a kung fu kick tham MT one. ;)

um..no.
The kick was performed by Korean Hapkido Master, Bong Soo Han.....

[Drake]

I think Hardwork108 represents a phenomena that many of us are familiar with: inherited Han centric prejudice syndrome.

He has adopted prejudices about the martial arts that are culturally based and he has little to no awareness of the cultural background out of which those prejudgments originated.

It doesn't really make sense for me to make an effort to broaden my cultural horizons only to adopt narrow minded prejudices that have no basis in my own cultural subconscious.

You should hear the guy trying to talk intelligently about Afghanistan. Same thing.

[RWilson]

You should hear the guy trying to talk intelligently about Afghanistan. Same thing.

Oh yeah I forgot that you are the only one who know anything about Afganistan. You know more than CNN, MSNBC, and Fox news combined. I bet you can take out Vietnam like Rambo did.

Get off your high horse. No one cares about you being in the military.

[wenshu]

That was unexpected.

[Drake]

Oh yeah I forgot that you are the only one who know anything about Afganistan. You know more than CNN, MSNBC, and Fox news combined. I bet you can take out Vietnam like Rambo did.

Get off your high horse. No one cares about you being in the military.

Uh, no. CNN is typically off. Fox News is ALWAYS off. BCC isn't too bad. One interesting tidbit is that Al Jazeera managed to report, ACCURATELY, on a VBIED strike we had at the UNHCR building here the other day... within 5 minutes of it happening.

And before you keep going, I am saying HW knows nothing about Afghanistan, which is a fact, seeing as he calls them afghanis, prattles about AQ being there, and is somehow convinced that this is a huge act played out by some evil super organization.


This has nothing to do with military service. This is about cultural ignorance. And say what you want about my service, the fact is, I have an Afghan sitting about 10 feet away from me right now watching TV. I live in Kandahar. Military aside, I'm still qualified to make this call.

Thank you, drive through.

[Drake]

That was unexpected.

That's what she said! :eek:

[Hardwork108]

@HW108:
I certainly have "been exposed to" traditional TCMA methodologies.
I incorporate Muay Thai roundhouse into my training/teaching for several reasons;

Due to its popularity (based on its effectiveness) you will be facing more and more people who know this technique. If you don't understand the mechanics, and strategies of the technique, you will not be able to effectively counter/defend against it. It is out of your experience.

Although we have the roundhouse kick in our arsenal, we have not developed it nearly to the extent as the Thais. "Tools is Tools," I always say, and this is tool development.

BTW- I also practice the roundhouse TKD method-snapping, lead leg, rear leg, low trajectory, closed hip, open hip, descending, spinning, jumping, tornado, ball of foot, shin, instep, knife-edge.

Do you know/practice any of these?

I will answer you with another question:

How many Muay Thai practitioners do you think practice kung fu limb breaking techniques, Chin-na, throws, take downs, finger strikes, Iron Palm, etc. so that they can "see it coming" if they end up in a street fight with a kung fu expert?

I believe that if your core TCMA style is complete then a more profound understanding of its principles as regards actual combat may be more useful than studying a thousand techniques from other systems, for a "just in case" scenario. ;)

The wisdom of what I am saying is that, one will eventually have to look within one's system for the answers, rather than training every MA under the sun, just in case someone uses an unfamilar technique against them!

Take the jamming principle in styles such as Wing Chun and Chow Gar (even if they will differ in certain applications of this). If you see any strike coming, then you can jam it. The MT kick is no exception.

"What if you don't see it coming"? You ask. Then I will answer that the end result would be the same as not seeing a punch that ends up breaking your nose.

Anyway, in the Wing Chun training, that is our approach, however, the WC that I train has a significantly bigger arsenal of techniques and ranges than the run off the mill business franchise version you see nowadays.....

And then we have Chow Gar (and the related styles of Pak Mei/Dragon, etc) that even less people practice the way it was meant to.......

[wenshu]

Jalaluddin Haqqani obviously trains at a Mcdojo and has never been exposed to complete authentic tcma training methodologies.

[Hardwork108]

I think Hardwork108 represents a phenomena that many of us are familiar with: inherited Han centric prejudice syndrome.

He has adopted prejudices about the martial arts that are culturally based and he has little to no awareness of the cultural background out of which those prejudgments originated.

It doesn't really make sense for me to make an effort to broaden my cultural horizons only to adopt narrow minded prejudices that have no basis in my own cultural subconscious.

You are reading this the wrong way. My point is that in a world that suffers from the Mcdojo phenomenon, we have too many people trying to "improve" the TCMAs, while not having had exposure to a them in a genuine training program - kwoon/sifu, if you like.

IN short, it is better to know and understand a given discipline on multi levels, before one makes clueless generalized statements, such as "kung fu does not address the ground fighting scenario"; "Internals do not exist"; "forms training is useless" and etc - based solely on one's kickboxing and MMA experience - with of course, some pretend or wishful "kung fu experience" thrown in for "credibility", for good measure.;)

ACTUAL knowledge in the TCMAs is better than making comments like the above, and then be proven WRONG by someone who actually has genuine and authentic TCMA qualifications to make you look clueless on the world wide web!

[TenTigers]

I will answer you with other question:

How many Muay Thai practitioners do you think practice kung fu limb breaking techniques, Chin-na, throws, take downs, finger strikes, Iron Palm, etc. so that they can "see it coming" if they end up in a street fight with a kung fu expert?

.
Traditional Thai Boxing-Muay Boran has chin-na. throws, take downs, etc...
Our Muay Thai techniques come from my student, who trains Muay Thai, Muay Boran/Chaiya, Krabi-krabong in Thailand (he lives there half the year, and trained with Tony Jaa's teacher, and assisted in teaching the Thai Military.He also fought and won in the first MMA tournament in Thailand.
"Jeang Dai Ji Wa..."

[Iron_Eagle_76]

Oh yeah I forgot that you are the only one who know anything about Afganistan. You know more than CNN, MSNBC, and Fox news combined. I bet you can take out Vietnam like Rambo did.

Get off your high horse. No one cares about you being in the military.

Drake, Thank you for your service to our country. It is greatly appreciated.;)

[Drake]

Jalaluddin Haqqani obviously trains at a Mcdojo and has never been exposed to complete authentic tcma training methodologies.

He does "MMA-style MMA"

[Iron_Eagle_76]

How many Muay Thai practitioners do you think practice kung fu limb breaking techniques, Chin-na, throws, take downs, finger strikes, Iron Palm, etc. so that they can "see it coming" if they end up in a street fight with a kung fu expert?

What makes you think Kung Fu is the only style that has these techniques or those similiar:confused:

Before my Kung Fu training, I trained Shuri-Te Karate which included limb breaking techniques, Tuite which is bascially the same as Chin-na, throws, takedowns, finger strikes, ect.

And that is just a brief example. There are several martial arts that teach all these techniques you just brought up, not just Kung Fu, which is a generic term itself considering how many styles of Kung Fu there are. TT gave you an example with traditional Muay Boran.

Considering the comments you make and the depth of which your knowledge, or lack thereof is, I would hesitate from critisizing others about what they know and don't know, because it is obvious from most of your comments that the extent of your knowledge is nowhere near what you think it is.;)

[Hardwork108]

And before you keep going, I am saying HW knows nothing about Afghanistan, which is a fact, seeing as he calls them afghanis,
I know more about your presence in Afghanistan than you ever will. Actually, perhaps in 20 to 30 years time when some official secret documents are declassified, you will know what I know now.


prattles about AQ being there,
You misunderstand. Al Quaeda is everywhere and nowhere, just like any organization that does not exist. Al Quaeda is merely the name of a US military computer file given to Afghan groups (Talibans) trained to fight the Soviets. This fact was referred by a former British Foreign Secretary - but feel free to call him a "conspiracy theorist"!

In short Al Quaeda don't exist.


and is somehow convinced that this is a huge act played out by some evil super organization.
Yes, when you are enlightened and start following the money trail, as opposed to made up bogey man stories, you will see that they all lead to the same place, that is, Western based private banking and corporate (including arms manufacturers) cartels.



This has nothing to do with military service. This is about cultural ignorance. And say what you want about my service, the fact is, I have an Afghan sitting about 10 feet away from me right now watching TV.

Wow, you let one live or was watching TV his last request to see a recorded G.W. Bush speech, so that he would be left too numb to feel the bullet pierce his skull?:rolleyes:


I live in Kandahar. Military aside, I'm still qualified to make this call.

Yes, this forum is full of people who have "trained in TCMAs" and feel qualified in making lots of "calls" too.....LOL!

Anyway, this is off topic, so if you wish to continue and learn more about Geo Politics, then take it to the Off Topic section, and I will oblige. :);)

[wenshu]

You are reading this the wrong way. My point is that in a world that suffers from the Mcdojo phenomenon, we have too many people trying to "improve" the TCMAs, while not having had exposure to a them in a genuine training program - kwoon/sifu, if you like.

IN short, it is better to know and understand a given discipline on multi levels, before one makes clueless generalized statements, such as "kung fu does not address the ground fighting scenario"; "Internals do not exist"; "forms training is useless" and etc - based solely on one's kickboxing and MMA experience - with of course, some pretend or wishful "kung fu experience" thrown in for "credibility", for good measure.;)

ACTUAL knowledge in the TCMAs is better than making comments like the above, and then be proven WRONG by someone who actually has genuine and authentic TCMA qualifications to make you look clueless on the world wide web!

How do you not see that all you ever offer are vague generalizations?

[Hardwork108]

Traditional Thai Boxing-Muay Boran has chin-na. throws, take downs, etc...
Our Muay Thai techniques come from my student, who trains Muay Thai, Muay Boran/Chaiya, Krabi-krabong in Thailand (he lives there half the year, and trained with Tony Jaa's teacher, and assisted in teaching the Thai Military.He also fought and won in the first MMA tournament in Thailand.
"Jeang Dai Ji Wa..."

Good point!

I am very well aware of the larger scope of Muay Boran. However, how many people who cross train their kung fu with MT, practice the traditional version of EITHER?

[Hardwork108]

How do you not see that all you ever offer are vague generalizations?
Vague or not, they are TRUE!

Perhaps people who read my "vague" comments, would not see them as "vague" if they had solid TCMA training/understanding, or even a sifu with whom they could raise questions with - instead of their BJJ and Tae Kwon Do, qualifications?

[Hardwork108]

?

What makes you think Kung Fu is the only style that has these techniques or those similiar:confused:

Where did I make such a statement?:confused:



Before my Kung Fu training, I trained Shuri-Te Karate which included limb breaking techniques, Tuite which is bascially the same as Chin-na, throws, takedowns, finger strikes, ect.
True. Have you wondered where some of those techniques come from? LOL!

By the way, is there MA that you have not "trained" in? :rolleyes:


And that is just a brief example. There are several martial arts that teach all these techniques you just brought up, not just Kung Fu, which is a generic term itself considering how many styles of Kung Fu there are.
Of course there are, and this they will sometimes teach distinctly based on their own principles, concepts, etc.

What is your point?


TT gave you an example with traditional Muay Boran.
My comments were in relation to how modern MT, that is how most of you MMA types train Muay Thai!!!


Considering the comments you make and the depth of which your knowledge, or lack thereof is, I would hesitate from critisizing others about what they know and don't know, because it is obvious from most of your comments that the extent of your knowledge is nowhere near what you think it is.;)

My depth of knowledge is nothing special, but even so it runs circles around most of you MMA types, that are Jack of All Trades!

Don't get me wrong, being Jack of All Trades can make your MA functional and effective in a relatively short time. No arguments from me there, as it all depends on what you are looking for.

All I ask is that you should be modest about your assumptions about the TCMAs, in which you have no expertise, that is all. :)

[Drake]

How do you not see that all you ever offer are vague generalizations?

Don't waste your time... SR was trying to get him to answer some specific questions regarding take downs, and he got the same vague prattle.

And FYI...the Afghan was watching Afghan TV. They have that here, you know.

[brothernumber9]

Hardwork, you state the mainland style of Wing Chun you study has ground fighting. But you also imply that such is the case in plenty of places in TCMA.
You've had people on these boards who have studied for tens of years, some in different systems, others in one or a few core systems, argue that if some TCMA's include ground fighting/ground grappling that they are extremely rare. You tend to dismiss this by claiming they haven't seen real TCMA methodologies, or impy they didn't learn from a "real" sifu.

Outside of the Wing Chun you study, what TCMA systems (names) are you aware of that have ground fighting/ground grappling, that have taught so for generations, not just in the past 20 years?

[Mike Patterson]

Welllll... once again, I did not get back in a timely manner. And once again, this thread has been derailed. So for all the good it will do,; one answer, one thank you and a couple generalized comments:

SanJuro Ronin: I'm 53.... I think my "window" is fading. I like to be involved as a coach, actually fight/train with my pupils. I think this is the best way to prepare them. I figure if they can handle ME, they can deal with most of what will be thrown at them in competition far more effectively. Currently, I am still involved. How long that may last, I don't know. Whether I will get someone where I think they need to be before I'm done.. Again, I don't know. A couple look promising but there are too many variables to really say for sure as of yet. :)

Frost: Thank you for not dragging in the "who did what in Tang Shou Tao" as it has been done to death with usually not very good result. And also thank you for giving me the "benefit of a doubt" that I might just actually know what I'm talking about in the face of so much controversy. :)

I think that many on this board fail to think of two other aspects of human nature and the world at large that influence a person's decision making processes. In two words... "Agenda" and "Marketing".

Now, for those who do not know me well... a couple factoids about yours truly;

1) I am a career martial artist. Meaning this is all I do to support myself and my wife and this is all I have EVER done to do same.

So 2) I know a bit about marketing the martial arts and have written a book about that same subject matter. Simply looking at the contents will give you an idea of how much I actually know about that subject.

3) I now live in Las Vegas. Arguably the "sunsource" of MMA right now. You'd have to wonder why I moved here. Then again, it not on the business side of martial arts, maybe not.

4) You may then also wonder why I ... A) Espouse that I don't need an outside grappling venue to integrate into what I do to make it successful as a teaching approach here.... And B) Why I AM actually still successful here.

I'm just sayin' ... not here to make anyone believe differently than they do now. To each his or her own. Live and let live.

Now I'm off to do what I do best. Cheers everyone! ;)

[Fa Xing]

Hardwork, you state the mainland style of Wing Chun you study has ground fighting. But you also imply that such is the case in plenty of places in TCMA.
You've had people on these boards who have studied for tens of years, some in different systems, others in one or a few core systems, argue that if some TCMA's include ground fighting/ground grappling that they are extremely rare. You tend to dismiss this by claiming they haven't seen real TCMA methodologies, or impy they didn't learn from a "real" sifu.

Outside of the Wing Chun you study, what TCMA systems (names) are you aware of that have ground fighting/ground grappling, that have taught so for generations, not just in the past 20 years?

I wanna see how he answers this....

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-x_R4N0mkK64/Tcq30J8S_JI/AAAAAAAAC_Y/HC75g_oHnWk/s1600/lolcats-funny-pictures-questionmark.jpg

[Hardwork108]

Hardwork, you state the mainland style of Wing Chun you study has ground fighting. But you also imply that such is the case in plenty of places in TCMA.
You've had people on these boards who have studied for tens of years, some in different systems, others in one or a few core systems, argue that if some TCMA's include ground fighting/ground grappling that they are extremely rare. You tend to dismiss this by claiming they haven't seen real TCMA methodologies, or impy they didn't learn from a "real" sifu.

Outside of the Wing Chun you study, what TCMA systems (names) are you aware of that have ground fighting/ground grappling, that have taught so for generations, not just in the past 20 years?

Just looking at this forum one can also see that the Hsing I system studied and taught by Sifu Mike Patterson trains the ground scenario.

Sifu Patterson also mentioned that during his time in Taiwan ALL other schools that he knew trained the ground (but with stylistic differences).

Here are his statements AGAIN:


Originally Posted by Mike Patterson
Originally Posted by Mike Patterson
In Taiwan, at least in my day, all styles trained to fight. Very few exceptions to this. As such, all practioners understood that the ground was just another range/venue/transition of combative potential. So we all did it.. I never met anyone of any stylistic persuasion there that did not practice ground technique. Although we all had our differences in terms of emphasis.

It is only in the USA that I have seen such seemingly insurmountable differences of opinion over what qualifies as this or that or what defines this or that. Silly if you ask me. I have already stated that there are only so many things that can be done with a hand or foot. The rest is stylistic persuasion via tactical overlay or perspective of efficiency of combat

I am also aware of at least one Northern Mantis school in Singapoor that practices the ground. I became aware of this when I read a letter from one of its practitioners in a kung fu magazine some years ago. The magazine was probably the forebearer this very Kung fu magazine.

The kung fu student advised that his schools trained ground fighting, in response to some US (surprise, surprise) Mantis practitioners' claim that there was no ground fighting in Northern Mantis.

There is written literature by Master Wong Kiew Kit of Shaolin Wahnam school in Malaysia referring to ground techniques and some illustrations.

There is a Tiger System that also practices the ground scenario:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__JYhJJXZr8


Finally, my own sifu's attitude to ground fighting is that it is a natural kung fu range, following the same principles of our style.


Is this type of TCMA training wide spread? Of course not! I mean come on, most people who have trained kung fu in the West cannot fight their way out of paper bag using pure kung fu striking techniques, and the problem is not with the kung fu, but the people who claim knowledge and teach these arts as empty shell forms.

The end result is this. Many with "decades":rolleyes: of kung fu experience, not only cross train in other arts for ground fighting, but also for STRIKING....LOL!

However, it is easier for the ego to say that the TCMAs were lacking, hence the need for BJJ, Boxing, Muay Thai training, than say that they were taken for a ride by being taught a partially effective "empty shell" system!;)

That is what all of this thread, and other similar ones, are all about! That is, people with fragile egos filling the gaps in their incomplete TCMA knowledge by cross training in "modern" MA, and justifying it by saying that the TCMAs "lack" this or "lack" that, without they, themselves having ever studied them in a genuine comprehensive manner!

[Iron_Eagle_76]

Hardwork, you state the mainland style of Wing Chun you study has ground fighting. But you also imply that such is the case in plenty of places in TCMA.
You've had people on these boards who have studied for tens of years, some in different systems, others in one or a few core systems, argue that if some TCMA's include ground fighting/ground grappling that they are extremely rare. You tend to dismiss this by claiming they haven't seen real TCMA methodologies, or impy they didn't learn from a "real" sifu.

Outside of the Wing Chun you study, what TCMA systems (names) are you aware of that have ground fighting/ground grappling, that have taught so for generations, not just in the past 20 years?

The answer you will get will sound something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss2hULhXf04&feature=related

LMAO, look above, I rest my case!

[Hardwork108]

The answer you will get will sound something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss2hULhXf04&feature=related

LMAO, look above, I rest my case!

Actually, Brothernumber9's question was well put, and has been answered accordingly. Read it, and the sad reality of "TCMA" practitioners such as yourself may finally dawn on you and result in a new way of looking at your own martial path, which in no way I am suggesting that you should change, but just that you need to see it for what it is! :)

[Taixuquan99]

Training the ground is not, in every case, a matter of training a well charted out method. Some likely were merely carrying out principles on the ground that they used standing, maybe even snippets of technique, and making use of this, but as of yet, Sifu Patterson's quote does not say "they all had a method", and kung fu is method.

Which is unimportant.

Which makes it ideal for ******* argument that craps up the forum, right along with people who cite use of principle as proof that they are learned on their style, but cannot cite technique that applies that principle from that style that they routinely use.

Two separate styles can share a principle, but completely different techniques that show the intent of that principle's applications. That you use the principle in style A through the use of style A's techs does not mean that you are a teacher of style B because you use the principle. Yet here, it does. Which validates Hardwork's approach, even if he's entirely wrong in every other way, performance in fighting is not the issue, performance in fighting WITH SUBSTANTIAL USE OF THE STYLE is, period, and all conversation that was going on before that was about exactly that has been preempted by Hardwork and you guys and Ray selling this bat****.

If you cannot point to direct kung fu techniques that use the principle, you are not discussing kung fu. YKW does it all the time, some of you do it occasionally, but seem intent on "someone said something wrong, MUST STOP THE WRONGNESS!!!"

IT'S THE FRIKKIN INTERNET, IT'S 90% INACCURACY COATED WITH A VENEER OF FACTOID ABOVE A DELICIOUS MEME CENTER, YOU CANNOT MAKE IT 'RIGHT'.

I hate each and every one of you. Stop trying to convince the rest of us that arguing with crazy people is important, no one believes you except the kiddies.

Die.:mad:

[Iron_Eagle_76]

IT'S THE FRIKKIN INTERNET, IT'S 90% INACCURACY COATED WITH A VENEER OF FACTOID ABOVE A DELICIOUS MEME CENTER, YOU CANNOT MAKE IT 'RIGHT'.

I hate each and every one of you. Stop trying to convince the rest of us that arguing with crazy people is important, no one believes you except the kiddies.

Die.

Does this mean I won't be getting a Christmas card from you this year??:(

:p

[Drake]

Training the ground is not, in every case, a matter of training a well charted out method. Some likely were merely carrying out principles on the ground that they used standing, maybe even snippets of technique, and making use of this, but as of yet, Sifu Patterson's quote does not say "they all had a method", and kung fu is method.

Which is unimportant.

Which makes it ideal for ******* argument that craps up the forum, right along with people who cite use of principle as proof that they are learned on their style, but cannot cite technique that applies that principle from that style that they routinely use.

Two separate styles can share a principle, but completely different techniques that show the intent of that principle's applications. That you use the principle in style A through the use of style A's techs does not mean that you are a teacher of style B because you use the principle. Yet here, it does. Which validates Hardwork's approach, even if he's entirely wrong in every other way, performance in fighting is not the issue, performance in fighting WITH SUBSTANTIAL USE OF THE STYLE is, period, and all conversation that was going on before that was about exactly that has been preempted by Hardwork and you guys and Ray selling this bat****.

If you cannot point to direct kung fu techniques that use the principle, you are not discussing kung fu. YKW does it all the time, some of you do it occasionally, but seem intent on "someone said something wrong, MUST STOP THE WRONGNESS!!!"

IT'S THE FRIKKIN INTERNET, IT'S 90% INACCURACY COATED WITH A VENEER OF FACTOID ABOVE A DELICIOUS MEME CENTER, YOU CANNOT MAKE IT 'RIGHT'.

I hate each and every one of you. Stop trying to convince the rest of us that arguing with crazy people is important, no one believes you except the kiddies.

Die.:mad:

I love you. Srsly.

[Taixuquan99]

does this mean i won't be getting a christmas card from you this year??:(

:p

why won't you die?!!!

[Taixuquan99]

I love you. Srsly.

Wong Fei Hung cries his stern disappointed zombie tears with your every post.

[Drake]

Wong Fei Hung cries his stern disappointed zombie tears with your every post.

You have to love a kung fu hero that even has his own personalized hero song.

[Taixuquan99]

You have to love a kung fu hero that even has his own personalized hero song.

Do not believe that you will blunt my hate for you with witty repertoire!

[wenshu]

Welllll... once again, I did not get back in a timely manner. And once again, this thread has been derailed.

Derailed from what exactly?

[RWilson]

Welllll... once again, I did not get back in a timely manner. And once again, this thread has been derailed. So for all the good it will do,; one answer, one thank you and a couple generalized comments:

SanJuro Ronin: I'm 53.... I think my "window" is fading. I like to be involved as a coach, actually fight/train with my pupils. I think this is the best way to prepare them. I figure if they can handle ME, they can deal with most of what will be thrown at them in competition far more effectively. Currently, I am still involved. How long that may last, I don't know. Whether I will get someone where I think they need to be before I'm done.. Again, I don't know. A couple look promising but there are too many variables to really say for sure as of yet. :)

Frost: Thank you for not dragging in the "who did what in Tang Shou Tao" as it has been done to death with usually not very good result. And also thank you for giving me the "benefit of a doubt" that I might just actually know what I'm talking about in the face of so much controversy. :)

I think that many on this board fail to think of two other aspects of human nature and the world at large that influence a person's decision making processes. In two words... "Agenda" and "Marketing".

Now, for those who do not know me well... a couple factoids about yours truly;

1) I am a career martial artist. Meaning this is all I do to support myself and my wife and this is all I have EVER done to do same.

So 2) I know a bit about marketing the martial arts and have written a book about that same subject matter. Simply looking at the contents will give you an idea of how much I actually know about that subject.

3) I now live in Las Vegas. Arguably the "sunsource" of MMA right now. You'd have to wonder why I moved here. Then again, it not on the business side of martial arts, maybe not.

4) You may then also wonder why I ... A) Espouse that I don't need an outside grappling venue to integrate into what I do to make it successful as a teaching approach here.... And B) Why I AM actually still successful here.

I'm just sayin' ... not here to make anyone believe differently than they do now. To each his or her own. Live and let live.

Now I'm off to do what I do best. Cheers everyone! ;)



I do not hate you, Mr Patterson, nor do I even have a bone with you personally. I just do not understand all the hype surrounding you and what you supposedly teach. You say you are different from most Kung fu people you have met do to your fighting background but you act the same way in what you sell. Here is what I mean. You talk about fighting as coaching fighters but the clips fron your DVDs show you doing drills, forms, and solo exercises. Where is all this fight training you expouse, and teach, but then produce tcma form DVDs?

[wenshu]

Training the ground is not, in every case, a matter of training a well charted out method. Some likely were merely carrying out principles on the ground that they used standing, maybe even snippets of technique, and making use of this, but as of yet, Sifu Patterson's quote does not say "they all had a method", and kung fu is method.

Which is unimportant.

Which makes it ideal for ******* argument that craps up the forum, right along with people who cite use of principle as proof that they are learned on their style, but cannot cite technique that applies that principle from that style that they routinely use.

Two separate styles can share a principle, but completely different techniques that show the intent of that principle's applications. That you use the principle in style A through the use of style A's techs does not mean that you are a teacher of style B because you use the principle. Yet here, it does. Which validates Hardwork's approach, even if he's entirely wrong in every other way, performance in fighting is not the issue, performance in fighting WITH SUBSTANTIAL USE OF THE STYLE is, period, and all conversation that was going on before that was about exactly that has been preempted by Hardwork and you guys and Ray selling this bat****.

If you cannot point to direct kung fu techniques that use the principle, you are not discussing kung fu. YKW does it all the time, some of you do it occasionally, but seem intent on "someone said something wrong, MUST STOP THE WRONGNESS!!!"

IT'S THE FRIKKIN INTERNET, IT'S 90% INACCURACY COATED WITH A VENEER OF FACTOID ABOVE A DELICIOUS MEME CENTER, YOU CANNOT MAKE IT 'RIGHT'.

I hate each and every one of you. Stop trying to convince the rest of us that arguing with crazy people is important, no one believes you except the kiddies.

Die.:mad:

Stop crying.

Discussing the particulars of technique is for old men who can't practice it anymore.

[YouKnowWho]

your DVDs show you doing drills, forms, and solo exercises.

I know that you addressed this question to Mike. But as far as I know the TCMA combat training may be different from others. TCMA tries to use one move to set up next move. That will lead into combo training. The moment that you step into the combo area, your training start to have a "plan" which may map to some predefined drills, forms, and solo exercises.

Here is a clip that I put up for another thread.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eVGBLUSHf8

Within 15 seconds, he could apply his roundhouse kick, side kick, punch, bear hug, knee, outer leg hook throw combo twice in a role. That's not by luck. It was pure plan ahead and his opponent was not weak either. In order to train that combo, he has to get a partner and go through that sequence over and over. When he is home without partner, he has to drill that solo over and over. That's the TCMA way to train a fighter.

[Mike Patterson]

I do not hate you, Mr Patterson, nor do I even have a bone with you personally. I just do not understand all the hype surrounding you and what you supposedly teach. You say you are different from most Kung fu people you have met do to your fighting background but you act the same way in what you sell. Here is what I mean. You talk about fighting as coaching fighters but the clips fron your DVDs show you doing drills, forms, and solo exercises. Where is all this fight training you expouse, and teach, but then produce tcma form DVDs?

:) It's interesting to me that it seems that whenever you post something lately to me that it has been edited?

I was not aware of any "hype" surrounding me. I'm good at what I do. Those who know me know that and they know it well.

What I choose to release on DVD is just that MY CHOICE. I am not here to please the likes of you, nor to entertain your notions about what is and what isn't.

I have a responsibility to my dead teacher, because of a promise made to him long ago, to first and foremost document and transmit the style to the best of my ability. My choices go to that in terms of priority of what is released.

In addition, I am still actively teaching fighting to people who have a desire to compete. My methodology has been successful. I am not about to put it on DVD for the same reason I do not allow outside visitors into my closed fighting classes.

Take that as you will and I AM SURE YOU WILL. But to me it's just common sense from the perspective of a coach with a winning track record. When I know I am no longer going to be involved in such, then maybe I'll get 'round to putting that stuff on DVD as well. Until then... sorry... you'll just have to brood. ;)

As I said before... want to know what I do? Come visit me. You'll find me open and willng to share and/or educate. Want to play with my fighters? That can be arranged. Want to play with me? My door is always open. Just give me a call next time you're in Vegas. Cheers! :)

[Golden Arms]

In addition, I am still actively teaching fighting to people who have a desire to compete. My methodology has been successful. I am not about to put it on DVD for the same reason I do not allow outside visitors into my closed fighting classes.

Take that as you will and I AM SURE YOU WILL. But to me it's just common sense from the perspective of a coach with a winning track record. When I know I am no longer going to be involved in such, then maybe I'll get 'round to putting that stuff on DVD as well. Until then... sorry... you'll just have to brood. ;)
)

It has never made sense to me that some people expect a person that has spent a huge amount of time and passion and often quite a bit of sacrifice as well towards their art, should just offer the best of what they know to the masses without batting an eye.

[David Jamieson]

It has never made sense to me that some people expect a person that has spent a huge amount of time and passion and often quite a bit of sacrifice as well towards their art, should just offer the best of what they know to the masses without batting an eye.

Yeah, you're not the only one who does a wtf when that happens. lol
I chalk it up to impetuous self entitlement in some people.

[Taixuquan99]

Stop crying.

Discussing the particulars of technique is for old men who can't practice it anymore.

Totally disagree. Any judo guy of three years serious experience will reflexively state things that, if found in an English language kung fu book, half the members here would call giving out secrets and the other half wouldn't even get despite the fact that their techniques should spell out the idea to them.

Any boxer of almost any level of experience can name one counter, most English language kung fu manuals somehow fail to, and by extension, most English language discussion of kung fu fails to.

English language kung fu books on specific styles' empty hand fighting contain zero information, with the exceptions being a handful of books, I cannot cite more than two, which rise above this.

If people have a hobby of spending time on the forum arguing what they know is ******* ****, and they don't want to have that interrupted, then they can't complain when they interrupt those who wish to discuss something else every chance they can because they're so self involved in their argument with some other member that they don't see past it.

Some members seem to enjoy technique level discussion of kung fu, and if no one points out that this stuff actually kills that, then there isn't technique level discussion worth talking about. Before Ross left, there was some great stuff going on involving a good group of members, so apparently I'm not the only one who thinks this is more useful. I'm not saying all stupid flame wars must end, I'm saying that keep that **** contained or members force the site into bannings that they then whine about, because it is a kung fu site, and if aspects of kung fu discussion are not allowed, this forces bannings.

[Drake]

Drills are very important. Why in the hell would anyone think otherwise?

[Taixuquan99]

Drills are very important. Why in the hell would anyone think otherwise?

Because they're following a stock argument so their team can win the internet?

[David Jamieson]

I think Ross was starting to get some cool stuff up.

then he ran away all of a sudden under some pretense or another.
But he does that.

then he'll send you a hate note. Maybe some photoshop of you rising a dinosaur with a ***** in your mouth or something...then he'll pop back and post something useful.

then he'll get into arguments, get pizzed and run away again.

meh, stability is not the hallmark of MA-ists anyway, so...hopefully he comes back again without so much attachment. :D

[Drake]

Because they're following a stock argument so their team can win the internet?

I already won the internet. FIVE HUNDRED YEARS AGO.

[Taixuquan99]

I think Ross was starting to get some cool stuff up.

then he ran away all of a sudden under some pretense or another.
But he does that.

then he'll send you a hate note. Maybe some photoshop of you rising a dinosaur with a ***** in your mouth or something...then he'll pop back and post something useful.

then he'll get into arguments, get pizzed and run away again.

meh, stability is not the hallmark of MA-ists anyway, so...hopefully he comes back again without so much attachment. :D

There was a group on the forum discussing and adding points, but now all discussion is focused toward three things:

1) Dragonzbane and Hardwork frikkin arguing NOTHING

2) Ray talking about principles and underage Shanghai hookers and sparring 14 year olds, but zero technical discussion of kung fu, mostly trying to steer all convo toward stock Bullshido stereotypes of kung fu while avoiding any points that fail to fulfill those stereotypes.

3) Other members joining into flame wars around one or two.

It's not because Ross is gone, it's because people got stupid as soon as drama dropped.

[Taixuquan99]

To make things clear, Dragonzbane is one of my favorite members, and, were I Admin, I would calmly explain openly to him that as of tomorrow, banned. I'd give Ray a day to discuss, considering his claims of his kung fu, what bagua techs make him ultimate judge of all members of a forum of professionals and non-professionals alike, and when he blathered about principles, banned.

I'd even ban Dardiv Jarmethom.

[Drake]

There was a group on the forum discussing and adding points, but now all discussion is focused toward three things:

1) Dragonzbane and Hardwork frikkin arguing NOTHING

2) Ray talking about principles and underage Shanghai hookers and sparring 14 year olds, but zero technical discussion of kung fu, mostly trying to steer all convo toward stock Bullshido stereotypes of kung fu while avoiding any points that fail to fulfill those stereotypes.

3) Other members joining into flame wars around one or two.

It's not because Ross is gone, it's because people got stupid as soon as drama dropped.

The problem is nobody here actually studies kung fu, so they can't discuss anything beyond the basics. Like, if I were take this further and suggest alternate ways of utilizing the poon kiu (to intercept choking attempts), or, dare I say it, the sow choy (how would it work without the upright momentum, or could it work at all?) while on the ground, I'd get a deer in the headlights from a good chunk of folks.

[Taixuquan99]

The problem is nobody here actually studies kung fu, so they can't discuss anything beyond the basics. Like, if I were take this further and suggest alternate ways of utilizing the poon kiu (to intercept choking attempts), or, dare I say it, the sow choy (how would it work without the upright momentum, or could it work at all?) while on the ground, I'd get a deer in the headlights from a good chunk of folks.

Nine times out of ten, when a thread got pursued by Ross, TGY, YKW, Gino, etc, one or the other was able to provide an image or vid that put it in obvious terms, so that, where other stylists might use a different name, they suddenly see.

The key is in making the topics. Ten threads at the top that no one can answer immediately puts a lot of pressure on the *******es arguing about whether Hardwork's wing chun does or doesn't have ground fighting.

[Drake]

Nine times out of ten, when a thread got pursued by Ross, TGY, YKW, Gino, etc, one or the other was able to provide an image or vid that put it in obvious terms, so that, where other stylists might use a different name, they suddenly see.

The key is in making the topics. Ten threads at the top that no one can answer immediately puts a lot of pressure on the *******es arguing about whether Hardwork's wing chun does or doesn't have ground fighting.

Well, it doesn't help that HW can't explain a single technical concept, which infuriates everyone else.

[Taixuquan99]

The problem is nobody here actually studies kung fu

By the way, wrong. Most posting members do study. The problem is, discussion and info for kung fu in english is sh1t empty of technical discussion. This is not solely fixed by studying another art and fighting. At some level, detailed info on the style in question is vital, and, considering the transmission of teachings in kung fu, it is best to pool efforts than rely on single sources or lineages.

[Taixuquan99]

Well, it doesn't help that HW can't explain a single technical concept, which infuriates everyone else.

Everyone? Really?

Maybe, if you pushed for supporting more technical discussion over arguing over who has it, he would have been cured long ago?

What success have you had in the effort to make him stop?

I'm mocking you on the internet. You cannot allow that!:D

[Drake]

Everyone? Really?

Maybe, if you pushed for supporting more technical discussion over arguing over who has it, he would have been cured long ago?

What success have you had in the effort to make him stop?

I'm mocking you on the internet. You cannot allow that!:D

I am making you bleed through the internets. It's like Scanners and AOL merging!

[Drake]

By the way, wrong. Most posting members do study. The problem is, discussion and info for kung fu in english is sh1t empty of technical discussion. This is not solely fixed by studying another art and fighting. At some level, detailed info on the style in question is vital, and, considering the transmission of teachings in kung fu, it is best to pool efforts than rely on single sources or lineages.

I was being facetious. FAH-SEE-SHUSH.

[Taixuquan99]

I am making you bleed through the internets. It's like Scanners and AOL merging!

I knew you were Michael Ironside!

[Lucas]

it's because people got stupid as soon as drama dropped.

Hey now, don't drag me into this. I've always been stupid, thank you very much.

[wenshu]

The problem is nobody here actually studies kung fu, so they can't discuss anything beyond the basics. Like, if I were take this further and suggest alternate ways of utilizing the poon kiu (to intercept choking attempts), or, dare I say it, the sow choy (how would it work without the upright momentum, or could it work at all?) while on the ground, I'd get a deer in the headlights from a good chunk of folks.

Probably because not everyone studies CLF?

[Taixuquan99]

[This next part is not in relation to Drake, as soon as he revealed his scanners power I had to let him go.]

Take any ring style and examine the extant literature in English on it, where there is such literature. Boxing, most books will consistently be able to show what the counters are, what major defenses one uses. Judo, a strong percentage will show how you are trying to shift the opponent's weight onto different areas of their feet to make them start to unbalance, the major throws, a section on the very basic ground work. BJJ, a good percentage of books will cover the role of guard, where different techniques tend to happen(in an open guard, in closed, etc). Kickboxing books tend to be a bit weaker on relations, being largely a body of moves, with a fair number of worthy exceptions. Shuai jiao, again, techs, often the goals regarding moving weight into unbalancing, etc.

In each case, these books, if they were in the same format but a kung fu style, most kung fu stylists would consider among the nicest kung fu books they had: a book that gave the tech for every step in the style, or every one of a category of techs.

The commonly available kung fu books are so shy on techniques, call them apps, and when viewed, in most cases, show almost every move as something related to an incoming punch, and so the info is spurious to begin with. In return, kung fu stylists, at some point, took to making up apps as a natural practice, despite loving all the old manuals that clearly show kung fu forms viewed as a chain of largely specific techniques. So that one sees a move in the form that, if viewed from the form, is clearly a common throw across the kung fu styles, and sees something else.

Arguing kung fu in a way that stops technique level discussion is more damaging to kung fu than Paulie Zink ever could be. Kung fu stylists, fortunately, are obsessively faithful to form, and so where they don't know the correct move, they still perform it like the correct move(more or less), so that this throw gets done as an awkward strike, but is still obviously a throw for anyone who looks, so the problem is not the systems, if the systems have problems will reveal when more people are actually using them accurately, but with the culture, the sources for information, to partitions between sources that prevent us seeing what we do*, and with an unwillingness to leave a stupid argument alone in order to do something more useful.

We can argue about kung fu as it's passed to us, or make it what its supposed to be, we can keep a questionable treasure secret or reveal the secrets of our treasure by seeing it from another view realize the treasure is beyond what we thought we held.

*My meaning here is that most kung fu styles have the exact same basis, so that knowing that basis and seeing the other style explains their usage, yet many naturally wish to see their approach as unique from the ground up, but this is self-limiting. Frankly, there are only two variations in fundamental kung fu footwork that I've seen, and one is simply the other one done for show without martial value.:D

[Taixuquan99]

Probably because not everyone studies CLF?

Nonetheless, the number of techniques unique to only one kung fu style is quite small, so discussion is more than possible. Most styles are standard kung fu techniques with a smaller number of focus moves.

[Taixuquan99]

I was being facetious. FAH-SEE-SHUSH.

That's the final straw!

[wenshu]

Totally disagree. Any judo guy of three years serious experience will reflexively state things that, if found in an English language kung fu book, half the members here would call giving out secrets and the other half wouldn't even get despite the fact that their techniques should spell out the idea to them.

Any boxer of almost any level of experience can name one counter, most English language kung fu manuals somehow fail to, and by extension, most English language discussion of kung fu fails to.

English language kung fu books on specific styles' empty hand fighting contain zero information, with the exceptions being a handful of books, I cannot cite more than two, which rise above this.

If people have a hobby of spending time on the forum arguing what they know is ******* ****, and they don't want to have that interrupted, then they can't complain when they interrupt those who wish to discuss something else every chance they can because they're so self involved in their argument with some other member that they don't see past it.

Some members seem to enjoy technique level discussion of kung fu, and if no one points out that this stuff actually kills that, then there isn't technique level discussion worth talking about. Before Ross left, there was some great stuff going on involving a good group of members, so apparently I'm not the only one who thinks this is more useful. I'm not saying all stupid flame wars must end, I'm saying that keep that **** contained or members force the site into bannings that they then whine about, because it is a kung fu site, and if aspects of kung fu discussion are not allowed, this forces bannings.

I am not arguing about whether or not people are incapable of having technical discussions. I am saying it is useless. Of course a boxer can talk about slip and counter, doesn't make it useful or productive.

It is a step below trying to learn how to fight by learning a form from a youtube video. . .

from this guy: http://www.youtube.com/user/tallahasseeshaolin#p/u/6/QWnu-mCdd7I

Some may find it interesting but that is personal preference and opinion and doesn't mean it has any more intrinsic value than bawang's forum pantomime testicle stroking.

I could wax poetically all day about the intricacies of gou zi (SJ throw), the set up and entry: gai bu or bei bu? Hand positions, sleeve and lapel, sleeve and underhook or sleeve and da ling (neck)? Hip positioning and contact, the amount of body turn and where you should end facing blah blah blah.

It is all utter crap if I can't show it to you, throw you with it, allow you to throw me with it, attempt it in free sparring.

In any case, whining and trying to dictate people's behavior on the internet is Davlik Hymanenson's job, instead maybe just contribute things representative of the conversation you want to have.

[bawang]

theres nothing to talk about because time and time again people refuse to change, like a dog returning to its vomit.

[Drake]

Probably because not everyone studies CLF?

It was an example. Any techniques would be welcome.

[Hardwork108]

IT'S THE FRIKKIN INTERNET, IT'S 90% INACCURACY COATED WITH A VENEER OF FACTOID ABOVE A DELICIOUS MEME CENTER, YOU CANNOT MAKE IT 'RIGHT'.

I hate each and every one of you. Stop trying to convince the rest of us that arguing with crazy people is important, no one believes you except the kiddies.

Die.:mad:
YOu can say all you want; interpret it as you want and put all the smoke screens you want. The fact is that some TCMAs address the ground fighting scenario and train for it. End of story!

I have been saying for years and the same people who used to laugh and call me names have now turned around and said, "we knew about that TCMAs addressed ground fighting but they are not as good as BJJ".... NO one in this forum seems to bring himself to say " I didn't know this Sifu Patterson, thanks for the info". NO, afterall what about their now famous "decades" of non-existant genuine TCMA training!

And you sir, if you have not studied it in your training then you are in "good" company, because most other people's kung fu syllabuses don't seem to cover this area. So, don't take it out on the messengers!:)

[Taixuquan99]

I am not arguing about whether or not people are incapable of having technical discussions. I am saying it is useless. Of course a boxer can talk about slip and counter, doesn't make it useful or productive.

It is a step below trying to learn how to fight by learning a form from a youtube video. . .

from this guy: http://www.youtube.com/user/tallahasseeshaolin#p/u/6/QWnu-mCdd7I

Some may find it interesting but that is personal preference and opinion and doesn't mean it has any more intrinsic value than bawang's forum pantomime testicle stroking.

I could wax poetically all day about the intricacies of gou zi (SJ throw), the set up and entry: gai bu or bei bu? Hand positions, sleeve and lapel, sleeve and underhook or sleeve and da ling (neck)? Hip positioning and contact, the amount of body turn and where you should end facing blah blah blah.

It is all utter crap if I can't show it to you, throw you with it, allow you to throw me with it, attempt it in free sparring.

I do not buy for one second that you have not gained one thing that you could use from discussion elsewhere that improved your fighting. I know I have, and I know many others who have. I feel you are fundamentally wrong on this issue.

Further, I feel your post fails to account for the possibility that two separate people could be working fundamentally similar problems with completely other sparring partners, and thus have valid points worth discussing.

Additionally, those who are able to discuss it tend to also be those with experience, and so it puts people with actual expertise above those who talk a lot of macho posturing bull.


In any case, whining and trying to dictate people's behavior on the internet is Davlik Hymanenson's job, instead maybe just contribute things representative of the conversation you want to have.

You know that valid conversation gets trolled to its death, in order to make room for it before, people got banned, they came back (and more trolls), and conversation became less than worth the effort, so pressure is needed to get people banned, period. As long as trolls are free to crap up topics, good discussion is the first to go, so your suggestion is based on fantasy.

Every good period of conversation the last two years where technical discussion is openly discussed on the main board has followed a banning, and it always will. Your decision that technical discussion is not worthwhile has no bearing on what other members wish to discuss, nor do decisions by members to bring lame flame wars into other people's discussions.

Given that there is a small group that enjoys such discussion, and given that there is room enough for all three, and given that members AGREE IN WRITING BY REGISTRATION HERE to respect other members, if they choose not to abide by what they agreed to, then periodically putting pressure on to make room for the type of discussion a small number of us enjoy will occur. If a member I respect is making that impossible, like Dragonzbane, I'll dog him mercilessly for it, and your view again will have no bearing, and, when done, I'll manage to get more good convo out of it before the next phase or move on.

Once people choose to converse ten years together, the idea that there is no social rule at play or that there will be none is make believe.

Rules will be enforced, to complain about that on the internet is only because one would be wasting their time complaining about it in the real world, where it is a given. In effect, your argument is a common and interesting attempt at exactly what it rails against, "RULE #1: THE INTERWEB DISCUSSION WILL HAVE NO RULES". Unfortunately, the era where it was valid is gone, all online discussion is heavily circumscribed by the individuals making it, here most extremely by the choice that where extreme behavior is to be conducted, then extreme anonymity is adhered to. That choice of anonymity by people is a total surrender to the fact that social rules always apply.

I'm not trying to control people's behavior, except where it unreasonably intrudes on what I should reasonably be able to expect from my membership to a particular forum, at which point, it's my business.

Because I respect the difficulties of running this forum, leaving is not the most reasonable way to express that it would be nice if the environment were made clear for more technical discussion, just a reasonable amount, still a few flame wars, still some total fantasy LARPERS, I don't read them but they all have their place, but I'm here for one thing, and that one thing has NEVER infringed on Dragonzbane and Hardwork's crap, and their's REPEATEDLY has on mine, so if I have to take them to task and tell them to grow the **** up, well, I will. I'm ornery, my knee hurts this week, and frankly, though you're one of my favorite posters, I just don't buy into your "it's the internet, there's no social rules" argument. I've never been anywhere where face is a bigger social rule than internet martial arts forums, and that includes China, and I'll frikkin use that tool like Ray Pina uses a 14 year old Puerto Rican boy to test his overhand.

[Taixuquan99]

This post is an object lesson to Dragonzbane on ignoring Hardwork.

[Lucas]

I cant believe i read that whole fukin post...but it was worth it for the funny one liner at the end.

[Hardwork108]

Well, it doesn't help that HW can't explain a single technical concept, which infuriates everyone else.
You are giving "everyone else" too much credit. What infuriates them is that TCMA "experience" is not worth a dime, and that they were wrong. Then go and make assumptions about the TCMAs no more, based on their Mcdojo or franchise "kung fu" school training.

The Internals are real and on top of that they manifest themselves in the so called External styles as well, IF those styles are trained properly.

The ground scenario IS addressed by some TCMA styles!

Forms training is IMPORTANT in the TCMA methodologies.

There are other TCMA aspects not discussed here that are also valid, for example the Iron Skills.

Yet, the general "kung fu" approach in this forums seems to be that of glorified kickboxing. Yes, spar and hit the bag and then spar and hit someone else, and you are doing kung fu.:rolleyes:

So, realistic sparring has its place but so do the other facets of TCMA training. However, traditionally speaking in this forum, those who have not had the intellectual capacity to comprehend the other sub-methodologies within TCMA practice have called them - Internals, forms practice and Iron skills - FANTASY!

And on and on it goes.....

By the way, the latest is that apparently Wing Chun does not have elbow strikes. This news flash comes courtesy of a poster and "Ving Tsun" practitioner under a lineage run by a famous Wing Chun sifu (yes, another one.....LOL!).

The TCMA situation is sad for the most part, but thanks to genuine practitioners such as sifu Mike Patterson, Joy Chaudhuri, John Wang, the poster "Earthdragon" and a few others that we are able to have access to some real knowledge!

[Hardwork108]

This post is an object lesson to Dragonzbane on ignoring Hardwork.
Believe me that I have told him to ignore me various times, after all what is he going to discuss with me, kung fu? LOL!

Anyway, kudos to Dragonzbane76, he has managed to stop pestering me for a few days now. Lets hope things remain this way. :)

[Dragonzbane76]

To make things clear, Dragonzbane is one of my favorite members, and, were I Admin, I would calmly explain openly to him that as of tomorrow, banned.

Love you too! :)

actually I haven't posted in this thread for awhile, just waiting for someone to hang themselves with the mile of rope they've unwound.

[Taixuquan99]

I cant believe i read that whole fukin post...but it was worth it for the funny one liner at the end.

There's nothing funny about Ray Pina. He's a man of principles. He respects those who have fought, except where he doesn't. He is a lone former kung fu practitioner turned mma guy railing against the kung fu practitioners turned mma guys who are claiming to have functional kung fu like his, but using mma in the ring, as opposed to using mma with kung fu principles, like he does. He's an honest man tired of being overcharged by the underage Shanghai hookers of the kung fu world, or by the underage Shanghai hookers in general. He's been to China, and it's big. He's a surfer, an author, a lover of the most discerning mate he's ever known, himself. He's Ray Pina.

[TenTigers]

Christ..do I have to wade through ten more pages of bulls*** before someone starts contributing something to these topics?
Wake me up when it gets good.....

[Taixuquan99]

Love you too! :)

actually I haven't posted in this thread for awhile, just waiting for someone to hang themselves with the mile of rope they've unwound.

If I were Admin, I would leave your head on a spike at the gates of the Wing Chun forum, as a warning to the rest.

You can't buy that kind of respect.

[Taixuquan99]

Christ..do I have to wade through ten more pages of bulls*** before someone starts contributing something to these topics?
Wake me up when it gets good.....

Have you read the thread title? The topic itself is BS.

Actually, you may be right. Hide a good discussion in here, and no one would ever find it.

[Dragonzbane76]

If I were Admin, I would leave your head on a spike at the gates of the Wing Chun forum, as a warning to the rest.

You can't buy that kind of respect.

No I guess you can't buy that kind of respect. Glad I would be of some use around here besides insighting riots in the name of TCMA ground fighting.

[RWilson]

:) It's interesting to me that it seems that whenever you post something lately to me that it has been edited?

I was not aware of any "hype" surrounding me. I'm good at what I do. Those who know me know that and they know it well.

What I choose to release on DVD is just that MY CHOICE. I am not here to please the likes of you, nor to entertain your notions about what is and what isn't.

I have a responsibility to my dead teacher, because of a promise made to him long ago, to first and foremost document and transmit the style to the best of my ability. My choices go to that in terms of priority of what is released.

In addition, I am still actively teaching fighting to people who have a desire to compete. My methodology has been successful. I am not about to put it on DVD for the same reason I do not allow outside visitors into my closed fighting classes.

Take that as you will and I AM SURE YOU WILL. But to me it's just common sense from the perspective of a coach with a winning track record. When I know I am no longer going to be involved in such, then maybe I'll get 'round to putting that stuff on DVD as well. Until then... sorry... you'll just have to brood. ;)

As I said before... want to know what I do? Come visit me. You'll find me open and willng to share and/or educate. Want to play with my fighters? That can be arranged. Want to play with me? My door is always open. Just give me a call next time you're in Vegas. Cheers! :)




I edit my posts of spelling errors. Not for whatever reason you thought.

[Taixuquan99]

No I guess you can't buy that kind of respect. Glad I would be of some use around here besides insighting riots in the name of TCMA ground fighting.

I made clear you're a good contributor at other times. But you have to admit that YKW and Ross had some great topics up right before Ross and Ray had their drama, and from there, it's been crap again. You argue as though you think people believe Hardwork and you're saving them from him. You could have crushed him ten times over through martial content, but you waste time with flame wars. It is beneath you.

[wenshu]

I do not buy for one second that you have not gained one thing that you could use from discussion elsewhere that improved your fighting. I know I have, and I know many others who have. I feel you are fundamentally wrong on this issue.

Further, I feel your post fails to account for the possibility that two separate people could be working fundamentally similar problems with completely other sparring partners, and thus have valid points worth discussing.

Additionally, those who are able to discuss it tend to also be those with experience, and so it puts people with actual expertise above those who talk a lot of macho posturing bull.



You know that valid conversation gets trolled to its death, in order to make room for it before, people got banned, they came back (and more trolls), and conversation became less than worth the effort, so pressure is needed to get people banned, period. As long as trolls are free to crap up topics, good discussion is the first to go, so your suggestion is based on fantasy.

Every good period of conversation the last two years where technical discussion is openly discussed on the main board has followed a banning, and it always will. Your decision that technical discussion is not worthwhile has no bearing on what other members wish to discuss, nor do decisions by members to bring lame flame wars into other people's discussions.

Given that there is a small group that enjoys such discussion, and given that there is room enough for all three, and given that members AGREE IN WRITING BY REGISTRATION HERE to respect other members, if they choose not to abide by what they agreed to, then periodically putting pressure on to make room for the type of discussion a small number of us enjoy will occur. If a member I respect is making that impossible, like Dragonzbane, I'll dog him mercilessly for it, and your view again will have no bearing, and, when done, I'll manage to get more good convo out of it before the next phase or move on.

Once people choose to converse ten years together, the idea that there is no social rule at play or that there will be none is make believe.

Rules will be enforced, to complain about that on the internet is only because one would be wasting their time complaining about it in the real world, where it is a given. In effect, your argument is a common and interesting attempt at exactly what it rails against, "RULE #1: THE INTERWEB DISCUSSION WILL HAVE NO RULES". Unfortunately, the era where it was valid is gone, all online discussion is heavily circumscribed by the individuals making it, here most extremely by the choice that where extreme behavior is to be conducted, then extreme anonymity is adhered to. That choice of anonymity by people is a total surrender to the fact that social rules always apply.

I'm not trying to control people's behavior, except where it unreasonably intrudes on what I should reasonably be able to expect from my membership to a particular forum, at which point, it's my business.

Because I respect the difficulties of running this forum, leaving is not the most reasonable way to express that it would be nice if the environment were made clear for more technical discussion, just a reasonable amount, still a few flame wars, still some total fantasy LARPERS, I don't read them but they all have their place, but I'm here for one thing, and that one thing has NEVER infringed on Dragonzbane and Hardwork's crap, and their's REPEATEDLY has on mine, so if I have to take them to task and tell them to grow the **** up, well, I will. I'm ornery, my knee hurts this week, and frankly, though you're one of my favorite posters, I just don't buy into your "it's the internet, there's no social rules" argument. I've never been anywhere where face is a bigger social rule than internet martial arts forums, and that includes China, and I'll frikkin use that tool like Ray Pina uses a 14 year old Puerto Rican boy to test his overhand.


As I said, usefulness of technical discussions is a matter of personal preference and opinion.

If you want to get all bent out of shape because people don't act with the proper amount of decorum, whatever blows your skirt up. But dude, sometimes you have to let the internet be the internet.

For the record I would rather listen to two people argue ad nauseum than listen to someone complain about them arguing. . .

Honestly for as lightly as this place is moderated it does a pretty decent job of self moderation. It could be a metric **** ton of a lot worse.

[David Jamieson]

So, anyway... what were we talking about again?

[Hardwork108]

Christ..do I have to wade through ten more pages of bulls*** before someone starts contributing something to these topics?
Wake me up when it gets good.....

What else do you need?

We have established for the kung fu bashers that the TCMAs address ground fighting; that the Internals are valid TCMA methodologies; The forms training is an important tool in authentic TCMA training, etc.

We have also established that you do not have to cross train your kung fu with Alaskan Penguin fighting, so as to be able defend yourself again an Alaskan Penguin fighter, if he decides to mug you on a dark street corner. All you need is deeper understanding of the scope of your core TCMAs and of course hardcore training.

So, thread would have enlightening to the Kung fu bashers, and aren't forums like this useful for accumulation of knowledge and constructive discussion?

Sheeesh, who am I kidding! The day after tomorrow some newbie will enter this forum and ask if the TCMAs address ground fighting and the same clueless "kung fu" tagged MMA-ists will come out of the woodwork and tell him that the TCMAs do not train ground fighting, and on and on the forum goes in circles of kung fu clueless EGOS coming here for "MMA is Great", self fulfilment! LOL

[Dragonzbane76]

I made clear you're a good contributor at other times. But you have to admit that YKW and Ross had some great topics up right before Ross and Ray had their drama, and from there, it's been crap again. You argue as though you think people believe Hardwork and you're saving them from him. You could have crushed him ten times over through martial content, but you waste time with flame wars. It is beneath you.

TGY and ross have some great topics i agree.

I'll take your advise on the other as well. You live you learn. :p

[Lucas]

So, anyway... what were we talking about again?

i think it was shanghai hookers.

[Drake]

What else do you need?

We have established for the kung fu bashers that the TCMAs address ground fighting; that the Internals are valid TCMA methodologies; The forms training is an important tool in authentic TCMA training, etc.

We have also established that you do not have to cross train your kung fu with Alaskan Penguin fighting, so as to be able defend yourself again an Alaskan Penguin fighter, if he decides to mug you on a dark street corner. All you need is deeper understanding of the scope of your core TCMAs and of course hardcore training.

So, thread would have enlightening to the Kung fu bashers, and aren't forums like this useful for accumulation of knowledge and constructive discussion?

Sheeesh, who am I kidding! The day after tomorrow some newbie will enter this forum and ask if the TCMAs address ground fighting and the same clueless "kung fu" tagged MMA-ists will come out of the woodwork and tell him that the TCMAs do not train ground fighting, and on and on the forum goes in cirlces of kung fu clueless EGOS coming here for self fulfilment! LOL

YOU.AREN'T.SAYING.ANYTHING.

How about an example. Say, Ray Pina managed to bring you the ground, and you feel his right hand knife up along the side of your neck as his legs wrap you from behind. You feel your balance shifting backwards, and you know you are about to fall into a RNC. WHAT DO YOU DO?

And by god, don't say "I use my uber-awesome super-secret WC"

[Lucas]

YOU.AREN'T.SAYING.ANYTHING.

How about an example. Say, Ray Pina managed to bring you the ground, and you feel his right hand knife up along the side of your neck as his legs wrap you from behind. You feel your balance shifting backwards, and you know you are about to fall into a RNC. WHAT DO YOU DO?

And by god, don't say "I use my uber-awesome super-secret WC"

i'd personally scream rape. ;)

[Hardwork108]

YOU.AREN'T.SAYING.ANYTHING.

How about an example. Say, Ray Pina managed to bring you the ground, and you feel his right hand knife up along the side of your neck as his legs wrap you from behind. You feel your balance shifting backwards, and you know you are about to fall into a RNC. WHAT DO YOU DO?

I would say to Ray, "what, not even a dinner date first"? :D


And by god, don't say "I use my uber-awesome super-secret WC"
In all my years in this forum I have never heard anyone use that term to describe their Wing Chun training, why do you assume that I would? :confused:

It seems that you don't read my posts. Sanjuro asked me a similar question about technical stuff. I will tell you what I stated to him. I have trained other kugn fu in the last few years and I only train with my Wing Chun sifu on visits to Rio, and most of that training involves maitaining my current WC skills, until I settle back in Brasil in a couple of years time, in which case I will be happy to oblige with relevant info.


This does not change the fact that ground fighting training is part of the traditional syllabus of the system.
Please read the above comment.

This is the third time I am posting it in the last few days, and it is getting tiring.

[Drake]

Ok, I got it. You'd be choked out. Ray wins, you lose.

[Hardwork108]

Ok, I got it. You'd be choked out. Ray wins, you lose.
Ray wouldn't do that to me, not before buying me dinner first! :D

Besides, I would just use my secret Mail order Choy Li Fut death touch on him!:p

[Drake]

Ray wouldn't do that to me, not before buying me dinner first! :D

Besides, I would just use my secret Mail order Choy Li Fut death touch on him!:p

Ok, I got it. You'd be choked out. Ray wins, you lose.

[Hardwork108]

Ok, I got it. You'd be choked out. Ray wins, you lose.

Deja vu? :confused:

You forgot to say that if I had gone up agains Mike Tyson with my striking, he would knock me out too (hopefuly without man-handling me too much, to start with)....LOL!

[TenTigers]

This is the third time I am posting it in the last few days, and it is getting tiring.

for all of us....

[Hardwork108]

for all of us....
Then stop asking!

Drop the egos, including the now famous "I have done a zillion MAs for the last X decades, that means I am a kung fu expert" monologue and accept the truth about the richness of the TCMAs and that not all of you know everything there is to know about them - including the ground fighting and other aspects - and then be GONE to the depths of the galaxy! ;)

[Taixuquan99]

As I said, usefulness of technical discussions is a matter of personal preference and opinion.

If you want to get all bent out of shape because people don't act with the proper amount of decorum, whatever blows your skirt up. But dude, sometimes you have to let the internet be the internet.

I get what you're saying, I really do. But, I only have time to come here occasionally in most instances, and when this place gets this crappy, it's lame. It is measurably worse than in years. The front page has been utter crap, and people are choosing to crap it up, which is lame and disrespectful to everyone else.


For the record I would rather listen to two people argue ad nauseum than listen to someone complain about them arguing. . .

For the record, telling people to shut it isn't complaining. They may get mad at me for doing it, but I'll do it anyway.


Honestly for as lightly as this place is moderated it does a pretty decent job of self moderation.

In most previous periods I would agree with this statement. But, the contrast between the quality of the threads in relation to kung fu before Ross' departure and after is drastic(not crediting Ross for all of that, that's merely when the environment became toxic to such discussion). The top threads on the main page the entire time since Ray and Ross had drama have been BS with zero content, even and especially where Ray is involved, and he's involved everywhere.


It could be a metric **** ton of a lot worse.

The main contributors to the best material of the past year are only responding occasionally, not starting discussion. Two months ago, it was the opposite. That's never a good sign. There is one member here who, if they left, would mean the forum lost the vast majority of contributions regarding specific techniques directly from kung fu. One guy. I agree with you that I and others need to contribute, but to contribute on that level, well, there's only going to be a tiny number capable, and they can't drown out the trolls AND do all the contributing.

[Taixuquan99]

TGY and ross have some great topics i agree.

I'll take your advise on the other as well. You live you learn. :p

Well done. I will monitor your progress on this issue.:D

[Taixuquan99]

YOU.AREN'T.SAYING.ANYTHING.

How about an example. Say, Ray Pina managed to bring you the ground, and you feel his right hand knife up along the side of your neck as his legs wrap you from behind. You feel your balance shifting backwards, and you know you are about to fall into a RNC. WHAT DO YOU DO?


I kill you with what is becoming an enraged tard strength for what you have done to my forum.

[Hardwork108]

I kill you with what is becoming an enraged tard strength for what you have done to my forum.

That should not be too difficult for you. :D

Seriously guys. If all posters had come to this discussion and agreed about the greatness of BJJ and Muay Thai in "improving" the whole of (few hundred styles that apparently all MMA-ists here have working knowledge of :rolleyes:) the TCMAs, then we would all be holding hands and making arrangments for special man-grappling meet ups in various parts of the Northern Hemisphere.

However, anyone who comes up with new info as regards certain TCMA methodologies then those who have no clue, gang up on him or them and say all sorts of vile things. I am just saying that it makes a lot of you guys look like weak men with big egos......;)

[Hardwork108]

The post that started this thread is worth another look. ;)



With great personal sacrifice they come to this forum with a message to deliver--kung fu sucks and we have come to awaken you from your delusional fog.

Thank god for those brave souls who take the time to tell us how lame we are and how great they truly are because they practice <insert martial flavor of the week>.

What would we do without them?

EO

What would we do without them?

We would for sure discuss the greatness of BJJ/Judo/Boxing/Muay Thai a lot less.

We would probably explore and discuss actual TCMA methodologies, instead of arguing with people who have at best a half baked experience of a given TCMA style, mixed with a dozen or more, often irrelevant MAs, that would have taken them "away" from even a basic comprehension of any TCMA style that they may have had a small chance of understanding.

Yet, they keep coming and and "educating" us about the "fantastic" MMA approach while telling us about the weaknesses of the TCMAs - which they themselves have not really practiced in any credible manner - YOU COULD NOT INVENT THIS STUFF!

[Taixuquan99]

I'm not following what is meant by "upright momentum" in relation to sow choy.

Drake?

[Taixuquan99]

The post that started this thread is worth another look. ;)




What would we do without them?

We would for sure discuss the greatness of BJJ/Judo/Boxing/Muay Thai a lot less.

We would probably explore and discuss actual TCMA methodologies, instead of arguing with people who have at best a half baked experience of a given TCMA style, mixed with a dozen or more, often irrelevant MAs, that would have taken them "away" from even a basic comprehension of any TCMA style that they may have had a small chance of understanding.

Yet, they keep coming and and "educating" us about the "fantastic" MMA approach while telling us about the weaknesses of the TCMAs - which they themselves have not really practiced in any credible manner - YOU COULD NOT INVENT THIS STUFF!

I actually would discuss the content of muay thai, boxing, bjj, and judo. But I would also be able to take part in discussions of kung fu more, though that would be interrupted occasionally by those who accuse other kung fu stylists of not being kung fu enough based on vague generalizations. Still, it would be better than being sandwiched between the pompous and often hopelessly untrained "You aren't traditional enough for me" crowd and the "kung fu must die" mma fanboys, with a smattering of "I had a bad sifu, therefore everyone did, they made me feel special, but I wasn't, now bjj makes me feel special, but I'm still not."

Frankly, the only students who are a joy to teach and the only training partners who are great to work with don't seem to pay much heed to either of those camps.

That said, stop the madness, Hardwork.

[Jimbo]

HW,
Sometimes I feel you make some valid points, but then you like to call those whose experiences differ from your ideal as 'clueless', McKwoon-trained, etc. That's really no different at all from the people who come on here and endlessly trash CMA. Neither side is really helping their cause.

Each person gathers experience for themselves. If that includes experience in non-CMA arts, that does not make their CMA practice any less valid. If it enhances someone's understanding or whatever reason they do it for, how is that irrelevent?

The fact is, and it's been said before...most of us only know each other on these boards by the words that we post. Which means not at all.

[Taixuquan99]

What Jimbo said.

[Hardwork108]

HW,
Sometimes I feel you make some valid points, but then you like to call those whose experiences differ from your ideal as 'clueless', McKwoon-trained, etc.
Look, I know what you mean and things do get out of hand sometimes in these forums, but there are people here that despite the evidence that there are TCMAs that have ground fighting training, can´t admit to being wrong and start changing their stories and going back to the "but BJJ is better", in the best case scenario, and in the worst case scenario "there is [still] no ground training in TCMAs"! One also sees demeaning comments about the Internals and IP, etc, etc

When one sees this kind of living in denial then one assumes that these people - as great as they are in tae kwon do - have not been exposed to genuine TCMA training and hence they do not contemplate that there is more to them (the hundreds of systems/styles included) than they have been exposed to.


That's really no different at all from the people who come on here and endlessly trash CMA. Neither side is really helping their cause.
The difference is that people like sifu Patterson who kindly take the time to explain certain lesser known aspects and students like me who just talk about what we were exposed to, are doing so in a TCMA forum, not a MMA one.

I believe that what I said in my last setence verifies why this thread was brought into existance by the original poster.


Each person gathers experience for themselves. If that includes experience in non-CMA arts, that does not make their CMA practice any less valid.

Actually, what makes their TCMA experience less valid is not their training in other arts, necessarily, but the way they manifest themselves as regards kung fu methodologies that they are unfamiliar with, which is more or less in the following way, "I have 'decades' of experience in tae kwon do, Muay Thai, karate, judo, BJJ, boxing and [of course] 'kung fu', so I know everything", but it does not end there, because sometimes you get, "to improve kung fu striking you must practice boxing and MT, then you must do BJJ and judo for grappling and ground game, to improve your kung fu, because kung fu is out of date [apparently]".

Anyone, arguing and presenting other facts against this is called a troll and a trouble maker, and all of this in a KUNG FU FORUM. I am sorry, people who deny that some TCMAs address the ground scenario; that the Internals are valid methodologies; that forms training is an important TCMA training tool, etc. are clueless, in view of the fact that a sifu of Mike Patterson's clout has taken the time to write here to inform the posters here about his experiences and understandings of the TCMAs.

Also remember that the TCMAs suffer from the Mcdojo phenomenon, where over 90% kung fu schools out there are bad to mediocre. Yet, over 90% posters here do not hesitate to make sweeping and generalized statements regarding what are hundreds of varied combat styles.


If it enhances someone's understanding or whatever reason they do it for, how is that irrelevent?

I have no doubt that many of these people have gained understanding of various combat approaches, but I am also at no doubt that most of them could not fight their way out of paper bags using PURELY kung fu techniques. I mean how can they, if the kung fu they have studied is part of, in some cases, a dozen or so other, sometimes very different and irrelevant styles of MA. How could they fight using kung fu when every other post here seems to be criticizing methodlogies that they have not really trained?

Of course, having said what I said above, I am sure that many of these guys can use their MMA/boxing/MT skills to fight pretty well, but that does not make them KUNG FU experts, or even qualify them to make sweeping and generalized criticisms about the TCMAs that are in no way true!


The fact is, and it's been said before...most of us only know each other on these boards by the words that we post. Which means not at all.
Words can be very telling sometimes.;)

PS. Thank you for your civil post. :)

[Taixuquan99]

Look, I know what you mean and things do get out of hand sometimes in these forums, but there are people here that despite the evidence that there are TCMAs that have ground fighting training, can´t admit to being wrong and start changing their stories and going back to the "but BJJ is better", in the best case scenario, and in the worst case scenario "there is [still] no ground training in TCMAs"! One also sees demeaning comments about the Internals and IP, etc, etc

When one sees this kind of living in denial then one assumes that these people - as great as they are in tae kwon do - have not been exposed to genuine TCMA training and hence they do not contemplate that there is more to them (the hundreds of systems/styles included) than they have been exposed to.


The difference is that people like sifu Patterson who kindly take the time to explain certain lesser known aspects and students like me who just talk about what we were exposed to, are doing so in a TCMA forum, not a MMA one.

I believe that what I said in my last setence verifies why this thread was brought into existance by the original poster.



Actually, what makes their TCMA experience less valid is not their training in other arts, necessarily, but the way they manifest themselves as regards kung fu methodologies that they are unfamiliar with, which is more or less in the following way, "I have 'decades' of experience in tae kwon do, Muay Thai, karate, judo, BJJ, boxing and [of course] 'kung fu', so I know everything", but it does not end there, because sometimes you get, "to improve kung fu striking you must practice boxing and MT, then you must do BJJ and judo for grappling and ground game, to improve your kung fu, because kung fu is out of date [apparently]".

Anyone, arguing and presenting other facts against this is called a troll and a trouble maker, and all of this in a KUNG FU FORUM. I am sorry, people who deny that some TCMAs address the ground scenario; that the Internals are valid methodologies; that forms training is an important TCMA training tool, etc. are clueless, in view of the fact that a sifu of Mike Patterson's clout has taken the time to write here to inform the posters here about his experiences and understandings of the TCMAs.

Also remember that the TCMAs suffer from the Mcdojo phenomenon, where over 90% kung fu schools out there are bad to mediocre. Yet, over 90% posters here do not hesitate to make sweeping and generalized statements regarding what are hundreds of varied combat styles.



I have no doubt that many of these people have gained understanding of various combat approaches, but I am also at no doubt that most of them could not fight their way out of paper bags using PURELY kung fu techniques. I mean how can they, if the kung fu they have studied is part of, in some cases, a dozen or so other, sometimes very different and irrelevant styles of MA. How could they fight using kung fu when every other post here seems to be criticizing methodlogies that they have not really trained?

Of course, having said what I said above, I am sure that many of these guys can use their MMA/boxing/MT skills to fight pretty well, but that does not make them KUNG FU experts, or even to make generalized criticisms about the TCMAs that are in no way true!


Words can be very telling sometimes.;)

PS. Thank you for your civil post. :)

I actually agree on certain points, and always have. When I see criticism of kung fu from people who got more contact training elsewhere that fails to note that the lack of contact training means they could not have entrained for combat any kung fu, I cringe. When this is carried forward to now being an authority, I also cringe, because it is a sort of self-deluded fraud they are carrying out in their argumentation. Further, when I see people talk about how they have the real thing, and yet I see that the difference in the quality of info on all kung fu styles in English is so bad compared to stuff I can and have found in Chinese, and these same people are saying what everyone else needs to do to save their kung fu, I wonder how the ocean of their wisdom has failed to even fill a pamphlet with something a little more meaningful than "mantis uses a hooked hand, here's a form."

That said, though the people you argue with often team up with such morons, which also makes me cringe, they are no such morons, but merely *******es for wasting time arguing all month with you. A number of them I am aware of have quite legitimate kung fu experience.

I just don't see why it isn't obvious to all that an absence of technical discussion specifically on kung fu on the most frequented english language kung fu board is going to be noticed and long term considered a red flag to people who might be interested in kung fu. That there is a real sense of urgency to turn this around, because the reputation of tcma in China isn't that much better, but since we're facing the problem first, we'd better make our own solutions. These arguments are a distraction from an important task, and they lead nowhere when they preempt technical discussion or preempt people with useful information on usage into arguments.

You are correct in one sense, there is no question that a fighter who has not trained kung fu in a way to entrain the methods, has trained bjj and muay thai in a way to entrain the methods, and fights in a ring, cannot be using much kung fu. It is a given that, since most kung fu schools do not entrain for this, most claiming to be experts because of ring time are not experts in kung fu. But this leads nowhere. The goals must be training methods that allow entrainment of kung fu(which means replacing traditions like war and bodyguard work with other methods, which most often means gear and drills and sparring), open sharing of many methods, and, from there, increased availability of supporting materials in English that were previously unavailable, plus new works based on the results of more qualified individuals. Which means less making students into student-teachers at precisely the time they need to be advanced students, and less chatter in class and teachers showing off, and more teachers having good students to show off. If you don't have the goal of turning out students who could kick your ass, you won't, and because of the concept of face, kung fu has suffered under the burden of this limitation.

[Taixuquan99]

Love you too! :)

actually I haven't posted in this thread for awhile, just waiting for someone to hang themselves with the mile of rope they've unwound.

****it! Why do I keep getting you and Iron Eagle confused?

It matters not, you're just as evil and my eye is upon you! Do not think for one second that I believe you have not been somehow defiling kung fu during your so-called "good behavior".

Iron Eagle is a bad person and he should be punished. He should be tied to Drake, and the two should be left to fight to the death using only wing chun ground fighting back engineered solely from Hardwork's descriptions.

And then we deal with Dragonzbane. Without people to argue with, choking out Hardwork will have to wait until he is able to learn wing chun ground fighting and can do it himself.

[MightyB]

Look, I know what you mean and things do get out of hand sometimes in these forums, but there are people here that despite the evidence that there are TCMAs that have ground fighting training, can´t admit to being wrong and start changing their stories and going back to the "but BJJ is better", in the best case scenario, and in the worst case scenario "there is [still] no ground training in TCMAs"! One also sees demeaning comments about the Internals and IP, etc, etc

When one sees this kind of living in denial then one assumes that these people - as great as they are in tae kwon do - have not been exposed to genuine TCMA training and hence they do not contemplate that there is more to them (the hundreds of systems/styles included) than they have been exposed to.


The difference is that people like sifu Patterson who kindly take the time to explain certain lesser known aspects and students like me who just talk about what we were exposed to, are doing so in a TCMA forum, not a MMA one.

I believe that what I said in my last setence verifies why this thread was brought into existance by the original poster.



Actually, what makes their TCMA experience less valid is not their training in other arts, necessarily, but the way they manifest themselves as regards kung fu methodologies that they are unfamiliar with, which is more or less in the following way, "I have 'decades' of experience in tae kwon do, Muay Thai, karate, judo, BJJ, boxing and [of course] 'kung fu', so I know everything", but it does not end there, because sometimes you get, "to improve kung fu striking you must practice boxing and MT, then you must do BJJ and judo for grappling and ground game, to improve your kung fu, because kung fu is out of date [apparently]".

Anyone, arguing and presenting other facts against this is called a troll and a trouble maker, and all of this in a KUNG FU FORUM. I am sorry, people who deny that some TCMAs address the ground scenario; that the Internals are valid methodologies; that forms training is an important TCMA training tool, etc. are clueless, in view of the fact that a sifu of Mike Patterson's clout has taken the time to write here to inform the posters here about his experiences and understandings of the TCMAs.

Also remember that the TCMAs suffer from the Mcdojo phenomenon, where over 90% kung fu schools out there are bad to mediocre. Yet, over 90% posters here do not hesitate to make sweeping and generalized statements regarding what are hundreds of varied combat styles.



I have no doubt that many of these people have gained understanding of various combat approaches, but I am also at no doubt that most of them could not fight their way out of paper bags using PURELY kung fu techniques. I mean how can they, if the kung fu they have studied is part of, in some cases, a dozen or so other, sometimes very different and irrelevant styles of MA. How could they fight using kung fu when every other post here seems to be criticizing methodlogies that they have not really trained?

Of course, having said what I said above, I am sure that many of these guys can use their MMA/boxing/MT skills to fight pretty well, but that does not make them KUNG FU experts, or even qualify them to make sweeping and generalized criticisms about the TCMAs that are in no way true!


Words can be very telling sometimes.;)

PS. Thank you for your civil post. :)

Hmmm... I think you've finally nailed down the gist of your arguments here through the years and I'd have to say I... (darnit - can't believe I'm saying this) agree with you.

My main argument for cross training though is that I don't think of it as so much "I'm training boxing to be a boxer" but rather think of it as "I'm training boxing to counter boxing." Plus I get a different variety of sparring partners.

Like you, I'm getting tired of everyone dumping on TCMA. I like TCMA. I like the weapons - the pursuit of the manifestation of Chi (whatever that is), I like all the things that people consider goofy. I believe that the mythical archetype warrior scholar monk is something fun to aspire to... and it's not exactly a bad thing to have that as a role model. I like my Sifu, I like his friends, I like the other Sifu I've met over the years. So I like Kung Fu. I even enjoy watching the modern talou performers that can do things that I couldn't even dream of doing myself when I was a kid. I like a good lion dance team. I like the applications and chain of movements. The simultaneous attack and defense... There's so much to like about kung fu - that's why I don't get why so many people here seem to not like it. To you guys... "Just Go - F_CK you very much, and don't let the door hit you in the arse on your way out!".

[Iron_Eagle_76]

****it! Why do I keep getting you and Iron Eagle confused?

That's because we are both secret aliases of David Ross!!:p


Iron Eagle is a bad person and he should be punished. He should be tied to Drake, and the two should be left to fight to the death using only wing chun ground fighting back engineered solely from Hardwork's descriptions.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_WEe8D_Zrbps/TKkOl-tbDBI/AAAAAAAAAlE/lkCLlTb6s00/s400/budget_bloodsport.jpg

[Brule]

....Like you, I'm getting tired of everyone dumping on TCMA. I like TCMA. I like the weapons - the pursuit of the manifestation of Chi (whatever that is), I like all the things that people consider goofy. I believe that the mythical archetype warrior scholar monk is something fun to aspire to... and it's not exactly a bad thing to have that as a role model. I like my Sifu, I like his friends, I like the other Sifu I've met over the years. So I like Kung Fu. I even enjoy watching the modern talou performers that can do things that I couldn't even dream of doing myself when I was a kid. I like a good lion dance team. I like the applications and chain of movements. The simultaneous attack and defense... There's so much to like about kung fu - that's why I don't get why so many people here seem to not like it. To you guys... "Just Go - F_CK you very much, and don't let the door hit you in the arse on your way out!".

This paragraph says a lot. Nowhere in this paragraph you mention you like kung fu for the techniques, sparring, forms, etc....the martial stuff. You mention just things that surround a kung fu school. Maybe i misread what you said, if so my bad.

Don't get me wrong though, i like CMA also and enjoy all aspects of it, except maybe lion dance.

[MightyB]

This paragraph says a lot. Nowhere in this paragraph you mention you like kung fu for the techniques, sparring, forms, etc....the martial stuff. You mention just things that surround a kung fu school. Maybe i misread what you said, if so my bad.

Don't get me wrong though, i like CMA also and enjoy all aspects of it, except maybe lion dance.

I like the applications and chain of movements. The simultaneous attack and defense...

[Dragonzbane76]

Like you, I'm getting tired of everyone dumping on TCMA. I like TCMA. I like the weapons - the pursuit of the manifestation of Chi (whatever that is), I like all the things that people consider goofy. I believe that the mythical archetype warrior scholar monk is something fun to aspire to... and it's not exactly a bad thing to have that as a role model. I like my Sifu, I like his friends, I like the other Sifu I've met over the years. So I like Kung Fu. I even enjoy watching the modern talou performers that can do things that I couldn't even dream of doing myself when I was a kid. I like a good lion dance team. I like the applications and chain of movements. The simultaneous attack and defense... There's so much to like about kung fu - that's why I don't get why so many people here seem to not like it. To you guys... "Just Go - F_CK you very much, and don't let the door hit you in the arse on your way
out!".

I dont think people are neccesarily bad mouthing cma, well maybe ray but, overall most are discussing perspectives. The perspective most notably of the lack in certain fields that cma presents. Like you i find many thing of value in the tcma, but i also note some of it limitations, nothing is perfect. Honestly i would not be on this forum if i didnt have a background in tcma or love something about it. People tend to hold things of the past in high regard. Nothing wrong with that, but we should always be open for newer ideas and methods.

[MightyB]

...but i also note some of it limitations, nothing is perfect. Honestly i would not be on this forum if i didnt have a background in tcma or love something about it. People tend to hold things of the past in high regard. Nothing wrong with that, but we should always be open for newer ideas and methods.

And it's ok to say "this could be done better - and here's how" but lately people tend to take it too extreme. Nothing's perfect and there's no perfect solution to everybody.

At least to me it seems that everyone likes to dump on TCMA and not talk about what it's good at.

For instance - ANY TCMA has a better striking methodology than BJJ.

One of TCMA's universal theories or philosophies seems to be a simultaneous attack with the defense. You're supposed to destroy the attacker as he attacks with an offensive movement hidden in the defense, so in essence you're always attacking. That's a great philosophy. The idea of short power generation and coordinated body movement is refined in TCMA. What other MA takes it to the level of a TCMA?

There's a lot of great things - Martial things in TCMA that can be discussed.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I would like to sum this up in this way:
NO ONE bashes TCMA, some do indeed however bash "kung fu guys" that spew BS.
People with experience and that have been around the block KNOW that there is NOTHING new under the sun and also KNOW that when you can bring something different to the table, you have an edge.
People with a myoptic view of OTHER MA seem to believe there is something unique about that they do that NO ONE else does, even though that CAN'T demonstrate it.
Those people NEED to get out more.

[wenshu]

For instance - ANY TCMA has a better striking methodology than BJJ.

Chinese martial arts also emphasize aiming for the low hanging fruit.



One of TCMA's universal theories or philosophies seems to be a simultaneous attack with the defense. You're supposed to destroy the attacker as he attacks with an offensive movement hidden in the defense, so in essence you're always attacking. That's a great philosophy. The idea of short power generation and coordinated body movement is refined in TCMA. What other MA takes it to the level of a TCMA?

There's a lot of great things - Martial things in TCMA that can be discussed.


One of the things that has always amazed me is the detail to which everything has been distilled. Such as the three external harmonies. Or the importance of the eyes. Everything I've learned (read: been constantly admonished about) about the three harmonies in Songshan shaolin practice is exactly the same as in shuai jiao; the alignments, the stress on integrated movement of the waist and the rest of the body.

[Ray Pina]

This whole "warrior scholar monk" thing is noble..... so is dressing in green tights, slinging a bow and quiver of arrows over your shoulder, robbing **** Cheney and giving the money to Occupy Wall Street.

Grow Up!!!!!!

If you're not in the military or pursuing a vigorous sport fighting career.... you're not a warrior.

If you haven't racked up a handful of PHDs.... you're not a scholar.

If you haven't taken your oath and living in a monastery .... you're not a monk.

This, along with the "play with chi" thing, is not unlike grown men playing Dungeons and Dragons in the basement...... GROW UP!!!!!!

You chose martial arts. Get some boxing gloves, a mouth piece, a sports cup and get to work. Don't take a tradition for warriors and blend it with Shaw Brother fantasies.

Can you post a picture of yourself so we can laugh at you, the warrior scholar monk?

[Ray Pina]

The idea of short power generation and coordinated body movement is refined in TCMA. What other MA takes it to the level of a TCMA?


Boxing, BJJ, wrestling, Judo, MMA... and they do it against full resistance in open competition. They just don't call it "short power." They call it being crisp, or explosive, or something not so special sounding.

[wenshu]

It speaks volumes about a person's self worth when they spend all day hanging out with people for whom they profess nothing but utter contempt.

[MightyB]

This whole "warrior scholar monk" thing is noble..... so is dressing in green tights, slinging a bow and quiver of arrows over your shoulder, robbing **** Cheney and giving the money to Occupy Wall Street.

Grow Up!!!!!!

If you're not in the military or pursuing a vigorous sport fighting career.... you're not a warrior.

If you haven't racked up a handful of PHDs.... you're not a scholar.

If you haven't taken your oath and living in a monastery .... you're not a monk.

This, along with the "play with chi" thing, is not unlike grown men playing Dungeons and Dragons in the basement...... GROW UP!!!!!!

You chose martial arts. Get some boxing gloves, a mouth piece, a sports cup and get to work. Don't take a tradition for warriors and blend it with Shaw Brother fantasies.

Can you post a picture of yourself so we can laugh at you, the warrior scholar monk?

Ray - you can be a douchebag. Just saying... :rolleyes:

We're talking about martial ideals. What's wrong with someone aspiring to be something greater than themselves even if it's an unachievable but idealized state? You don't have to be so serious. As a matter of fact - a great lesson in MA or life is to learn how to not take yourself too seriously.

Heck - I don't see anything wrong with LARPing. I think the Michigan Renaissance (http://www.michrenfest.com/)Festival is Awesome!!! It's a heck of a lot more fun than having a sweaty fat arse in a dirty gi tea bagging you in a north south position. And it's a more responsible outlet for a professional person looking to ease the stresses of the modern existence.

Here's me Larping. (http://www.youtube.com/user/KBaringer3#p/a/u/1/otwb_2oZlpo)

[Iron_Eagle_76]

Would someone please point to these posters constantly bashing on TCMA?? Maybe I am not looking hard enough but I don't see them. Also, please, if any of this supposed "bashing" of TCMA is something perceived that I did please direct me to what I said and would gladly explain. I'm just trying to figure out where??

Honestly I would love more technical discussion as well, but when someone starts a thread or comments on it the discussion generally goes nowhere, whereas drivel such as this thread goes on and on. I won't be a hypocrite, I fully admit to participating in the "drivel" part, but I find myself starting threads on technique, sparring, methods, ect. that go nowhere??

As an example of this, I started a thread with the Russian Greco-Roman wresting strenghth and training compares to rooting and footwork found in TCMA, in particuliar Shuai Jiao.

But that will get 3 comments while this gets 400, all the while myself and others will be accused of not contributing.:rolleyes:

Yes, I see more and more every day why Ross left!!

[hskwarrior]

It's a heck of a lot more fun than having a sweaty fat arse in a dirty gi tea bagging you in a north south position.

It is pretty funny that he was acting like he was in shape like the photo' he posted......when i saw his video my first reaction was WTF?!?!?!?!?!?!

[ShaolinDan]

Honestly I would love more technical discussion as well, but when someone starts a thread or comments on it the discussion generally goes nowhere, whereas drivel such as this thread goes on and on. I won't be a hypocrite, I fully admit to participating in the "drivel" part, but I find myself starting threads on technique, sparring, methods, ect. that go nowhere??

As an example of this, I started a thread with the Russian Greco-Roman wresting strenghth and training compares to rooting and footwork found in TCMA, in particuliar Shuai Jiao.

But that will get 3 comments while this gets 400, all the while myself and others will be accused of not contributing.:rolleyes:


Have been noticing this pattern a lot lately...and thinking about it. I think the trick is to start an argument--that's what keeps people posting. To have a technical discussion on roundhouse kicks, you should post, 'my roundhouse kick is better than your roundhouse kick, and here's why,' instead of 'how do you roundhouse?'

[MightyB]

Would someone please point to these posters constantly bashing on TCMA?? Maybe I am not looking hard enough but I don't see them. Also, please, if any of this supposed "bashing" of TCMA is something perceived that I did please direct me to what I said and would gladly explain. I'm just trying to figure out where??

Honestly I would love more technical discussion as well, but when someone starts a thread or comments on it the discussion generally goes nowhere, whereas drivel such as this thread goes on and on. I won't be a hypocrite, I fully admit to participating in the "drivel" part, but I find myself starting threads on technique, sparring, methods, ect. that go nowhere??

As an example of this, I started a thread with the Russian Greco-Roman wresting strenghth and training compares to rooting and footwork found in TCMA, in particuliar Shuai Jiao.

But that will get 3 comments while this gets 400, all the while myself and others will be accused of not contributing.:rolleyes:

Yes, I see more and more every day why Ross left!!

Actually I just love to argue... seriously - it passes the time. I'm editing video right now and it's boring as Shiite. I was actually getting ready to post a serious reply on one of the threads you started. ;)

[Iron_Eagle_76]

Actually I just love to argue... seriously - it passes the time. I'm editing video right now and it's boring as Shiite. I was actually getting ready to post a serious reply on one of the threads you started. ;)

Awesome, I too am bored at work await the entertainment this will provide.:p

Seriously though, I really would like to get more discussion. On my mitt work vid I encouraged others to post vids if they had them and one person did, donjitsu, which I greatly appreciated and enjoyed the conversation with him about it.

I understand many people may not want to do this, they don't have the means, the time, maybe they simply don't care. But think how interesting a thread would be if 30 or 40 of the posters on here actually posted their training or sparring videos. I personally would feel it would be much more beneficial than arguing what position your hand should be in when delievering a phoenix eye.:rolleyes:

[MightyB]

It is pretty funny that he was acting like he was in shape like the photo' he posted......when i saw his video my first reaction was WTF?!?!?!?!?!?!

I didn't see the picture and I'm not referring to anybody in particular. I don't like or condone personal attacks on forum members.

In this instance I'm not agreeing with his state of mind on this topic... but I also have agreed with a lot of the things he's posted in the past... and I respect that Ray challenges himself in competition. Something I wholeheartedly admire. It's very difficult to put yourself out there.

I always feel like I have to throw up prior to competing and I get nervous as all gid'out.

[hskwarrior]

In this instance I'm not agreeing with his state of mind on this topic... but I also have agreed with a lot of the things he's posted in the past... and I respect that Ray challenges himself in competition. Something I wholeheartedly admire. It's very difficult to put yourself out there.

he is so focused on one thing to see anything else clearly. I bet he goes to bed and wakes up saying the same thing night in and night out. So, yeah, he is correct to a certain extent....but it goes no further than that. he is stuck in one mode.....

[MightyB]

Awesome, I too am bored at work await the entertainment this will provide.:p

Seriously though, I really would like to get more discussion. On my mitt work vid I encouraged others to post vids if they had them and one person did, donjitsu, which I greatly appreciated and enjoyed the conversation with him about it.

I understand many people may not want to do this, they don't have the means, the time, maybe they simply don't care. But think how interesting a thread would be if 30 or 40 of the posters on here actually posted their training or sparring videos. I personally would feel it would be much more beneficial than arguing what position your hand should be in when delievering a phoenix eye.:rolleyes:

I'll get some stuff for you. I personally only go to one striking/MMA clinic each week - on Tuesdays - but the drills are muy bueno and I've been wanting to capture some vid of the guys working out for ya all.

I'm a martial road w hore. Go to Judo clubs Monday and Wednesdays, Striking / MMA on Tuesdays, BJJ on Thursdays. TCMA on my own every day. Once in a blue moon, go to my Sifu's place on a Saturday (I moved a few years back so it's seriously cut into my TCMA time because of distance).

[Iron_Eagle_76]

hskwarrior

I also enjoy when you post videos of your guys and others doing Choy Li Fut techniques. It is interesting and beneficial to share knowledge and see other arts, particuliary those related to TCMA, apply what they know.

This is what I would like to see more from this forum!!

[hskwarrior]

hskwarrior

I also enjoy when you post videos of your guys and others doing Choy Li Fut techniques. It is interesting and beneficial to share knowledge and see other arts, particuliary those related to TCMA, apply what they know.

This is what I would like to see more from this forum!!

whoa, i wasn't expecting that. Thanks bro. My sifu was a stickler about using only what was in our system. I agree with what he felt so i pass that idea down to my own students. Sometimes I'll hold the pads in front of my students while they drill techniques from specific forms they learn and give them an actual target to strike instead of just doing it in the air or solo. They immediately realized how weak their strikes were and since then they love pad work.

[Ray Pina]

I don't see anything wrong with LARPing. I think the Michigan Renaissance (http://www.michrenfest.com/)Festival is Awesome!!! .[/URL]

Absolutely! It's awesome... but to confuse it with combatives is moronic on many levels.

Keep your secret fantasy life secret. Keep your martial life martial.

[Ray Pina]

It is pretty funny that he was acting like he was in shape like the photo' he posted......when i saw his video my first reaction was WTF?!?!?!?!?!?!

Wait.... are you a fat fVck calling someone out on being chubby? And I did get fat with this shoulder injury, not training and having a fiance that throws a stick of butter into every meal.

I noticed it. I felt it.

I've already dropped 10lbs from that video. I'll drop 10 more by Thanksgiving.

This is related to being honest with yourself.... I got fat. I'm addressing it aggressively. I'll be back 187 by Jan. 1, 2012.

[Drake]

It's thread like these that drive people to play football or take up swimming. Now, don't take this personally, ut from an outsider perspective, this makes it look like argument between a bunch of nerdy older white guys who play dress up and pretend they are Chinese monks and a bunch of fat middle aged men who sit on 14 year olds to show them what it feels like to be sat on.

Sorry... that's just what it looks like. Take it for what it's worth.

[hskwarrior]

Wait.... are you a fat fVck calling someone out on being chubby? And I did get fat with this shoulder injury, not training and having a fiance that throws a stick of butter into every meal.


Yes the Fuk i DID!!!!! and you ain't just chubby cuzzo. you were the first to call me out guessing at how much i weigh. then you post pics of you when you were in good shape. Ain't that a *****!!!!! get over yourself. and if your weight gain is because of your injury then you should full well know that my own personal injury caused me to gain weight as well. I was never fat till my accident.

[Drake]

Yes the Fuk i DID!!!!! and you ain't just chubby cuzzo. you were the first to call me out guessing at how much i weigh. then you post pics of you when you were in good shape. Ain't that a *****!!!!! get over yourself. and if your weight gain is because of your injury then you should full well know that my own personal injury caused me to gain weight as well. I was never fat till my accident.

I'll vouch for Frank here. I've seen his OLD pics, and he wasn't fat. And a spinal injury is no laughing matter... there isn't much in the realm of high intensity cardio you can do when you've suffered an injury like that.

But you do need to lay off the soda, sifu Frank ;)

[sanjuro_ronin]

I don't know what you guys are *****ing about, I love my flabbyness !
:D

[hskwarrior]

DRAKE.......I know bro. its my one big block from me losing all the weight i need to. I recently learned that caffeine affects your joints so i have been trying to get off the COKE .....its a tough ride...LOL..... but by summer time next year, i plan to be at least 50 lbs lighter.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/photos-ak-snc1/v4812/115/53/697132731/n697132731_1942892_7115163.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/15867_177973132731_697132731_2864822_5910092_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/15867_205701152731_697132731_3026460_7719759_n.jpg

[MightyB]

It's thread like these that drive people to play football or take up swimming. Now, don't take this personally, ut from an outsider perspective, this makes it look like argument between a bunch of nerdy older white guys who play dress up and pretend they are Chinese monks and a bunch of fat middle aged men who sit on 14 year olds to show them what it feels like to be sat on.

Sorry... that's just what it looks like. Take it for what it's worth.

Too Awesome! :)

Ray, my current secret fantasy life involves NinjAlicia. (http://a8.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/s720x720/310546_10150443672309363_135964689362_10462204_705 299244_n.jpg) :) And me in a monk's robe standing atop a golden pyramid like some type of sun god with hundreds of nakid women throwing tiny pickles at me.

[Mike Patterson]

I actually agree on certain points, and always have. When I see criticism of kung fu from people who got more contact training elsewhere that fails to note that the lack of contact training means they could not have entrained for combat any kung fu, I cringe. When this is carried forward to now being an authority, I also cringe, because it is a sort of self-deluded fraud they are carrying out in their argumentation. Further, when I see people talk about how they have the real thing, and yet I see that the difference in the quality of info on all kung fu styles in English is so bad compared to stuff I can and have found in Chinese, and these same people are saying what everyone else needs to do to save their kung fu, I wonder how the ocean of their wisdom has failed to even fill a pamphlet with something a little more meaningful than "mantis uses a hooked hand, here's a form."

That said, though the people you argue with often team up with such morons, which also makes me cringe, they are no such morons, but merely *******es for wasting time arguing all month with you. A number of them I am aware of have quite legitimate kung fu experience.

I just don't see why it isn't obvious to all that an absence of technical discussion specifically on kung fu on the most frequented english language kung fu board is going to be noticed and long term considered a red flag to people who might be interested in kung fu. That there is a real sense of urgency to turn this around, because the reputation of tcma in China isn't that much better, but since we're facing the problem first, we'd better make our own solutions. These arguments are a distraction from an important task, and they lead nowhere when they preempt technical discussion or preempt people with useful information on usage into arguments.

You are correct in one sense, there is no question that a fighter who has not trained kung fu in a way to entrain the methods, has trained bjj and muay thai in a way to entrain the methods, and fights in a ring, cannot be using much kung fu. It is a given that, since most kung fu schools do not entrain for this, most claiming to be experts because of ring time are not experts in kung fu. But this leads nowhere. The goals must be training methods that allow entrainment of kung fu(which means replacing traditions like war and bodyguard work with other methods, which most often means gear and drills and sparring), open sharing of many methods, and, from there, increased availability of supporting materials in English that were previously unavailable, plus new works based on the results of more qualified individuals. Which means less making students into student-teachers at precisely the time they need to be advanced students, and less chatter in class and teachers showing off, and more teachers having good students to show off. If you don't have the goal of turning out students who could kick your ass, you won't, and because of the concept of face, kung fu has suffered under the burden of this limitation.

Amen. Well stated.:)

[Lucas]

Too Awesome! :)

Ray, my current secret fantasy life involves NinjAlicia. (http://a8.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/s720x720/310546_10150443672309363_135964689362_10462204_705 299244_n.jpg) :) And me in a monk's robe standing atop a golden pyramid like some type of sun god with hundreds of nakid women throwing tiny pickles at me.

quit stealing all my secret fantasies

[wenshu]

It's thread like these that drive people to play football or take up swimming. Now, don't take this personally, ut from an outsider perspective, this makes it look like argument between a bunch of nerdy older white guys who play dress up and pretend they are Chinese monks and a bunch of fat middle aged men who sit on 14 year olds to show them what it feels like to be sat on.



Too Awesome! :)


Well done indeed.

I dress up in monk's robes because it is a good way to meet celebrities and government dignitaries. Also, prostitutes give discounts if you bless them.

[David Jamieson]

This place is like herding cats at times. yeesh.

Be civil. Easy on the name calling and all that.

[MightyB]

Well done indeed.

I dress up in monk's robes because it is a good way to meet celebrities and government dignitaries. Also, prostitutes give discounts if you bless them.

Is this true? And does it make a difference if you wear the gray or the orange robe?

[Lucas]

meow
http://pixdaus.com/pics/1297663792TXKM9Ui.jpg

[MightyB]

quit stealing all my secret fantasies

Hey now - I let you keep the one with the Cheetos and the Unit.ard

[Lucas]

that ones really top secret...

http://b.vimeocdn.com/ts/144/037/144037081_100.jpg

[MightyB]

that ones really top secret...

http://b.vimeocdn.com/ts/144/037/144037081_100.jpg

Your diligence and skill in finding that particular image has to be commended.

Well done sir! Bravo - Bravo!

[Lucas]

thank you thank you...my search fu has definately gotten better over the years here.

[Hardwork108]

GOOD POST!



I actually agree on certain points, and always have.
The there is still some hope for you yet, my boy! :D;):)


When I see criticism of kung fu from people who got more contact training elsewhere that fails to note that the lack of contact training means they could not have entrained for combat any kung fu, I cringe.

That is exactly it! Add to that the fact that many only have a passing familiarity with their given style's principles, but think that they understand them, then what you have in front of you are Mcdojo fodder, as far as their TCMA knowledge is concerned.



When this is carried forward to now being an authority, I also cringe, because it is a sort of self-deluded fraud they are carrying out in their argumentation.
Again, you are talking about the typical delusion of grandeur gained by mixing illegitimate Mcdojo kung fu with LEGITIMATE MMA type training. This is actually a very interesting phenomenon, if you ask me.


Further, when I see people talk about how they have the real thing, and yet I see that the difference in the quality of info on all kung fu styles in English is so bad compared to stuff I can and have found in Chinese, and these same people are saying what everyone else needs to do to save their kung fu,

That is why the finding of GENUINE and AUTHENTIC instruction - even if far from easy - can never be overemphasized. I am sure that you have noticed that I go on and on repeating myself as regards the importance of genuine instruction.


I wonder how the ocean of their wisdom has failed to even fill a pamphlet with something a little more meaningful than "mantis uses a hooked hand, here's a form."

Yep, the watching the finger and not seeing the moon, people.....;)


That said, though the people you argue with often team up with such morons, which also makes me cringe, they are no such morons, but merely *******es for wasting time arguing all month with you. A number of them I am aware of have quite legitimate kung fu experience.

Please point them out to me, because I want to know who they are!


I just don't see why it isn't obvious to all that an absence of technical discussion specifically on kung fu on the most frequented english language kung fu board is going to be noticed and long term considered a red flag to people who might be interested in kung fu.
You wouldn't believe how many actual TCMA practitioners, as well as those interested in the TCMAs have been put off or even intimidated - and have left - by the likes of Dave Ross and others, who would take an innocent question put forward by a new poster and turn it to point of ridicule, because some how the "kung fu-ness" of enquiry did not fit well with their "new world" view of the "functional" MMA they supported or peddled!



That there is a real sense of urgency to turn this around, because the reputation of tcma in China isn't that much better, but since we're facing the problem first, we'd better make our own solutions. These arguments are a distraction from an important task, and they lead nowhere when they preempt technical discussion or preempt people with useful information on usage into arguments.
We would not have these arguments if the MMA crowd, admitted to their limitations as the "improvers" of the TCMAs and just came here to ask polite questions about these methodolgies, to enlighten themselves, instead of come here and more or less, tell us that what we do is "fantasy"! ;)


You are correct in one sense, there is no question that a fighter who has not trained kung fu in a way to entrain the methods, has trained bjj and muay thai in a way to entrain the methods, and fights in a ring, cannot be using much kung fu.
THANK YOU!

I would go further and say that they have NO IDEA!

These people are "drunk" with their "decades" of MA experience, that in many cases has taken them away from the TCMA methodologies they seek to "improve" by adding Tae Kwon Do kicks!

They don't train kung fu; they don't fight kung fu and they cannot discuss kung fu in any depth without tripping on their tongues. That is the sad fact.

So, we have the in the ring this, or in the ring that; then we have, the pseudo scientific types who try to "debunk" every technique or concept that is beyond their limited TCMA understanding. For example, you show them (and their "decades" of experience) a TCMA fist formation that they are not familiar with, they will turn around and brush it as a "fantasy", because perhaps the grand master who invented the system, "had a broken finger and could not form a fist properly" (which somehow went unnoticed by his students and disciples; for generations, that is until the art arrived in Smucksville USA, and our pseudo scientific MMA-ist "I have also done 'kung fu' friend debunked it!

Show these people an unusual kicking methodology that they do not understand, then you might get, "oh, that doesn't work in 'real life'. The grand master that invented that system, must have had a wooden leg" (that also went unnoticed by his disciples...LOL)!

Then we have the famous, "the hollow fist is an Internal fantasy technique, invented for the lazy, rich upper class Chinese aristocrats". You ask, why do you say that? But, you will never hear, "because we have absolutely no idea about these methodologies, but are too cowardly and insecure to say it, so we act like modern, scientific know it alls, to hide our TCMA cluelessness - besides we have done BJJ, you know"......LOL!



It is a given that, since most kung fu schools do not entrain for this, most claiming to be experts because of ring time are not experts in kung fu.
Again, you are correctly referring to the Mcdojo/kwoon phenomenon, which effects over 90 percent of those who "train" TCMAs. Of course, that statistic does not apply to this forum, where everyone and their grandmothers, who train Muay Thai, BJJ, etc., are true TCMA experts, qualified to criticise, judge and IMPROVE not one, but all TCMAS under the sun.....LOL!


The goals must be training methods that allow entrainment of kung fu(which means replacing traditions like war and bodyguard work with other methods, which most often means gear and drills and sparring),
Agreed, but many schools already do that, but they are in the minority. Also, genuine kung fu training needs more than just contact sparring. People need to train and understand their forms properly (including the so called "development" forms).

People need to understand the principles, also, and beyond the usual superficial level. How many times have we heard about the famous "being" like water and leacking through. Yet many with the usual ring fighter mentality take this to be solely a way of finding a way through when you are attacking. That is while they quote the water principle, many times they have no idea of the "not going back" principle!!!

So, yes it is easy to "leak" through when you are on the attack and you find openings, but what about when you are attacked by a strong opponent. "Easy" and they say perhaps, " I will go back and draw him into a counter".

So, they see water leaking when it is flooding you, but they forget that water will leak into you when you try to push (attack) it. So, what are the training mindset and skill sets needed to not go back? Good question. The answer will open doors to deeper research into lesser known TCMA methodolgies.


open sharing of many methods, and, from there, increased availability of supporting materials in English that were previously unavailable, plus new works based on the results of more qualified individuals. Which means less making students into student-teachers at precisely the time they need to be advanced students, and less chatter in class and teachers showing off, and more teachers having good students to show off. If you don't have the goal of turning out students who could kick your ass, you won't, and because of the concept of face, kung fu has suffered under the burden of this limitation.

I believe that kung fu training was always about fighting. Of course, other aspects, including the cultural/moral ones were always involved, but at the end of the day the TCMAs are combat arts and many schools train them that way. Those that don't are mainly Mcdojos, because you will probably find that schools that don't train realistically will also not delve deeper into the conditioning and advanced principles.

And thanks to you for your civil post, as well.:)

[Drake]

Oh yeah.... and LARPers who write Thesis-length posts.

[Hardwork108]

Oh yeah.... and LARPers who write Thesis-length posts.
Try to read my post and see the valid and relevant (even to you) points, as regards the TCMAs, made in it, and leave your personal issues with me for the Off Topic section, where I regularly give you lessons on real world Geo Politics. ;)

Thanks in advance.

[Drake]

Try to read my post and see the valid and relevant (even to you) points, as regards the TCMAs, made in it, and leave your personal issues with me for the Off Topic section, where I regularly give you lessons on real world Geo Politics. ;)

Thanks in advance.

Thanks, I almost left that out!

CONDESCENDING LARPers who write Thesis-length posts.

Wow...almost missed that one. Thanks for the assist!