What are the weaknesses/limitations of your system?

[Merryprankster]

I don't punch or kick so well, for obvious reasons. I know NOTHING of weapons defense.

How about you?

[Johnny Hot Shot]

To become good a person must practice alot

[Steven T. Richards]

Hello Merry 'P',

This question will sort out the men from the boys'.

Many martial arts people simply couldn't bring themselves to accept the validity of the question.

As a lineage holder, I may not be supossed to answer this kinda question but, I will say that its weakness is in anything that is good that isn't taught in it;)

That means that our people MUST go out and test themselves and the system, and that the system MUST be open ended.

Dialectical - physical pressure testing.

Generally, a weakness of it is that it is very hard to teach, so, that means that only a few will ever grasp it. I don't mean this as an elitist statement but as a statement of fact.

If I've not answered properly (which is entirely possible) please come back.

Cheers,

Steve.

[Dark Knight]

Hot chicks, not enough

[Starchaser107]

My system has a 56 k modem, and a pentium processor, it is very old and out of date, plus it still uses windows 95, I need to upgrade soon or Ill become a dinosaur.

But seriously , what is deficient in my kung fu is no indication of what isnt present in my kungfu system. I'd like to break stuff like bricks and concrete blocks while they are on fire... so far my system does not have that. I'd really feel better about myself If I knew how to break a pile of bricks on fire. I know its childish of me , but this is something I really want to do... effortlessly.

[Water Dragon]

Taiji: Too dependant on the other guy "giving" you something to work with. This causes troubles witha well trained fighter.

Rarely given set technique to use as a base for future knowledge. This can cause a lack of confidence in on'e abilities as well as slowdown the learning curve.

[Budokan]

We only do point-sparring, which is practically valueless.

[prana]

I cant walk after 30 minutes of training. After 2 hours, I feel like a corpse. haha errr hang on a second, that is what I am. aiks !

[Xebsball]

Do you do some type of Yoga or something? (just curious cos it seems very powerfull if it takes so much from your body)

[prana]

Xebsball

hehe after 30 minutes, the legs goes to sleep. About the corpse thing, yeah it is something to do with the meditation :D hehehe

[Water Dragon]

We can't shoot chi ballz out of our azz either. That's a major deficiency in any system.

[joedoe]

I am the only limitation of my system :)

[Mr. Nemo]

Baji: No ground grappling
Boxing: Well, its uhhhh.....only punches
BJJ: The weaknesses of BJJ, both legitimate and illegitimate, have been well documented in a thousand kung fu vs. BJJ threads

[old jong]

I don't train in a cage against fully resisting opponents!...

[Martial Joe]

Wing Chun~The ground

Wrestling~Standing

That is why I put them together...

[Merryprankster]

Steve,

In a very general way, that's exactly right. Anything that is useful that isn't taught is a weakness.

Or perhaps more precisely, anything useful you aren't taught how to deal with is a weakness.

May I suggest that if it is so hard to teach, that development of teaching methods be explored with the same rigor that went into developing and refining the style?

The dialectic is the only way to travel!!! :)

Water Dragon--this seemed to me to be the problem as I was watching an Aikido class. It seemed to be awfully dependent on the other person overcomitting. What if they don't, ya know?

[don bohrer]

In American Kenpo I tend to think we have way to many self defense techniques which detract from working the basics! In addition we learn 2 and sometimes 3 kata's for a belt. Ouch, my skull hurts just thinking about it.

[Shaolindynasty]

I am not sure if I can say anything concrete since one of our top priorities is to spar using as many unusual situations as we can think of. Maybe the weakness is you won't be able to use it until at least a few months into it, but it doesn't take ten years either. So I am not really sure. My weakness is my enthhusiasim I tend to scare people away when I get excited during sparring. I also tend to showboat against weaker fighters, I know it's a bad habit and I might get hurt one day(yeah right I'm to da mn good haha).:p

[Steven T. Richards]

Hi Merry 'P',

I agree re the dialectic - and I understand that some of the Gracies champion its use in their teachings.

Many times in the past, I've suggested to other Chinese martial artists that they should train to 'beat' their own system ... NOT by training in a compliant way structurally... but to uncover its weaknesses as if you were from another system and wanted to take it and it's practitioners to fric**kin pieces.

Usually this gets a hostile reaction - as in 'how dare you suggest that!' or 'traitor!' etc etc.

I think it's simply logical - if we don't find out our systems weakness's then we can be sure that little 'ol blind spot will be uncovered very effectively by some other sod.

A good system has nothing to fear from this as it will grow with the results. As for individuals - it becomes an issue of character: those that want to go living in happy virtual reality fantasy world full of magical mystical BS will resist the notion like hell, and simply project their anxieties back on you in the form of hostility.
More developed characters will rise to the challenge and grow as people and as martial artists. It's a BS buster - and a lotta people don't like that;)

Cheers Friend,

Steve.

[bean curd]

the problem with looking at your arts weakness, is how experianced are you at the art you have taken on. is the weakness you see, one you have within yourself or one that the art doesn't answer.

without question every art doesn't facilitate all areas, but saying that, understanding the art you have both nei and wei, will permit you to adapt to what is required.

[rubthebuddha]

Wing Tsun: ego

Wing Chun in general: a common respect among GM Yip Man's FAMILY of senior students, if only for GM Yip's sake. is GM Yip somewhere in the afterlife asking, "good god, what the f*ck happened?"

[Steven T. Richards]

Bean 'C',

You have a point. Nevertheless, I was always taught to attempt to break down a structure as I was being taught it - not to confirm that it was good - but in a more multifactorial way - to test my ability to think, to compute and to reflect. Few 'structures' survive determined contact with an opponent, so, the ability to switch and change efficiently is needed.

The 'breaking down' can therefore be constructive as well as reductive.

This approach is high on input demands for the teacher, so it can't be taught in a large class environment. It does suit small dedicated groups, and this is a feature of Hakka arts - it certainly is in Lee-Yin-Sing's Mantis.

Without wishing to start an argument with Wing-Chun people SOME from that art are very sensitive about breaking down their own structures - as that implies that they are not perfect - and that does not 'compute' if the teaching is dogma driven. Of course this is true for a lot of arts - I mention WC because I have studied it under a number of different Si-Fu and used it in police work under real life pressure.

It's a sensitive issue for any style to address - it takes some courage and not a little reflection.

Cheers,

Steve.

[straight blast]

I do that all the time...the breaking down and looking for faults. It can be really depressing when you've just done six months of a style and the little voice in the back of your head says "Hey, you known this s**t isn't going to work for real". And yes, I do believe that after six months in a style you should have some idea of whether it'll work or not. Especially if like me you have trained for almost all your life.
It is both a blessing and a curse.
Blessing: Suddenly you are able to give people in your style a few nice little surprises that they hadn't thought of and therefore hadn't prepared for.
Curse: When sparring you are painfully aware of the weaknesses of your style, and are so busy trying to overcompensate for a weakness that likely as not he isn't even aware of that you tend to get trashed. Plus you lose faith in a lot of styles very quickly...though that's not always a bad thing...

But as for the weaknesses of my Style:
Muay Thai: No groundfighting, damaging to the body, relies on brute strength, and 9 times out of 10 the smaller lighter opponent gets thrashed.
Wing Chun: No groundfighting, many bad schools of.

That's about it

[yuanfen]

Steve Richards sez:
Without wishing to start an argument with Wing-Chun people SOME from that art are very sensitive about breaking down their own structures - as that implies that they are not perfect - and that does not 'compute' if the teaching is dogma driven. Of course this is true for a lot of arts - I mention WC because I have studied it under a number of different Si-Fu and used it in police work under real life pressure
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve: I have no idea about how much SPM you really know.That is neither a negative or positive remark. But that is not my point. The answers to the questions on this thread depends on how much a person knows of a system. Regarding wing chun I can say that your comment on wing chun above is quite misleading and inadequate. Of course you can always find people in an art who have their individual limits. In the culture of good wing chun the notion of "there is no unstoppable move is very much there" and a good sifu has and teaches humility about the limits of actions. In the same context of an exchange even when a good person makes an effective move in good teaching all are shown and taught to experiment with what the possible counters can be.
Both openness and development are treasured values. Also good wing chun teachers go over and again with the issues of whether the context made/makes a difference.
On internet lists discussions are not always sufficiently sustained
and one can give and absorb inadequate understanding of an art.
In many arts including wing chun and taiji there are lots of folks who do not know what they are doing. The considerable commercialization of much of kung fu has resulted in many inadequacies in understanding an art. And internet debates often mask more than what they uncover... often because top flight people don't always engage in debates in addition to the limitations of the medium.. Again, in US SPM's Mark sifu is unlikely to spout off on the net and debate. In Chen taiji, Chen Xiao Wang is unlikely to beat his breasts about his status as the family standard bearer.
Also, on the net folks can mention bouncers in bars and police work etc. In the US and very likely in the UK and Australia, the legal and ethical environment puts great limits
on the use of real kung fu. And in kung fu and karate tournaments also the rules and the legal implications give very limited ideas of what some arts are really about.

[Brett Again]

The major weakness I see in my system is not in the system itself, but in the teaching/training of it.

Too much emphasis is placed on the forms, with not nearly enough emphasis on practicing the application of these against live, resisting opponents.

While I "know" the application of moves from the form, without training to use them, I doubt my abilities to do so in an actual armed encounter. It would be, for example, like a boxer learning all types of jabs and punches and practicing against a heavy bag, but never actually boxing an opponent. (I believe this is a problem with much kung fu these days, and is at the heart of why kung fu fairs so poorly in UFC-type bouts.)

I have heard it said that "once you truly learn and internallize the form, the function will come automatically." BS That's like saying you'll become a great soccer player if you run around, alone, on a field and pretend to kick a ball.

[Steven T. Richards]

Yuan 'P'

You miss my point completely. Try reading it as subjective experience of SOME people in that system.

You seem to be far to sensitive and that has allowed you to project whatever it is that you seem to dislike about me personally into my comments about Wing-Chun. Whether you like it or not, I have studied that style - as you should know from other posts between us, and also whether you like it or otherwise, I have used it for real - and I have commented very positively on it, as in how it saved my life. So, I don't need a wilful mistinterpretation - consciously or otherwise.

As for top people in SPM, well my Si-Fu current Grandmaster Lee-Lien doesn't use the net either, he asked me to on his behalf with the authority to speak for him and his blood family. If you don't like that then hard cack.

If you want to know about me or my Pai ask some of Mark Foon's people who have posted here such as Richard Hodson or Scott Eng (GM Marks's son-in-law). You could do similar things with some of GM Yee''s people too: Bruce Campbell and Khanh Li.
You could even ask Roger Hagood - he knows enough about my background. Outside of jook-Lum there are plenty in Chow-Gar, Iron Ox etc who know me well.

[Steven T. Richards]

Yuan 'P'

As a PS you should have taken my last paragraph (In the post that you refer to) as a starting point - shame....

[yuanfen]

Steve Richards sez:As a PS you should have taken my last paragraph (In the post that you refer to) as a starting point - shame....
----------------------------------------------
The last para is where you refer to wing chun. My reply bears primarily on that. I have a friend or two with SPM background-
one is very very good as a martial artist- he doesnt discuss SPM on the net. I would not and have not commented on any substantial content of SPM. It takes a long time to get an inside view of a good style and it is usually preposterous to talk deeply
or knowledgeably about more than one. The time to get by with Draeger and Smith's Cook's tour has passed -at least for me.
I dont know you and comment on things as posted. I do not dislike you or like you- dont know enough to do either.

[Water Dragon]

Water Dragon--this seemed to me to be the problem as I was watching an Aikido class. It seemed to be awfully dependent on the other person overcomitting. What if they don't, ya know?

Well, it's not to that extreme.
Examples: Against boxers, I'm pretty good with avoiding rights and hooks. Jabs tear me up to hell and back as there is no real commitment, just enough to bloody your nose after a while.

Uppercuts are better for me, but still tough. I think it's the difference between the uppercuts more vertical energy vs. the horizontal energy I'm more used to.

Wrestling. I'm good against single legs, doubles, ankle picks, actually most take downs. Front head locks, over and under hooks tear me up. Once you sink that, there's no energy exchange and I'm screwed. I've been taken out of my element.

[Steven T. Richards]

Yuan 'F',

The reason why many seniors in any Pai do not post is because of trolls and flammers, and other more subtle attackers who may hide behind a facde of respectablility - usually an annonymous one.

In my view more seniors should post and enter into discussion - openly and freely. Notwithstanding the above, why not?

I speak openly and if that is not to your liking, then I'm afraid that you will just have to get used to it.

Reading your posts overall, very little of what you say is constructive and there is usually a poorly disguised attempt at attacking someones character. That said, I would defend your right to express your views as this is a debating forum.

I value any informed and reflective opinion or indeed criticism. If you are not capable of any of that, then maybe you could invite someone onto the forum who is.

[Merryprankster]

Yuan Fen has been pretty cordial to me, generally speaking, especially considering the attitude I threw his and whipping boy's way on the Wing Chun forum. Just wanted to speak to that.

That said, I think I understand Steve's point, and I believe it's much larger than Wing Chun.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe what you are saying is that arts frequently fall into the "Sifu says so," trap.

Do this.
Why?
Because Sifu says so.

Student dutifully performs.

Dogma sucks, and Steve, I think was just using his personal experiences in studying WC to demonstrate that. I don't believe any particular barb at WC was meant. I think he was just saying that that particular way of teaching is bad regardless of style practiced.

[Steven T. Richards]

Yuan 'F',

The last paragraph in that post does not refer to Wing-Chun.
For some reason your emotions are getting in the way of your ability to reason - or perhaps you just like being deliberately obtuse?

[Steven T. Richards]

Hi Merry 'P',

Yes that was my point exactly. Lessons based on subjective empiricism are the best learned.

I said nothing about ALL Wing-Chun, or about Yuan Fen or his lineage or his Si-Fu(s), only about SOME peole from that broader art within my own experience.

Yuan does not seem to like the fact that I am open and post freely and answer questions as I do - despite in his eyes 'claiming' something about status. He seems to think that I shouldn't do that.

Anyone can check my background out - its transparent - unlike some.

He also seems to think it impossible to get a deep insight into more than one art. Some people believe that, and no doubt that belief will produce its own anticipated outcomes.

Yuan doesn't seem to like my mentioning real experience in relevant contexts. Why not? Are not martial arts supposed to be real?

My experience is as valid, relatively speaking, as the the next persons and it is on that basis that I mention it.

Cheers Friend,

Steve.

[Merryprankster]

I have to say that I am perpetually entertained by the "closed," idea that seems to be present in many CMA; as though knowledge were a mystical thing to be taught in secret to a select few. I simply don't understand it and any discussion that focuses on it in any way leaves me scratching my head... I mean I KNOW it on a purely intellectual level, but it just leaves me baffled.

The Japanese were far less secretive IMO

[Steven T. Richards]

Hello Merry 'P',

Very good point, and a nice prompt for a serious debate about the issues of closedness and open debate - as in a forum.

People who do not want to talk with others will find themselves confused if they enter a debating forum - same for people who may dislike other people being open.

How, I wonder, can we all share knowledge and information without openness?

A closed single style forum would eventually run out of things to say as the limit point for reflection and self-reflexive critique would be met with very quickly - unless of course - as happens - having no 'outside enemy' - the debate reduces to internicine insults with different branches of a given art turning against one another.

Thankfully, there does seem to be a large number of open people posting on this forum and it is a great pleasure to have the oportunity to learn from them.

Cheers Friend,

Steve.

[xiong]

Although this seems to have turned into a Wing Chun thread I'll give what I think are my weaknesses.

I practice Wushu and I think a weakness of the style can be an overemphasis on the sport competitions.

My personal weakness is in actual fighting. We do not spar much, I think my teacher is worried about people hurting eachother, and I was never a very good fighter before.

So I am going to try and work in more fight conditioning and put together a sparring group outside of class. I just haven't told my wife this, she frowns on sparring.

[yuanfen]

merryprankster: my intent is to be cordial. thanks for your comments.
steve: I reproduce the ending of your relevant post:
<<<<Without wishing to start an argument with Wing-Chun people SOME from that art are very sensitive about breaking down their own structures - as that implies that they are not perfect - and that does not 'compute' if the teaching is dogma driven. Of course this is true for a lot of arts - I mention WC because I have studied it under a number of different Si-Fu and used it in police work under real life pressure.

It's a sensitive issue for any style to address - it takes some courage and not a little reflection.

Cheers,

Steve.>>>>
--------------------------------------------------------
I am assuming that a para is more than a sentence. But one
should be able to see what i am responding to in what is reproduced above whatever the nomenclature- paragraph-sentence etc one uses. Of course "sifu sez" by itself is hardly a sufficient source of authority in a martial art. But listening to, understanding and practising and trying out what a very accomplished teacher in any art is pointing out is not a trivial matter either..
Getting really first class instruction in TCMA-s including wing chun
is not an easy matter. And--one can develop straw man arguments by use of the term "some" in discussing an art and it's practitioners. To remove the discussion from WC or SPM of
course it would be correct to say that "some" or even "many"
taichi folks dont know how to use their art- that is neither here or there in understanding taichi/ taiji as a martial art.
Yes- experiences count- for personal development and in my case too. But in communications specially in truncated one s on the net we are at best dealing with recollections of our experience-
a very subjective matter.

[rubthebuddha]

nothing wrong with talking about wing chun. a lot of us study it in one flavor or another, and if enough people who do study it find faults, then, by gosh, we need to talk about it. that's what this thread is for.

now, we all know what technical weaknesses WC is known for (groundfighting, for example). what about SPM and stuff like that? i know little about mantis from either end of china, so fess up, all you SPM folkses.

[Steven T. Richards]

Hello 'Rub...'

Honest and informative reply... thank you.

I can only speak for my understanding of my branch of Mantis.
It's weakness is the shadow of its strengths - it focusses very, very well on doing certain things with great skill - but the downside of that is that its technical base is limited. It is a complete but closed system - in the sense that I've posted elsewhere. There are no strongly developed high kicking skills or ground grappling (curiously there is a lot of antigrapling) there is a full range of stand-up cum-na skills.

In our branch of Jook-Lum, a choice has been (broadly) made between strong bridge development and 'leaking hand skill'. We 'prefer' leaking, and SOME other systems of SPM 'prefer the opposite - strong, hard, heavy bridge. Preferences aside, there are times when a heavy bridge is perhaps the more applicable.

Broadly, I'd say that weakness is anything taht a system doesn't have that can be empirically demonstrated as practical and street useful. That means that my style has many weaknesses - as indeed will many others too.

This brings me to considering developing the initial prompt question of weakness in 'style' to asking 'How is this compensated for?'

Cheers,

Steve.

[Merryprankster]

I compensate for it by crosstraining as needed. :) And by challenging myself to get off my butt and work with guys outside my normal realm of experience.

[Steven T. Richards]

Yuan 'P',

Despite the potential for snipes at my 'status' - I am not at all bothered by critiques of my system - and, again despite the aforementioned I am not at all proprietorial. I don't own SPM in any of its forms or branches and I see no need to react to another persons honesty based critique as if I identified myself personally with my art or a related one.

If I did, then I'd probably be making aggresively defensive posts about SPM at the slightest whiff of criticism - and, taking it all very personally too.

Your choice - indeed insistance regarding which was my last paragraph just shows that you simply wanted to abstract something out of context to make a point for your own reasons rather than make an effort to understand what I had said. That last paragraph of mine: about sensitivity as an issue, and the call for courage and reflection, defines the whole post. Sad that you chose repeatedly to ignore it.

I would disagree with the notion that (many) practitioners not understanding how to use their art is neither here nor there in understanding it as a martial art. It is central to the issue of how difficult or sophisticated, direct or convoluted a system may be and how it may be delivered in a teaching sense. This is not to judge the effectiveness of an art on how many of its practitioners can use it - simply to look at how its structure and principles (which are BOTH very relevant) are taught and applied. That can a very direct bearing on survival - which is why our Pai advocate pressure testing.

As for practical experience - you know from previous posts on other threads that I have emphasised again and again the subjective nature of my personal fighting experience. That said, I have every right to offer it in contextual debate, and if some people with little or no experince are upset at that - then I am sorry for them.

Just as with people who harbour secret anxieties and doubts about their system - people with little real world fighting CAN in SOME instances project their fears in the form of hoistility onto people who have walked the talk.

[yuanfen]

Steve Richards says:
I can only speak for my understanding of my branch of Mantis
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------That is all that any of us can do just
speak from our perspective. BTW. "Rub the Buddha' is speaking ostensibly from his Leung Ting WT background which is very far
removed from mine- when he speaks of ground fighting
We all go round and round on these things--is Ralek returning with his multiple posts.?
If we met and you took me to the ground I could show you the implications from atleast one wing chun line. That is not intended as a brag but speaks to the limits of saying the same truncated things on the net again and again.

[bean curd]

steven just got on so am about ten threads late hahaha.

what you have said though about " breaking down" is not a weakness in the faht. far from it, it is making you look at it and realise it's potential and limitations - limitations are not a weakness parce, which i am sure you understand what i am saying. e.g. chau got of tong long sa sau gong, at one level is one thing further up is another. at the first level the player will see the confusion, further up it is more clearer, does this mean at the start chau got percieved was correct, of coarse not, again this is not weakness but limited understanding/skill/knowledge.

in doing " breakdown " the player is taught even if the sifu is not up front with the player is to realise that a faht is not the be all and end all of what is shown, but is to some extent only limitted by the players skill/understanding and experiance.

this is like learning a seipingma doing pai sau, does this also mean you can only do it that way again no.

the thread is from what i read - weakness of art not analysing the art. to see the weakness of your art you have to see the full picture, this is why the elders are more wise cause they got all the picture not just some of the brush strokes hahaha.

i understand what you are saying, however, to do what you have asked requires much knowledge.

the gar/pai i have seen also does what you say " hakka do " it is a requirement, to do anything less is dangerous to the player

peace

[Steven T. Richards]

Hi Bean 'C',

Many thanks for highlighting the relevant points.

I guess that I was trying to hint that weaknesses, appropriately identified and compensated for, are actual strengths. Error correcting feedback can be a 1st or 2nd order change in Systems Theory. Mostly, its first order - i.e. the governing processes and structures are not changed in themselves. Second order change - a change in structure, dynamics etc can lead to an evolution of the system as an adaptive reaction to certain 'stressors' - e.g. those highlighted by pressure testing to the systems failure point.

To work effectively however, in a good martial arts context, the Si-Fu needs to 'reverse feedback' the Faht (laws, principles methods) so that even if the student has tested it - and it has 'failed' then the compensation factors that should be built in to good Faht, negate (to whatever extent) the initial failure.

This is a dialectical process - (mailnly Hegelian and physical at this point, although the essential Socratic element of the dialectic is also present), with thesis v antithesis and resultant provisional synthesis - with the 'negation of the negation' that leads to a new understanding.

As you say, its difficult, but its VERY enjoyable, and a great learning process - not simply about negation of tradition as it is so often misunderstood - but of reaching an affirmation thru negation of the negation - excepting of course where it DOES fail.

Good students realise the provisional nature of all combative conclusions, and apply the dialectic to their own BELIEFS as well as their actions.

Cheers,

Steve.

[bean curd]

steven,

what you have said is very acurate. we are looking at this aspect from the same direction, it was unfortunate that the question did not clarify initially what path was to be taken.

what you call "error" i call "awarness", i suppose much like " is the glass half full or half empty?" all one's perspective.

the truth with all faht is that within it, there are boundaries that require the faht to be what it is and to fullfill what it was first designed to do. the issue to some degree, is the understanding of how the faht can be changed ( which you have clearly stated above ) to enhance the player on many levels.

the issue however is when a faht ( your para three from above post ) " leads to a new understanding " is changed , will it loose its truth and becomes something else.

as a generliasation most sifu understanding the principles of a particular faht and will remain within the truth, the truth of any said faht is also due to the principles of whatever style is used.

so here lays the paradox, if one stays true to the "laws" ( for a better word ) to the particular gar/pai is this a weakness or not.

what foundation does one build on, when participating in understanding principles from other gar and bring them into the envelope of your pariticulr gar ,especially if there is conflict within the principles???

[HopGar]

I'm not good enough yet to see any weaknesses in the system itself. But, we do not do enough practical applications unless most of the people do not show up, which kinda sucks.

[KC Elbows]

The main weakness of my system is that it does not cover ground techniques sufficiently. However, because the focus is very much on being as close to the opponent as possible, there are many techniques that are designed to keep you from being brought down.

Fortunately, my size and the little judo I know have helped me immensely, and I later intend to take more judo/jiu jitsu(depending on which art has the best teacher around here).