slightly off topic

[Prairie]

Hi folks,

I was a spectator at a martial arts tournament (I use the term "martial" loosely as much that I witnessed wasn't very martial) and saw some people competing that did Choy Lee Fut. It seemed like groovy stuff. It's the witnessing of other styles that weakens my desire to specialize in a single style (taijiquan)

Do many folks out there believe there is some benefit to studying a single style?

[red_fists]

Hi Prairie.

Not off-topic at all.

Here is my Viewpoint:
If you study one art for lets say 10~15 yrs. or longer you are going to be naturally very good at it.

Said that a lot of the old Masters studied multiple styles. But here, IMHO, the Key is to study one Art well before branching of into another style and your new styles should be incorporated into your first style using it's principles & rules.

So if you start off on TCC, your later styles should become part of your TCC.

There are few People that can completely seperate the practices of 2 or 3 systems.

For most their arts will blend together and the influences will be apparent to your peers.

There is an old saying:
"You cannot server 2 masters, nor can you be married to more than 1 Wife."
Or
"The Hunter who chases 2 Rabbits at the same time goes home empty handed and hungry".

In the end it depend on where you want to be in 10,15,20,25 yrs. in MA.

Peace.

[Chris McKinley]

Quite a lot depends on what you are studying/training for and how you go about it. I'll take the guy who's taken the time to understand how to make a single art work for him congruently over the guy who has indiscriminately assembled a hodgepodge of unrelated, or worse, conflicting material out of context. In other words, someone who takes the time to make a single art work for them is going to have more success than someone who is merely a dabbler in a hundred approaches to fighting.

By the same token, if you take two identical students and place one in a single art for an arbitrarily long time, and place the second in the same art for the same time, but give him supplemental training in the weak areas of that style, it's possible the second guy may have a very serious advantage. Especially if the supplemental information has been chosen carefully to mesh well in terms of the principles behind the movements, and has been practiced with an eye toward seamless integration into the primary style.

All this may sound like a celebration of the current MMA approach to fight training. It can be, but isn't necessarily. Crosstraining has simply NEVER not been practiced...in all cultures. It's always been there. Most of the creation stories of long-revered traditional styles involve the founder combining at least two types of training together.

I would argue that the most important factor in the debate between purists and mixers is how well you can make the approach work. After all, boxing purists, who only learn a handful of techniques, can nonetheless be very intimidating to face in a fight. Likewise, modern style mixers, at home punching, kicking, or rolling around on the ground, can be just as scary. Whichever approach someone decides on, it's vital that the person can make it work in as wide a variety of contexts as possible and in a congruent fashion.

[Prairie]

Thanks for the input.

My goal is simply to become good at taijiquan. I do not want to practice it for years and remain a crappy practitioner who isn't remotely able to apply the principles.

Given that taijiquan has many small nuances that make the difference between successful and unsuccessful applications, I better remain focused. My coordination could not handle influences from actively learning other arts. As it is, my practice is influenced not only by my instructor but also from things I read and see. I shouldn't help the outside influences by practicing them.

Thanks for your opinions. I was considering going off track.

[Ray Pina]

Stick with Taiji.