CLF vs WC - Att Straightblast

[Eddie]

Hi Straightblast,
I saw your site, and read that you do both CLF as well as WC. I also love your posts, so I thought to ask you a few questions about the basic relation or difference in combat between the two arts (if you dont mind).

A good friend of mine also does WC and is also a member of that Ving Tsun Athletic Association that you belong to. I also have a few other friends doing this style. I was practicing some sparring with my friend a while back, basically just playing around. Now obviously the two styles are pretty different in the ideals etc, but I was wondering about the similarities. I am no expert in either style (I know nothing about WC) but to me there seemed to be some similar techniques and ideas (on the surface if anything else). What I want to ask you is, when you fight, would you use techniques or ideas from both styles, kind of mix it together or would you come up with different combos using techniques from both styles (Maybe go from Poon Cui into the WC chainpunch)? Both styles pretty much use hand techniques as a big part of their arsenal, so how much does your WC influence your CLF? The more I train, the more I realise the effectiveness of CLF and the more I think i understand the style. At the moment, I have no wish to actually go study another style (Maybe in the future). I have another friend (origanally from HK) who is a Bruce Lee Freak. He also loved combining different styles (Tai Chi, Mantis, WC etc), but recently he told me that he kinda feels "trapped" because he did not focus more on one style. I cant really explain what that meens, but I I kinda get the impression that he is at a point where he is lost in all the different ideas and concepts of the styles.

I love the combat part of kung fu just as much as the philisophical part. We do Martial Arts for various reasons, but obviously we all share that love for the combat side. Whether we like it or not, in combat, many styles share similar ideals.

I appologise for my bad spelling language. All day infront of the PC can do that to people.
Eddie

[straightblast5]

Hello Eddie,

I'm happy to hear that you found our website and some of my posts here informative.

You have posted several questions for me, so I will do my best to touch upon each topic by dividing my thoughts into a couple sections.

my thoughts on the commonality between the martial arts...
From my humble experiences, I can definitely agree that after reaching a certain level of development in the martial arts, all methods will begin shedding their differences to expose similar ideals.

It is my fundamental belief that all martial arts began their development as combative methods. Though the interpretation of the martial arts varies among different practitioners today, the fundamental purpose of the martial arts (IMHO) is to give a practitioner the tools to incapacitate his/her opponent(s). And from that perspective, all martial arts have at least one fundamental motive (or ideal) in common.

Another commonality that immediately comes to mind is the practitioners themselves. All martial artists are human. As human beings, we all abide by pretty much the same physical attributes and limitations (i.e. at most two arm and two legs).

my thoughts on the topic of cross training...
Cross training is a wonderful thing, however, I feel it is not a necessary factor to the success of a martial artist. And when approached improperly (IMHO), cross training can actually become detrimental.

I had developed an applicable understanding of Choy Lay Fut's basics with my father before venturing onto my study of Ving Tsun (or anything else). I believe one must develop a good base in the basic function of a particular discipline before moving on to benefit from another.

Different martial arts are analogous to different languages. Each language utilizes particular grammatical rules specific to the structure of each language, just as each martial art utilizes specific concepts and strategies particular to its own structure and mechanics. If one cannot comprehend and utilized even one language, learning another can be detrimental to the development of both.

However, when one does gain an applicable comprehension of at least one language, learning another can definitely help enhance the development of both languages through the educated contrast and comparison of each. From my humble experiences, the same can be said for the martial arts.


I hope some of my random thoughts listed above have done well to touch upon a few of your inquiries. Thanks again for your kind words regarding our website and some of my rhetoric. I look forward to reading more of your posts here in the future.

Take Care,
Phil
Ng Family Chinese Martial Arts Association (http://www.ngfamilymartialarts.com)

[S.Teebas]

I canot speak for straightblast5 but i have been practicing wing chun for while; i can see that after gaining proficency in the system is it possible to carry the ideas over to other systems too.

Because the WC i learn is based on body mechanics i see no reason why the movements of other systems cant be utilised using the power taught in WC. (unless the other systems principals adversly teach opposite theories)

[straightblast5]

S.Teebas

Good points, I couldn't agree with you more.

Phil
Ng Family Chinese Martial Arts Association (http://www.ngfamilymartialarts.com)

[nospam]

Cross-training has always boggled me. I could see the desire to train in an internal system if one is learning an external system, and visa versa. And yet, the externalist will become the internalist, if one has a knowledgable teacher - perhaps that is the missing link.

My system Bak Hsing CLF is external. It is fast and hard in the begining as is the way of external systems. Over time, the internal begins to mature and a blending happens. Until it all boils down to simple movement/motion; different paths eventuating upon similar destinations.

Largely, it is the direction one's Teacher provides that marks one's origin. Perhaps too many inadequate teachers are schooling a limited curriculum within their system. Some of us have either worked hard or fortuitously become students of individuals who are true Masters based on a strong and complete lineage of instruction, experience, growth, and an innate ability to mentor the objective with the subjective.

I have been told I have a blind eye and/or am limiting my martial 'growth' by having only learned one style of gung fu. But when I entered into my apprenticeship of my system, it became clear that what I was being taught, and how, as well as by whom, was fundamentaly sound and easily proven. I did not nor do not rest on the laurels of my Teacher. What has been revealed to me has also had to be assimilated by me. This involved many years of simply living and experiencing Life seperate from martial arts.

There are many precepts that I developed, and a multitude of Life lessons that I experienced, away from martial arts that have become part of my martial arts. My growth was not toward the desire to learn one more or ten more fist patterns, or to jump at a seminar from one name to another; it was to fully experience all lessons taught from each direction and time in my Life so as to have each compliment and continue to direct my learning.

Kudos to those who train in many systems if that is what you desire. To each their own. If we do not challenge ourselves, by whatever means, whether esoteric or straighforward, we run the risk of becoming no more than the sum of our experience. And to me, that is not acceptable.

An yet I still wonder what lies beneath one's desire to cross-train. As students, are we too eager to experience our sum or are there too many unchallenged under the title Sifu...

nospam.
:cool:

[straightblast5]

No Spam,

You list many good points in your post. As I've stated previously, I too feel it is not necessary to "cross-train" to become successful as a martial artist. However, speaking as someone who does “cross-train”, I think the desire for me to do so was not necessarily to improve upon the methods already being taught to me, but to simply experience other perspectives. I cannot speak for anyone else, but I genuinely feel my explorations have helped my overall development and understanding in the arts that I've chosen to study. I certainly am not saying that studying each method by themselves would yield any less of a result.

I for one do not feel that you have turned a blind eye and/or are limiting your martial “growth” by having only learned one style of gung fu. In fact, I admire your beliefs and your devotion to your chosen method. It is obvious your devotion have yielded great results for you.

In the end, I feel a student's honesty in observing his/her own goals and limitations is the measure of his/her own success in the martial arts.

Phil
Ng Family Chinese Martial Arts Association (http://www.ngfamilymartialarts.com)

[extrajoseph]

"Cross-training" is a bit like "cross-dressing", if it turns you on, then go for it!

But if you are not into "cross-training" or "cross-dressing", then it could look a bit strange.

[Eddie]

Straightblast5,
the analgoy you used with the languages makes allot of sense. A very good friend of mine (a spiritual / religious master and a practitioner of Tai Chi) always say to me that the higher levels of kung fu is FORMless. I wont lie to say that I can even begin to understand what he means, but I do think that all martial arts shares the same common roots and ideas.

I try to spend as much time understanding the combat theory (even human anatomy) behind martial arts as on the physical aspect of training. As you say, how much can stuff differ, we all have the same human build? Once again I must compliment you (sorry for looking like I am brown noseing) on your writings, it is very realistic and to the point (as fu pow said, no myths or mystical stuff).

Last question, CLF Chueng Ahn Choy. How does it compare to wing chun straightblast (if this is the right term to call it)? Ever since handsom Joe told me that it is actually more like a close range strike than a long range stike, it has become one of my more prefered applications. My friend translated the Chinese text for this strike to me, and he said that the word cheung is not exactly the right one for spear. The first radical means something like pulling (wrestling) or something to that effect. I would think that it would have been some kind of hint that this strike is most effective as a close range strike (although just as good as a long range strike). The idea behind this application real intrigue me.

Extrajoseph
But if you are not into "cross-training" or "cross-dressing", then it could look a bit strange.:) I must say that I have seen people who "cross train" before really establishing their roots in one art. It does look funny.

[extrajoseph]

“And yet I still wonder what lies beneath one's desire to cross-train. As students, are we too eager to experience our sum or are there too many unchallenged under the title Sifu...”

Reading nospam’s passage above, I also wonder why people want to “cross-dress”. Is it just for the experience and for the fun? Or something deeper or more sinister involved?

I would ask the same with “cross-train”. Why this need? It is like why some men have the need to do it with two or three women and sometimes even mixed gender at the same time. Is it because their needs are greater than one person could provide? Or is it something else is missing in them that made them so eager?

May be for them to be a real man (a real sifu), they feel they have to try as many variety as possible. But I am sure they will have to settle down with one eventually, if they want to know the deeper meaning of things.

On the other hand, may be the increased popularity in “cross-dressing” and “cross-training” is just a reflection of our time. In our materialistic world, we feel the more the merrier and quantity always matters more than quality.

[bean curd]

nospam,

well said

[straightblast5]

Hello Eddie,

How are you? Handsome Joe had told me a little bit about his trip to your school a while back. In fact, he found some time to send me a few e-mails while he was there. Anyway, back to your question…

From my observations, the Cherng Ngan Chue and the Jik Chung Kuen (straight punch or “straight blast”) do contain several important differences in their structure and execution. On a most noticeable level, the straight blast is executed with a vertical fist, while the Cherng Ngan Chue is executed with a horizontal panther fist. As the primary offensive weapon in Ving Tsun, the execution and structure of the “straight blast” serve to both strike and intercept. Cherng Ngan Chue for the most part acts as a piecing strike executed to take advantage of the smaller surface area of the fore knuckles to concentrate the strike’s energy into a smaller target. I understand that those are grossly general descriptions, but I'm just trying to describe their general differences without having to write too much (it’s difficult to describe accurately with words alone).

Nevertheless, both the Cherng Ngan Chue and the “straight blast” are just punches aimed to make contact with the opponent.

Take Care,
Phil
Ng Family Chinese Martial Arts Association (http://www.ngfamilymartialarts.com)

[Eddie]

Straightblast5,
Sorry, I reading my own post again, I realised that maybe I am not exactly explaining what I really wanted to ask (sorry, english is second language).
As the primary offensive weapon in Ving Tsun, the execution and structure of the “straight blast” serve to both strike and intercept.
Unless I am completely off here, cant you use Cherng Ngan Chue in exactly the same way, as a strike and intercept at once? Basically what I mean is the dynamics of the strike, whether you use flat fist or even palm for that matter, would still be similar to that of the Jik Chung Kuen? I mean, what better way to defend than to actually attack? (same goes for gwa choy).

Handsome Joe had told me a little bit about his trip to your school a while back. In fact, he found some time to send me a few e-mails while he was there.

....and we haven't completely recovered from his visit yet :). The guys here all look up to old handsome Joe, and the ladies..., well lets just say Mr Joe has that whole American Hunk thing going for him.

[Sow Choy]

Man,

All our posts are about how handsome we are, people are gonna think we are conceited, lol!

Amyways back to Kung Fu:

Eddie,

Thanks again for the compliments, cheung ahn choy or eye hitting punch was taught by Lee Koon Hung and Li SIu Hung with a few variations, one being a intercepting punch that uses the arm to deflect. In our style we use punching to intercept alot. The position of the elbow is the key, the elbow in cheung ahn choy is pointing out, good for intercepting the inside.

The fist is also flat that way it is more like a whip than a full strike which could hurt the hand more than the opponent if executed incorrectly.

Straightblast5,

Loved the articles, just read them today. Your sihing sounds like a good guy. And the other article sounds just like you. Good Job!!

NOw... Back to Hong Kong! When are you leaving???? Hurry up!! Are you going to Shaolin Temple??

Joe

[Jimbo]

Good post, Nospam.

Although for the past 9 years I have been strictly a CLF practitioner, I must admit that in my MA background (which goes back to January of 1977), I had been going through a long searching process. I started out with Kenpo and was in it several years. During this time I also had experience sparring boxers and PKA-style kickboxers that came to the school. At one point I wanted the militaristic discipline of Japanese styles, so for a couple years I did Kenpo concurrently with Shi-to-ryu karate. After the karate years, because in my youth I had shown a natural talent for flexibility/kicking, I spent some time in Tang Soo Do/TKD. Let me say my purpose was never to just accumulate styles like some, but it was a continual search for what, to me, felt "right."

In '85 I moved to Taiwan and had practiced Northern Mantis (7-Star combined with some 8-Step). It was during this period that my MA progress began to accelerate much faster. This was THE art for me, I thought.

Finally in '93 I took up CLF under my current sifu and of course have not looked back. I did continue the Mantis on my own for a couple years after starting CLF, but found I really needed the time to devote to a single style. Although I had developed qualities of a good Mantis stylist, I had to decide: Spread myself thin trying to master two styles, or really work to excel at one? It was not an easy decision. I had invested years of time, $$, and literally blood, sweat, and hardship to learn all I had previously. I did not take up CLF on a whim.

Looking back, however, all my previous years were NOT wasted. My leaving each previous system was not a case of the teachers being poor. All of my teachers were excellent in what they did, and yes, each contributed in my development to where I am today. No, I do not "mix" or "switch up styles" when I spar like in a movie. The Kenpo was my MA introduction, and there I had drilled in me by my teacher the importance of physical conditioning, contact sparring, air shield/pad drills, flexibility, and open-mindedness toward other MA's, especially Chinese systems which he encouraged me to investigate.

In Shi-to-ryu I learned I could deal with the harsh (at the time) old-school Japanese discipline and gut-wrenching workouts with nonstop repetition.

Oddly enough, I feel the Korean systems did not teach me any more about kicking/flexibility that i didn't already have, but during the period I did train at AAU TKD sparring competition. I considered this more of an in-between period. I was really interested in kung fu.

The Mantis taught me the beginnings of relaxed, whole-body power generation, flowing in combinations, in-close fighting using the hands and bridging/breaking the horse, as well as the importance of stance training.

How am I still benefitted by all that today, as a CLF person? On my own I still do the stretching routine I learned in Kenpo, and I still have the important kicks. The Mantis sensitivity and infighting concepts I have kept but changed so that now all the strikes and skills used are CLF, if that makes sense. (I couldn't use pure Mantis anymore anyway, it always comes out as CLF). Also, I would not have progressed as quickly as i did without having previously done the relaxed power, horse training, etc., of Mantis; though I had to adapt my horses to CLF, the basic strength, mindset and discipline were already there. In fact, my experiences in Mantis has helped my understanding and given me a unique perspective on my CLF. My sifu said I actually came in to CLF TOO relaxed due to the Mantis (the opposite problem for most students), and had to adapt to where now I can go super-relaxed or to any point of "harder" characteristic as needed.

So what was the point? Basically that, although I'm sure there are those who cross-train just to jump from style to style, or to collect styles, or maybe even lack of discipline; my reason was a long-term search that ended with CLF. Maybe I would have been better with 25 years of just the CLF, but when I started Kenpo there was no kung fu in my city, and I didn't know the difference then, anyway. As such, I naturally bring my own perspective and experiences to CLF that are uniquely my own, as does everyone else. I do NOT mix in other arts. However, I do various drills and concepts that I've adapted and adjusted to fit into my CLF.
Jim

[Eddie]

Sow Choy,
All our posts are about how handsome we are, people are gonna think we are conceited, lol!

I must confess, I have no idea what conceited meen, but it does sound pretty cool. I dont know about you, but I have never seen a Kung Fu movie where there were no humor or jokes in. ;) Maybe you and Straightblast5 should start our very own Choy Lay Fut Boy Band (like the backstreet boys). You seem to already have the groupies :D
______________________________
The application for cheung ahn choy as you showed me is great. It is direct and to the point. I have spend allot of time thinking about it, and working it out for my self. Actually, while sparring, my friend was the one who started looking at these moves and started comparing them with WC. That was why I brought up these questions for Straightblast.

Thanks for the comments guys, I really learn allot from all of you.

Jimbo
Nice post. I dont cross train, but I also love competing in san shou, WKPA and K1 thaiboxing comps. I dont see this as cross train, as I basically use allot of my CLF techniques (must say, very watered down techniques adapted for the ring). Unfortunatly because of some medical reason, I am now not allowed to compete in any contact form for a short while, so this year I will not be competing.

I also did some 8 step mantis, and as you pointed out, mantis is a great style to teach you how to use relaxed power. Although I almost never practice the mantis forms I learned anymore, I am glad I had a little background in this style. Funny to say, it even taught me allot about CLF and made me reailise how great our style is (No offence to any mantis people- I love all kung fu).

I think that all this only basically prepared me for what I do now. I am now more mature in my martial art, and I feel I can learn and UNDERSTAND more than before.

If I may ask, where are you from?

[straightblast5]

Great posts guys. Sorry about my last post, I should've written a little more clearly. I didn't mean that Cherng Ngan Chue didn't also have the ability to intercept, but the structure and execution does differ between it and the VT punch.

Eddie,

Both Handsome Joe and you are right about the Cherng Ngan Chue's ability to intercept attacks as well. As Joe had mentioned, the elbow position is what helps in the interception. Being a horizontal fist, the elbow position is out during the execution of the Cherng Ngan Chue, while the elbow is down (and center) during the execution of the VT vertical fist. This significant disparity in structure marks the main difference between the two strikes as it affects both the execution of the technique and the generation of its power.

Joe,

Thanks for bringing up the elbow position; it's a good point that makes the explanation a lot clearer. Also I wouldn't worry to much about the whole “handsome” thing, I think most people here know that we're just kidding around. ;)
See you in Hong Kong! :D

Take Care,
Phil
Ng Family Chinese Martial Arts Association (http://www.ngfamilymartialarts.com)

[Jimbo]

Eddie:

Japanese-American roots and California born and bred! :)

Jim

[GOLDEN ARMOR]

Guys, from what i have heard about panther(fist) it mostly attacks even when defending. Sliding over ur opponents arms & useing angles to attack, does any1 know if this is how the CLF panther fights? And has any1 here learned the CLF panther form?
From what i have seen of CLF so far it fights very similiar to a panther, fast footwork & hands. And the waist coiling & then exploding like a snake.

[nospam]

I am sure there are those that take study in more than one style for no other reason than interest and breadth of exposure.

I believe the dedication that used to be given by the student is less. And the dedication that used to be asked by the teacher is less. Less dedication that is both provided and demanded means more time required to master a given style.

If I am a modern day practitioner, chances are I am in at least 2 systems of martial arts working within a curriculum that has more than likely already been diluted in allowance for student retention. Therefore, my dedication is halved or more and thus the time required to attain an understanding of a given style, beyond how it just suits my needs, has just increased in length by almost double.

On top of this, I am a student who has graduated with a black sash from either one or more styles of martial arts and now I instruct students of my own. I am an adequate instructor and perhaps can effectively employ my skills in all my styles. Perhaps I am even a good instructor as well as an adept stylist; the potential for my students to be involved in more than just my style(s) is great, thus the percentage of knowledge and skill I might have the opportunity to impart is less than 100%. Who suffers?

The system suffers the greatest lost. Our lineage is hit hard and some vanish because there are no students that will dedicate the time necessary to master a given system.

Watered down curriculums, adequate instructors but no true sifu or masters, and a society that nurtures the quick and easy and it's more about my needs and my ego than the relationship of teacher/student - father/child. It is a rare bird indeed, the student who is willing to offer and maintain the dedication in sacrifice of thy self for faith in their teacher and their system. It is a dedication based on a bond (part faith) that although may become stretched over time, holds up to the test of time.

But in a time where divorce of personal relationships is the norm, the state of modern martial arts should come as no surprise, no?

nospam.
:cool:

[nospam]

I have seen the panther fist, tsap choi, done in many forms. But the most common is when used as a normal strike just with the form of tsap choi.

From where I come from, the tsap choi does not defend in its offense. It most definitely slips and stabs, but not in the same use as a normal strike.

Then there is the continuous strike using the panther or tsap choi. The hallmark of Bak Hsing CLF.

nospam.
:cool:

[straightblast5]

From what I was taught, the panther fist simply refers to the shape of the fist itself. There are different attacks in CLF that utilize this fist structure. For example, the chop chue and the cherng ngan chue both utilizes a panther fist. And like Nospam had mentioned, strikes utilizing the panther fist tend to slip and stab.

Phil
Ng Family Chinese Martial Arts Association (http://www.ngfamilymartialarts.com)

[Sow Choy]

Nospam,

What you said was right on the money. I really enjoy reading your posts. It saddens me to see so many people call themself sifu without really possesing the true esscence of what that means (at least to me). It also saddens me to see people go off and make themself a sifu.

Or those that lose faith in their system, school or even their SIFU. It was hard for my school, our sifu died! And we loved him, more than many people know. When his brother came and took over, some left, some stayed. But I put my faith in him, and I am glad I did.

Kung Fu forever is not easy, you must have faith in it all, including yourself.

I like the Star Trek reference I mad a while ago. Everytime I am at a tournament, I see a bunch of out of shape people talking about nonsense, who compete only in forms or just walk around dressed in fancy Chinese clothes. And I feel like I am a star trek convention, dont know if you all saw the Saturday Night Live spoof on Star Trek, it was funny.

Maybe we should call these people who think they are sifus, Klingons, lol!

Well, I think I am just rambling. Ever since I got this laptop, I stay up way too late.

Goodnight all!

Joe

[extrajoseph]

Strictly speaking, the panther fist is just one variation of the generic chue (cheu = to beat, to pound, to strike with a stick or a fist). In CLF, there are different types of chue as in gueng-ji (ginger) chue, dang (nail) chue, jian (arrow) chue, fung-gnan (phaenix eye) chue, etc.

The typical CLF chue is formed by bending the first two knuckles of our fingers and press them tightly against the top of the palm, then the tip of the thumb is pressed against the tip of the index finger to hold the fingers and the palm together as one solid mass like that of a flatten out hammer.

The panther fist is configured slightly different to the typical chue. The bend fingers are not pressed against the palm and the thumb is bend on its own, so it feels more like the claws of a panther rather than a solid hammer. In Chinese it is called pow chue or gum pow (golden leopard) chue and is used in pow ying kuen (panther or leopard form) or when the panther like behaviour is called for.

In typical strikes like charp chue and cherng ngan chue, we generally use the standard chue. In cup chue and farng jong chue, we bend and tighten up the fingers a little bit more against the palm and in fung gnan chue we stick the index knuckle out and so forth. Different cheu means different way to hold the fist, different ways of striking and attack with different parts of the fist or the forearm.

Generally speaking, the panther fist is used when a claw action used to fake, to check or to grab is followed up by an attack at the same time, its emphasis is on agility and speed, not unlike what a panther would do in nature. We can also turn the panther fist over and use the fingers to claw and the base of the palm where the seven-star bone is located to do palm strike.

In my last count, there are more than 30 types of chue and they are all different, so to use a specific term like panther fist for the generic term "chue" or to use it for charp cheu or for other types of cheu is not exactly correct IMHO.

[JAZA]

Hello Joseph:

Where is the 7 star bone?. Do you know the occidental anatomical name?
Thanks.

ABout the sifus stuff. Here in my country there is no too much traditional kung fu people, but there is a lot of self-called Sensei and tournaments with pseudo-kungfu associated with the USKA and using japanese terms like gi, kumite, kata.

[Jimbo]

Nospam:
Re: your post on watered-down systems:

I agree, and yet at the same time was not sure if it was directed at those with situations like mine...? Believe me, there are times I wished I had started in CLF 25 years ago and only had the one system. BUT, would I have appreciated it and stuck with it back then? At that time there wasn't a variety of martial arts to choose from, and most of it was Kenpo, judo, or Japanese karate...when I started karate, I hadn't even heard of TKD because there wasn't any here until a couple years later.

As far as the student/teacher relationship. Although I have had many teachers in my life, I (initially) did not enter into martial arts with an idea of the traditional link between teacher/student; I came into martial arts for survival as a victimized 13-year-old. However, to this day I am on friendly terms with my Kenpo teacher who began my MA lifestyle.

Not only students, but some teachers can engage in actions that may sever a teacher/student relationship, even if that student is a hard-working, trustworthy student. I have heard some teachers bad-mouthing students behind their backs for no good reason other than they weren't among the favored, or because of where they came from. Then you think, "If he is talking this way about them, what must he really think or say about me when I'm not around?" Then a friend tells me he talked bad about me, although i did nothing but keep my nose down and work as hard as I could. I left one elderly Chinese sifu after a few years because of that. And although money is important to the livelihood of a teacher, I've known a couple that obsessed about it to the point of nickle-and-diming students to such a ridiculous extent, and seeing a student more as an unlimited piggy bank, that I chose to leave as well. The teacher/student relationship must necessarily be a two-way street.

Unfortunately, here in the West, and even what I was starting to observe in Taiwan, the traditional teacher-student relationship seems to be getting more rare. Because it isn't a part of the culture in the West, where it's basically buying and selling a service. Unlike ancient China, now there are countless recreational distractions for people to pursue in their free time. If we as teachers cannot convince people that what we have to offer is worth their time, they'll disappear without a word.

I assume that for most teachers, there will come along a few students in a lifetime whom the art, teachings, and mutual relationship fits to the point of lifelong dedication, and who will continue the teacher/student relationship, even if their lives take them away from the physical location of the teacher's school.

As far as a watering down of a system, that doesn't necessarily occur because a teacher had a background that included more than one art, unless he teaches his art as a chop-suey mishmash of ideas. Or, for example, if you teach CLF but with a strong karate or other un-CLF flavor, then confuse and mix the principles. However, having had experience in several arts may give one valuable insights on and help one's CLF too.

In fact, the reason I decided to concentrate on CLF exclusively is that I wanted to "dig a deep well, not have my yard filled with many shallow, unfinished holes."
Jim

[nospam]

Jimbo,

nothing I have stated is directed towards any one person on this forum. I agree that there are times when the bond between teacher and student can be severed by actions of the teacher; after all, relationships are one of the most dynamic ventures we will ever partake. And when the relationship is based, in part, on monetary exchange, there is always a goods/service taint to the bond.

Please take no personal affront to my words, I am merely expressing my thoughts on the matter. I am glad people enjoy and participate in the martial arts no matter the how. And in the end, these are simply my thoughts and have no true impact on you, besides that I'll let you know now that it is nice to hear you have found a style and teacher, by the sounds of it, that has enabled the bond to occur. For those of us who have experienced this, we know how special and important it is to not only the people in the system, but to the long term measure of our respective systems. There are definitely moments of give and take, but as I mentioned before, time will stretch the bond, but the bond holds true to the test of time.

As a teacher, there comes a time when the advanced student listens less and might seem to become distant. This is part of a teacher's measure to understand there comes a time when the individualness of the student requires independent space to express and develop its uniqueness, which will serve to enhance the student's learning and add to the system. After all, children do leave the house. I recall when that time was presented to me many years ago. It wasn't that I felt cast away or no longer wanted in the kwoon and life of my sifu, it was part of my instruction. It was part of my growth and personal assimilation of what I had been taught and to what I would learn on my own.

This is one reason I believe that my bond between my sifu and I has survived the test of distance, absence and time. It isn't enough that I mirror my teacher; as you well know, the bond is inclusive of our system too. And our respective systems would weaken over time if all we did turned out in the end to be a reflection of our teachers'. As I grow, so too does the style. Of course this growth has to be tempered by the bond between teacher and the philosophy of our systems, otherwise growth might speak more towards that of the individual in this instance vs growth of a system- a paramount distinction.

And Jimbo, I agree that systems do not become watered down because of cross-training. They do have a greater chance of becoming influenced as such because of cross-training, though. And because of many many other variables.

My...doubt...about cross-training was that within gung fu systems, if given at least half a chance (meaning many years of dedication and faith, which in my opinion is a must to become recognised as a master), I fail to see the desire or need or whatever it might be, to begin training in another style. It is just too easy to run out and purchase a television with P.I.P. (picture in picture), so you can watch one show at 3/4's the screen size and a second show at 1/4- did my math add up? :)

I have seeen this happen with people who had become close to me in my family. And to this day, I and only one other senior student maintained the bond. Interestingly enough, myself and my brother had not engaged in cross-training. At one point, he was taught by two other teachers, one of the same style and lineage, but it was of necessity than desire. Now, over 20 years later- my fellow student and I are the only active practitioners. Oh, and our bond between our master is alive and well.

nospam.
:cool: