Reverting to Kung Fu

[Black Jack]

I think his point and I am not speaking for the gent and could be wrong is that the cultivation of proper mechanics is not the sole source of one cultural system or one groups way of thinking on what is the "correct".

Personally I believe that fighting is not dictated by a set styles specific conditioning but more about the psychological root of confrontation. That is why for me I do not 100% really buy into the this is better than that general conception of training. In the end I think it all boils down to the situation and not from the viewpoint of the boxer or the gung fu man or the persilat or the judoka.

btw- is trading places like one of the best movies ever or what.

[truewrestler]

wtf is in my cornflakes

WD, I think you are simply putting too much backing into simple static chi drills. They mean sh!t in the big picture of conditioning, technique, and experience... all of which contribute much more to economy of motion than static chi drills. That's what it boils down to... economy of motion.

It is nothing new... it's called learning, improving, adapting. This occurs in all things from sports to typing to video games to sex to programming to driving to swimming.

Then there is the staff... oh the staff. Lets put it this way... what is the staff made out of? Wood? Lets take your analogy of adding a joint in there. What makes that joint stronger: 1. hitting the end of the staff with a hammer for half an hour or 2. attaching metal brackets around the joint of the staff for reinforcement.

To improve the strength of a structure you don't pound on it to make it more stable, you improve the design (technique, muscle memory) of the structure and strength of the materials (muscles).

I'm not saying that your static drills are bad or worthless, just that they aren't a big deal as far as drills go let along a martial arts system as a whole.

[rubthebuddha]

hm. looks like captain obvious has entered the conversation.

truewrestler -- chi tricks haven't been brought up in this conversation, so stop assuming all CMA are based on them. your viewpoint about CMA is worse than ignorant -- it's ignorantly presumptive.

what WD is talking about is pure physiology and body mechanics. finding the best distance apart for feet for both balance and mobility isn't about chi -- it's about finding the best distance between feet for balance and mobility. spending some more time on finding how different positions can absorb impact better or be more structurally sound is the same. it has nothing do do with chi -- it's all about good physiology and knowing what is your optimum use of joints and muscles for a specific purpose.

assumption of anything less is asinine, and the only ass in this conversation is the one doing the assuming.

[brassmonkey]

I don't care what Shooter says, I don't believe Wrestling has peng jin.

[T'ai Ji Monkey]

Originally posted by brassmonkey
I don't care what Shooter says, I don't believe Wrestling has peng jin.

JS: What is Peng Jin?

MR.FENG: It is a kind of power that both Internal and External styles should have (although External styles do not use this term). It is a protective, warding off, directed forward power, which is not weak/soft (ruan). All Taijiquan powers should have Peng, and the differences among them lie in different directions it is applied.

[Water Dragon]

I hate the whole post a paragraph, then rebutt $hit a lot of people like to do, but I think it's relevant here so I'm gonna do it.

WD, I think you are simply putting too much backing into simple static chi drills. They mean sh!t in the big picture of conditioning, technique, and experience... all of which contribute much more to economy of motion than static chi drills. That's what it boils down to... economy of motion.

OK, if you want to look at it in that way. in the big picture, rotating on the ball of the front foot when throwing a lead hook means $hit. Driving the pelvis forward on an armbar or triangle choke means $hit. Turning your head to the outside corner on O Goshi means $hit. Technically, those are all true statements. But are they all true statements?

Also, you're trying to troll me. You know my thoughts on the whole Chi thing. ou know I don't play that game.

Then there is the staff... oh the staff. Lets put it this way... what is the staff made out of? Wood? Lets take your analogy of adding a joint in there. What makes that joint stronger: 1. hitting the end of the staff with a hammer for half an hour or 2. attaching metal brackets around the joint of the staff for reinforcement.

You misunderstood what I was trying to say. In the analogy, your body is the staff. You want to make your body one inflexible whole at the moment of receiving/emitting force. This is what a lot of people call the ground path. I like steel wrapped in cotton better. The bones are lined up so they becaome as hard as steel while the muscle remains as soft as cotton. No, it's not literal, but it's a good thing to think about when hitting the heavy bag or working on counters to takedowns.

Also, there's nothing that says you as a wrestler can't take these ideas right now and apply them to what your doing. It's not rocket science. But have you ever heard a wrestling coach talk about it in that way or develop drills that focus on that attribute? I haven't.

To improve the strength of a structure you don't pound on it to make it more stable, you improve the design (technique, muscle memory) of the structure and strength of the materials (muscles).

Please see above

I'm not saying that your static drills are bad or worthless, just that they aren't a big deal as far as drills go let along a martial arts system as a whole.

Thank you for taking MP's dick out of your mouth long enough to holler some correct. You're 100 % dead on with this.

[truewrestler]

truewrestler -- chi tricks haven't been brought up in this conversation, so stop assuming all CMA are based on them. your viewpoint about CMA is worse than ignorant -- it's ignorantly presumptive.

I wasn't presuming... I was being an ass. Somtimes I'm not sure if we are talking about external or internal force.

I do not discount that many static drills are effective but rather think they are only one small part of a means to an end. The factors to develop economy of motion/energy/force are muscle memory and instincts developed through repetition and experience. Strength and conditioning improvements add to this.

I would like to add more to this later but right now I have some work to do at..... work.

I'm not saying that your static drills are bad or worthless, just that they aren't a big deal as far as drills go let along a martial arts system as a whole.

Thank you for taking MP's **** out of your mouth long enough to holler some correct. You're 100 % dead on with this.

WTF are you talking about? He said nothing to the contrary... he appeared to simply be reacting to your elitist tone.

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by truewrestler

Thank you for taking MP's **** out of your mouth long enough to holler some correct. You're 100 % dead on with this.

WTF are you talking about? He said nothing to the contrary... he appeared to simply be reacting to your elitist tone. [/QUOTE]

MP is a big boy. He doesn't need you to be his Gong Fu hero. This is but yet another example of you down on your knees in front of the mighty Prankster. (Not really, cause you;re usually pretty cool truewrestler. But as long as you're gonn take the cynical/sarcastic @sshole tone with me, I'm gonna dish it right back at ya)

[truewrestler]

WD, you made a dumb comment... own up to it instead of changing the subject. MP and I haven't "touched hands" or any other body parts in years.

[Water Dragon]

Which one of my dumb comments are you referring to?

And was it dumber than your chi comments?

[SifuAbel]

I was hoping this thread wouldn't be hijacked into a tangent.

TW, Why do you assume all techniques in Kung fu are static?

Actually, this is how it starts. A question, a rebutle, then someone throws out a ton of technobabble, an erroneous assumtion, and finally some distorted fact written in stone about the subject after a hundred tangents.

[fa_jing]

So do you like cheese? Howz about a bacon sammich?

[SifuAbel]

I'd rather have a havarti and mortadella sammich

[truewrestler]

TW, Why do you assume all techniques in Kung fu are static?

Why do you assume that I assumed that?

I didn't... I'm just talking about the drills that WD described that some how make KF "special"

[CrippledAvenger]

A thought: "special" seems to be equated here with "better" and I don't think that's really the case.

Maybe a better way of phrasing it would be "different". There's certainly difference to the two approaches and each trains slightly different attributes. However, I don't think I can say which approach is "the best", just which one I prefer.