any martial artist girls in southern california want to hang out?

[Brithlor]

Clearly you have (atleast what I consider) a realistic approach to your training... I guess there are more san soo people like you than I thought .

Some san soo people (especially my former teacher) had the idea that san soo was basically invincible and that it was offensive to him to learn other martial arts (which is one reason I quit after a few more years of that...).

Just out of curiousity... but with your training in a broad spectrum of martial arts how do fare against people how don't rely on any kind of bridging... like boxers? If you do well against them what martial arts do you feel helped you with that?

[freehand]

Well, when I trained under Al Rubin, who was a master student under Jimmy Woo, I and my favorite workout partner studied aikido. He also studied judo. We had a student who also boxed. One of Al's senior students taught San Soo as well as Kali. Al insisted that we do only San Soo while in his studio, but otherwise had no problems with it.

He insisted that San Soo was the best for fighting that he knew of, but most teachers think their art is the best. He did say things like
"This is no guarantee; it only improves your odds"
"A TKD guy, who spent as much time on his art as you have, will have a better roundhouse kick, but you will know more about throws, So too, will a judo man have better throws than you, but you will kick better."
"If you win a fight, you will have a bloody nose, your favorite shirt will be ripped, and you will probably go to jail."
"There may be some cowboy out there who only has one technique - perhaps a good right hook - and he might beat you with it, if he does it better than you do your defenses."
He called it a complete martial art, because it combined strikes, chin na, throws, and pressure points. He never insisted that it was impossible for another art to know something ours didn't know, (that I recall). How could one know that, anyway?

And even if it had all the broad categories of techniques, that wouldn't mean that there were no ways of training that would teach some of them better or supplement the ways we trained already.

My current kali crowd includes students of San Soo, jujitsu, kenpo, and aikido. We are all interested in bridging; we have techniques which work to finish and control, if only our attacker would be kind enough to let us get our hands on him!

One thing San Soo says, though, is that there is no test for real fighting except a fight. How could I test myself against a boxer? If we box, I cheerfully admit he would win. But if we street fight, and all he knows is boxing, it's unlikely he could handle shins kicks, head butts, back elbows, biting, and such. But I still remember what Al said about that guy out there with the good right hook...

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by freehand
Well, when I trained under Al Rubin, who was a master student under Jimmy Woo, I and my favorite workout partner studied aikido. He also studied judo. We had a student who also boxed. One of Al's senior students taught San Soo as well as Kali. Al insisted that we do only San Soo while in his studio, but otherwise had no problems with it.

He insisted that San Soo was the best for fighting that he knew of, but most teachers think their art is the best. He did say things like
"This is no guarantee; it only improves your odds"
"A TKD guy, who spent as much time on his art as you have, will have a better roundhouse kick, but you will know more about throws, So too, will a judo man have better throws than you, but you will kick better."
"If you win a fight, you will have a bloody nose, your favorite shirt will be ripped, and you will probably go to jail."
"There may be some cowboy out there who only has one technique - perhaps a good right hook - and he might beat you with it, if he does it better than you do your defenses."
He called it a complete martial art, because it combined strikes, chin na, throws, and pressure points. He never insisted that it was impossible for another art to know something ours didn't know, (that I recall). How could one know that, anyway?

And even if it had all the broad categories of techniques, that wouldn't mean that there were no ways of training that would teach some of them better or supplement the ways we trained already.

My current kali crowd includes students of San Soo, jujitsu, kenpo, and aikido. We are all interested in bridging; we have techniques which work to finish and control, if only our attacker would be kind enough to let us get our hands on him!

One thing San Soo says, though, is that there is no test for real fighting except a fight. How could I test myself against a boxer? If we box, I cheerfully admit he would win. But if we street fight, and all he knows is boxing, it's unlikely he could handle shins kicks, head butts, back elbows, biting, and such. But I still remember what Al said about that guy out there with the good right hook...

I like al's outlook, except for the bit about no other style having a technique that ss didn't have...

As for sparring the boxer, try mma style sparring.

[Brithlor]

There is no reason why sparring someone (properly ofcourse...) would not bear some resemblance to how the two would fight each other "on the street".

I don't really buy into the idea that if one person is clearly outclassed in a sparring or boxing match that the other person (if he knew how) could fall back on the deadly eye gouges and pressure point strikes to win the fight...

I also disagree that San Soo has every technique from every martial art... There are some things san soo just doesn't train for..such as ground fighting. Also, they WAY people train has a huge influence on the techniques... and no one can train like every martial art... There is a distinct "look" to san soo people just like tai chi or wing chun...

I will admit that san soo has a LOT of variety in their techniques though... more than most. It just seems to lack (or the teachers seem to lack) variety in training methods outside of "free fighting".

[Brithlor]

Just curious, but what Chinese martial arts would your teacher not consider a "complete martial art"?

Every chinese martial art (as far as I know) includes qin na... Most people who study Chinese martial arts say their art includes pressure point striking. Even ones that focus more on throwing still have strikes.

[freehand]

To quote me: "He never insisted that it was impossible for another art to know something ours didn't know, (that I recall)."

Deep sorrow. My first sifu Al, alas, lost his final fight to a dangerous foe: cancer. We will never know how he would respond to these questions.

If an art uses all of the known (to the student and teacher) broad categories of techniques, and has integrated them, then it is complete. How can we know if there is a family of techniques that we don't know about? Besides, some people may use the term "complete" loosely... There is a jujitsu dojo in town at which my daughter trains; I've taken a couple of classes there. They don't kick, but they defend against kicks. They would probably deny that it is a handicap that they are not kickers (I have never heard them claim to be a "complete art", but they might insist that they can deal with any likely scenario).

I am studying kali (with a dash of Jeet Kun Do) because I believe its drilling in bridging strengthens a weak area in my San Soo background. I also appreciate the focus on weapons; while San Soo covers an introductory use of weapons, its focus is on empty hands.

I would never say that eye gouges etc, would *necessarily win the fight for me. I thought I had made that clear in earlier posts on this thread; I apologize if I have not. This point seems to be one which is either easily misunderstood or misrepresented. I cannot spar to test my techniques if many of my techniques cannot be used in the sparring match. There are folks who know nothing but a single punch who can take me out, but if I cannot use the techniques I've trained in, how would we know for sure if I could or could not have won? Can we test an aikido student's skills against a boxer if he is only allowed to box?

This is an entirely different question from whether or not sparring can be a useful training method.

As to which arts are not complete arts, there are many combat-derived sports which do not seem aware of the difference between sport and combat; there were many more of them in America than real combat arts 40 years ago. If you are too young to remember 1960, ask your teacher how many schools in North America taught jujitsu or traditional kung fu then, let alone arts like Systema or Pentjak Silat. There are somewhat more arts available now than there were, back in the day...

Brithlor: "I also disagree that San Soo has every technique from every martial art..."

Brithlor, are you talking to me, or your former San Soo teacher?

[Brithlor]

Sorry to hear about your teacher , he was somehow one of the only people in San Soo I had not heard very much about.

"Brithlor: "I also disagree that San Soo has every technique from every martial art..."

Brithlor, are you talking to me, or your former San Soo teacher?"

No one in particular...

"I cannot spar to test my techniques if many of my techniques cannot be used in the sparring match. There are folks who know nothing but a single punch who can take me out, but if I cannot use the techniques I've trained in, how would we know for sure if I could or could not have won? Can we test an aikido student's skills against a boxer if he is only allowed to box?"


I often hear that... but if you are sparring with light or no contact it shouldn't matter at all... Afterall... If I get struck by a fullpower punch to the throat I'm probably not going to care that it wasn't a "deadly" gouge or pressure point strike.

Ofcourse, if you can't hit your sparring partner chances are you won't be able to eye gouge either.

As long as you have the proper equipment, and don't use too much contact you should be able to do every technique you know... and debate afterwards if the strikes you landed were effective or not.

But there is a time and place for each part of training... But I just can't see anyone being able to use all their techniques in a 'street fight' if they've never actually trained against someone resisting and attempting to ACTUALYL hit you... instead of just giving you a punch and letting you do your thing (although I won't deny that it doesn't help).

[freehand]

Brithlor: "I often hear that... but if you are sparring with light or no contact it shouldn't matter at all... Afterall... If I get struck by a fullpower punch to the throat I'm probably not going to care that it wasn't a "deadly" gouge or pressure point strike. "

Y'know, I trained in my first kali school for about five years when they discovered escrima contests (not the old ones, which were rather like the old Chinese contests: Rule one - one fighter against one fighter. There is no Rule 2.) . Their drills changed immediately. The "defanging the snake" (crippling the weapon hand) was replaced with multiple strikes to the head/helmet, because the judges can hear it ring, and it's more dynamic looking, and more likely to get points.

Strikes which would have crippled a real fighter, such as a stick against the wrist or a knife drawn across the biceps tendon, were replaced with flashy, repeated blows which were more likely to "win" in the new context - the sport contest. I lost interest and stopped going, but I eventually moved and found a new teacher, focused on combat.

I think many people who use sparring as their major training method do not realize the limitations they impose upon themselves; these strikes become habitual and ingrained - you fight the way you train.

Heh. The gouges are not deadly in themselves; I can't rip flesh off bones, can you? But your fingers in my eyes will make me blink and tear. How many times can you hit me if I am blind for say, a second?

I do not yet have a strong opinion regarding how useful or necessary sparring is. But I think many students who primarily spar overrate the pounding they take and underrate the movement conditioning they absorb. I believe a superior teacher would guide the students thru some sort of progressive sparring. I have seen begining students thrown into fast, uncontrolled sparring, and they seemed to be learning to flail fast.

Can I benefit from it? Probably, and I am trying to find the right teacher / method / people and fit it into my schedule.

Brithlor: "Ofcourse, if you can't hit your sparring partner chances are you won't be able to eye gouge either. "

Heh. A comment that also applies to all of those who wish to learn dimmak but have not yet learned basic strikes and control.

One of the worst schools I attended was a long fist style in which we were taught a form. Just a form. Every now and then I'd ask the teacher what a particular move meant, and he would demontrate it on his senior student. The move usually looked OK. I never threw a punch at another student, no one ever blocked or even hit an inanimate target. After 3 months I decided I was not *that desperate for martial arts and left.

[SevenStar]

I can't frickin believe it, but here's a woman who is in berkely and only wants to date MA....maybe the thread starter is in her age group.

http://www.karateforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=12880

[freehand]

Alas for KFSSchaosmaster, Berzerkely is a good 400 miles or so from Riverside (640 km).

It would be a heckuva commute.

[blooming lotus]

back to the topic...........

did the dude pick up or not ???

[Shaolinlueb]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by blooming lotus
[B]back to the topic...........



i'm guessing probably not. lol

[Brithlor]

I agree that progressive sparring is the way to go.

If you only do controlled sparring with no contact and put a student directly into that they will develop very bad habbits...

If I'm understanding you correctly you would suggest to learn how to properly develop power in your strikes and attacks, and learn defensive moves before heading into full sparring with an opponent... which I entirely agree on.

In wing chun we have many drills such as chi sao before we move onto sparring... And also "cross arm" drills that try to ingrain practical moves for sparring instead of resorting to people simply trying to touch one another and considering that as "beating" the other person. There are a few things I take issue with in Wing Chun to though...

[freehand]

Pretty much what I think right now.

My Chen Taiji teacher has us doing a chin na-only easy sparring, and a little more vigorous push hands, and some faster sparring with limitations to kick/punch stuff.

My kali teacher has had us sparring with just one class of techniques at a time, with the intent to introduce new techniques gradually (to the sparring). We already do many drills, including some lap sau and pak sau.

I'll see what I think in a year or two.

[diego]

Originally posted by Ego_Extrodinaire
Hi there,

As you will all know, I have been in a wheel chair for a number of years. My nurse Katrina as recently moved overseas. I am in need of female nurses to tend to my needs. They need not be qualified in nursing just as long as they're between the ages of 18 and 23. Applicants should send a copy of their resume and a picture to my email below.

Look forward to hearing from you.

hi e, my name's betty nice too meet you. i hear you sooo sexy and and lol
peace