Is Shaolin-Do for real?

[kwaichang]

I agree except your concept of Karate is wrong as a STOP and then continueing on KC

[The Xia]

I agree with kwaichang that Karate is not "stop and go". I think "stop and go" movement is more something that beginners of any style often do.

[kwaichang]

Hey Xia I am going to find a way to print your post and frame it , we finally agreed about something KC

[The Xia]

I was thinking about adding a part about hell freezing over but decided to let it stand as is.
Now all we need is something for you and Meatshake to agree on!

[Sal Canzonieri]

yeah, if only people were going past that beginner stage, but they aren't.
Come on, these mcdojo's (there are 10 karate schools in a 3 mile radius where I live in NJ!!!!!) are churning out black belts at 12 years of age like it was a white belt.
By 20 years old they haven't gone past doing this craparate that they are learning in mass. My favorite thing to do at a party is to tell one of these people to attack me with their best shot, and I take them down in seconds and then gently place them down on the ground like they were little babies. They always look amazed. Till I tell them that they just spend 10 years getting ripped off and then they look not happy.

IF you don't know that you didn't learn the correct things, then how do you know what is correct when you see it? You can't, you can't recognize it, you're blind to it, someone has to specifically point details out to you in that case.

How can a novice go into a class and "observe" the school, what the heck do they know? How in any way possible would this novice knowing by "observing" if the school is just junk? How would they know what to look for? How would they recognize excellence?

[The Xia]

I don't judge styles by mcdojos that claim to teach them. Mcdojos don't truly represent the arts they claim to teach. It’s the real practitioners that show what a style is about.

[Citong Shifu]

I don't judge styles by mcdojos that claim to teach them. Mcdojos don't truly represent the arts they claim to teach. It’s the real practitioners that show what a style is about.

Good post Xia, well said.

[Crushing Fist]

How can a novice go into a class and "observe" the school, what the heck do they know? How in any way possible would this novice knowing by "observing" if the school is just junk? How would they know what to look for? How would they recognize excellence?

I think that a reasonably intelligent and unbiased person can tell the difference between mediocrity and excellence in most things, when shown both.

If they had never seen excellence, mediocrity may be thought more than it is, but upon seeing true excellence, it generally speaks for itself.

[kwaichang]

TRUE, HOWEVER there is more mediocrity than excellence. When I 1st started it was different there were few if any schools, In the town I worked in at 18 , there were 65000 people and only 2 schools of MA and no CMA at all/ KC

[Judge Pen]

What might appear as a double-weighted CMA, such as southern CMA that are used on boats (Southern Tai Tzu, beggar's style, Wing Chun, etc) are in actuality using the body as a surfer or skateboarder would (or like when you are standing on a subway floor without having a pole to hold on to), which means you are shifting weight to one side of the other very smoothly. If you stayed completely double weighted when subway surfing, you would tip over.

That's what I'm interested in. Hung Gar for example. The tiger-crane sets that I've seen outside of SD start in a stable horse stance or a "triangle" stance like wing-chun. I understand that many of these styles developed because of boat fighting, but the forms don't reflect the surfing motion as you point out. Their stance is strong and stable.

I will say that many forms in SD and in other CMA have stable stances for conditioning purposes, but the stance itslef is ony a transition from move to move. At least that's my understanding, but I can see from the earlier posts (that I didn't read until I started posting) that this concept has already been discussed.

[Sal Canzonieri]

That's what I'm interested in. Hung Gar for example. The tiger-crane sets that I've seen outside of SD start in a stable horse stance or a "triangle" stance like wing-chun. I understand that many of these styles developed because of boat fighting, but the forms don't reflect the surfing motion as you point out. Their stance is strong and stable.

I will say that many forms in SD and in other CMA have stable stances for conditioning purposes, but the stance itslef is ony a transition from move to move. At least that's my understanding, but I can see from the earlier posts (that I didn't read until I started posting) that this concept has already been discussed.

BECAUSE:
The opening stances for these forms are CHI-Gong / Nei Gong, you are supposed to use special breathing methods to cultivate "chi" and then have it flow through you when you do the rest of the form's movements.

Forms in CMA aren't only a collection of techniques for self-defense, they are first and foremost nei-gong exercises. The internal aspects are interwoven into the movements, forms are for generating health, they are moving yoga.
As opposed to chi-gong exercises where you maintain a static posture, forms allow muscle-tendon stretching and strengthening, along with deep breathing benefits.
So, that's why the openings of every CMA is a standing posture, they are internal movements.

(and the Wing Chun 'triangle' stance and hung gar horse stance are indeed from boat use, read the history of these styles, they came from members of the opera that lived on boats)

[Judge Pen]

BECAUSE:
The opening stances for these forms are CHI-Gong / Nei Gong, you are supposed to use special breathing methods to cultivate "chi" and then have it flow through you when you do the rest of the form's movements.

Forms in CMA aren't only a collection of techniques for self-defense, they are first and foremost nei-gong exercises. The internal aspects are interwoven into the movements, forms are for generating health, they are moving yoga.
As opposed to chi-gong exercises where you maintain a static posture, forms allow muscle-tendon stretching and strengthening, along with deep breathing benefits.
So, that's why the openings of every CMA is a standing posture, they are internal movements.

(and the Wing Chun 'triangle' stance and hung gar horse stance are indeed from boat use, read the history of these styles, they came from members of the opera that lived on boats)

I wasn't disputing the history of the stances and their original intent, I was just saying that their typically isn't a "surfing" motion in those stances. I appreciate the nei-gong aspects of these styles. It's just that hung gar really emphasizes this in the begining of forms such as Tiger-Crane. Its also great strenghting and conditioning as well.

[Citong Shifu]

I wasn't disputing the history of the stances and their original intent, I was just saying that their typically isn't a "surfing" motion in those stances. I appreciate the nei-gong aspects of these styles. It's just that hung gar really emphasizes this in the begining of forms such as Tiger-Crane. Its also great strenghting and conditioning as well.

This is very interesting! Southern styles of kungfu and the short deep stances. Let me reply to the boat theory first. This is true, when on the boats kungfu stylist would use a short deep stance, but out of the boat, they would use what was natural and necessary for that situation.

Forms in general are or were trained as a way to condition the body (internal / external, ROM, flexibility, speed, power, stability, etc) and martial technique / principles. These forms were designed to be trained with the person working from unusual and restrictive postions so that the person could react with confidence while being at a disadvantage point. So, when a person moved naturally they would be 100 times stronger, faster, etc... Regardless if in a short, high, long, deep stance...

I bring this up because there is always so much debate on this stance and that stance. Northern or southern. Etc.

I know there are differences between how the teachers teach there art, short deep horse vs. triangle horse, etc. However training the forms are a guide and condition the body. If you think for one minute Wong Fei Hung only use short deep stance and low kicks all the time or an old time Wing Chun master only used the short restrictive WC footwork training in a real situation, then some more research is advisable...

You guys can take this for what you think its worth, but remember, once you limit yourself to one way of doing something, you have limited your overall potential...

This post does not mean to be demeaning, just find it curious that so many debates arise over this or that stance work....

Respectfully.
Ron.

[Sal Canzonieri]

This is very interesting! Southern styles of kungfu and the short deep stances. Let me reply to the boat theory first. This is true, when on the boats kungfu stylist would use a short deep stance, but out of the boat, they would use what was natural and necessary for that situation.

Forms in general are or were trained as a way to condition the body (internal / external, ROM, flexibility, speed, power, stability, etc) and martial technique / principles. These forms were designed to be trained with the person working from unusual and restrictive postions so that the person could react with confidence while being at a disadvantage point. So, when a person moved naturally they would be 100 times stronger, faster, etc... Regardless if in a short, high, long, deep stance...

I bring this up because there is always so much debate on this stance and that stance. Northern or southern. Etc.

I know there are differences between how the teachers teach there art, short deep horse vs. triangle horse, etc. However training the forms are a guide and condition the body. If you think for one minute Wong Fei Hung only use short deep stance and low kicks all the time or an old time Wing Chun master only used the short restrictive WC footwork training in a real situation, then some more research is advisable...

You guys can take this for what you think its worth, but remember, once you limit yourself to one way of doing something, you have limited your overall potential...

This post does not mean to be demeaning, just find it curious that so many debates arise over this or that stance work....

Respectfully.
Ron.

I agree, BUT they (the old masters) surely, whether using deep or not deep stances when executing an application, used CORRECT CMA body mechanics.

Whether deep or not deep, they kept their knees in alignment with their toes, they opened or closed the Kua, they kept their knees slightly bent (even in the not deep stances), they kept their shoulders in alignment with waist, they didn't move their arms independent of the waist, they kept their centerline, etc, etc.

Breaking any of these rules would have destroyed their root.

[ninthdrunk]

This may be blasphemous, but I think a lot of times, the masters just did their forms and fought. I wonder how much thought they put into the forms other than, "am I moving as fast and as powerfully as I can." I bet there were some whose forms were kinda crappy, who didn't train with proper mechanics, but were still amazingly capable fighters and teachers.

Just as there are masters and practitioners today who vary in degree of ability and understanding, I'm willing to bet it was the same back then. I tell my students, "if you can't do the technique right, get really good at doing it wrong. a powerful punch, thrown with poor mechanics, is still a powerful punch."

Sure there's an optimal way to do things, and I'm not pushing anyone away from striving for perfection, but we have to remember that the masters of old, just like us today, had flaws. Some would have laughed at these discussions, while others, probably the ones who passed on the information y'all are discussing, would have nodded in approval.