Unlock IS-Dfr. Merge all S-D threads together so it clears 1000 posts!
Unlock IS-Dfr. Let all the S-D threads stand independently.
Keep IS-Dfr locked down. All IS-Dfr posters deserved to be punished.
Delete them all. Let Yama sort them out.
The Original Shaolin Kuei
Brothers! Brethren!! Do you have a form in your repertoire that is a close approximation to this?: (I'm not sure how the punctuation is supposed to go for this kind of a transition from a question, which also sumbits something via what is normally reserved for a colon; but I think I have it right. If I don't, choose which punctuation you prefer.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymQh9rLgQyU
From the spine
as you and Baqualin seems to have missed the point: I was not asked to post forms that I thought showed someone who was better than the SD vids (and if you read my posts you will never see me say a single thing about anyone's skill level or performance per se - you guys luv to fall back on that claim about not everyone is perfect, there will always be flaws etc. etc. without even realizing it's not the argument being made!); what I was asked to post was what I thought were examples of the appropriate "flavor" of TCMA (go read the post before), meaning the content in terms of the moves themselves, how they were strung together in the macro context of the forms, and to some degree the manner in which the players did them; my contention is and has always been, that I personally do not see any of those qualitites in anything of SD that I have seen and so Kwai Chang asked me for examples of what I thought was indivcative of it;
I never used the word better than or skill level......I understand what you mean....I only said I didn't see anything (flavor wise) any different than the way our forms should be performed other than power generation which if not applied properly, the forms will seem too choppy & not have the flow you would normally associate with TCMA
BQ
Master Of Gai Zao Quan
cjurakpt - The point of my post was that SD looks very similar to or better than the forms you posted, IMO. I also agree with Baqualin. If I have to take the power and snap out of my forms to be considered legit TCMA, I'll pass. My "so many happy students" comment was sarcasm, not justification. I think the whole "flavor" thing is like discussing art. Every one's opinion is subjective. I post on this thread for the fun of the debate. SD has given me a great deal. I freely admit that I have difficulty remaining objective in my arguments. That doesn't mean that I am dumb and blind. Some of the criticisms of SD are valid, some aren't.
Last edited by BentMonk; 07-24-2007 at 01:46 PM.
"Repugnant is a creature that would squander the ability to lift an eye to heaven, conscious of it's fleeting time here." - Tool
www.bentmonk.com
Registered User
Have to agree with BQ here. This may be what some of you call TCMA - and maybe it is "modern" TCMA but you can't seriously believe that people practiced like we see in these two examples that was posted as good TCMA and then stepped on the battlefield the next day.All I can say if I have to look like a pu$$y doing my forms to be like TCMA....then I'll stick with the SD & GMS's way
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...85909503964460
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arch&plindex=3
Some of the other clips were better - but most of them had the same complete lack of martial intent and power.
Registered User
Originally Posted by Baqualin
All I can say if I have to look like a pu$$y doing my forms to be like TCMA....then I'll stick with the SD & GMS's way!!
I have to agree as well. I liked a great deal of those videos for what they were, but those videos are the EXACT reason why people think CMA / Kung Fu is not effective in a fight.
All of our training starts with the basics of rooting, balance, stability, strength, etc.
Most of what I see in regards to TCMA now a days the wind could blow them over and their strikes would make us laugh when and if we were hit by them.
The modern traditions of CMA are for show and have no martial application, unless you have a very cooperative opponent.The lion dance , the outfits, the rituals ,etc. is sooo far removed from what REAL TCMA is about .
I think more TCMA schools should be looking at SD and borrowing some of the ideas to adapt their styles for modern day usage.
Registered User
Well, I'd say you are delusional, but perhaps you are way past that.
I'd like to know:
Do you believe
That Sin The' is THE Shaolin Grand master?
That Shaolin Do is the original and authentic art?
That the reason kung fu in China is different is because it is a lesser variant of the true original style?
That the reason your stuff looks like Karate is because it is 'for combat.'? (Heard from SD students.)
That the Shaolin monks honored Sin The' by erecting a stele in his honor?
These are things the 'grandmaster' says on his website. Do YOU believe them?
Honestly, you've got to be quite the tool to believe this tripe.
Registered User
It is near impossible to bring a true believer out of their delusion, so lets focus on the lies of Sin The', the grandhamster of shaolin do.
Do you believe them? Do you repeat them? Do you sell your 'art' by repeating them?
If so, do you sleep at night? How does it feel to be engaged in such bald faced deceit?
Registered User
FWIW, some will call me rude, but no one has bucked up and addressed the moral implications of fraud to support a martial arts club. It happens a lot, but I sense there are some true believers here. No one has been able to support SD outside of SD. It is obvious The' is a bull****ter. So why do you go along with it?
Registered User
Oh, tattoedmonk, it is best to be silent and thought of as a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Registered User
1 I believe he is the Grandmaster of his system of shaolin.Originally Posted by Mas Judt
2 I believe that the material is authentic and original.
3 Yes
4 yes
5 No
These are left up to interpretation. For example, to say that the Shaolin Monks erected a stele in his honor could mean, when the stele was erected they had a ceremony in his honor . ( Not to say this is the way it is or was ,just and example. )
I believe that most of what is written about the art is solid ,but that certain things have been blown out of proportion, kinda like in the game telephone.
Registered User
No one outside of SD can prove that it is not what we say it is, can they??
What makes GMS story any different than anyone elses out there? I mean up until recent times the stories of and many histories and lineges in CMA were unknown and unfounded and now many of them are being proven to be incorrect as well, so what do you make of that??
So what if they are stories that were told to a child to teach him the proper spirit of the art?? Many styles do this and have done this. it is possible that just like anything else that has a story that they have been blown out of proportion??
This does not take away from what they art has to offer. And if it does the art is not for them.
Believe me I do not know anyone that thinks that the legends/ history/ lineage is a major selling point.
It is the art and the people involved that are the selling points
Registered User
If this bothers you so much why do you get involved?? Why not contact the Better Business Bureau , ETC., file a complaint and then take SD and GMS to court??
Registered User
Hey PT I enjoyed the forms I can see the generation of power from the waist in the ones that I saw , I feel the practitioners have merit. I have to disagree with my SD partners and do not feel the practioners look weak at all. I can see the generation of power and the speed etc. As far as what I believe let me agree with TTM on most of what is said as far as the statue stone at the temple who cares the point is it is an honor that the Shaolin Temple allowd it to be erected in the 1st place paid for or not. As far as the differences of the "flavor" of the films shown compared to SD let me say this: In Karate Do power generation is from the base and depends upon Uchi Waza and Tsuki Waza. Most Chinese MA depend upon Uchiwaza style of stricking as Japanese have alot more Tsuki waza. I trained in Japanese styles for many years and I know them well and SD is not Japanese in power or form period. Does SD generate power as the ones in the clips , yes in some cases but not all, I have seen a different method in the clips posted by SD people so let it be known that not all the demos of SD are the best that I have seen performed by SD people. So please do not judge the style by the stylist. Mas I asked earlier what is the weight class of the Wu Shu guy who will fight ?? Again nothing has changed are the styles shown and SD different ?? Yes is one CMA and the other not ?? Who knows for sure. KC
A Fool is Born every Day !
sorry, my mistake - hard to keep track of you all...
no, I wouldn't say to change styles, mainly because, to be honest, it's not of any interest to me what someone would do - changing styles might be the answer, it might not be, probably depends on the individual
anyway, as far as the differences, the only way I could do that effectively in a way that might convince you, is to sit down with you and review videos or practitioners side-by-side; but as I stated before, I am not going to bother with that because there is little point; you asked me to give you examples of what I thought constituted the flavor of which I spoke, I did so; if you do not see differences, then my describing them wouldn't do much good anyway; if you do see differences and feel SD's way of doing things is preferable, that's fine, again, my argument was not to convinve you otherwise
your original statement made mention of how forms are done by humans, not robots so everyone will have flaws, which implies that you were responding to a supposed critique of how someone performed the form, and it was in context of the vids I posted, so again it implies a comparative;
similar and better than are two different criteria: they can look the same and better / worse or different and better / worse; likewise they can look better and same / different or worse and same / different; as far as lacking power and snap, I would suggest taking another look at the CLF vid of the guy doing technique drills with his students or the Baji vid of the guy doing the Green Dragon form; if youthink these lack "snap" and power generation, then I really can't say much more about it;
I would agree about the Kunlun sets that they do not appear to be that martially oriented - but I don't think that the intent is to be martial, TBH; however, bear in mind, that no one asked me to give examples of fighting or "real" martial application per se - remember, the entire example was about "flavor"; these are two entirely different things - if you wanted examples of how TCMA should be trained as relates to actual fighting, you might be surprised but I would not have posted forms - I would have posted San Da or Shui Jow or other things that involved live training against resisting opponents - personally, I think that forms are a tremendous misuse of time if youwant to train actual fighting, so, quite frankly, all your counterarguments about the forms lacking martial intent and power generation mean nothing to me anyway, because the whole context is irrelevant (let the gods of TCMA start hurling their thunderbolts...)
again, if you think that forms have anything to do with training fighting, I have a bridge here in NYC that is in need of new ownershipOriginally Posted by Baqualin
I have to agree as well. I liked a great deal of those videos for what they were, but those videos are the EXACT reason why people think CMA / Kung Fu is not effective in a fight.
All of our training starts with the basics of rooting, balance, stability, strength, etc.
Most of what I see in regards to TCMA now a days the wind could blow them over and their strikes would make us laugh when and if we were hit by them.
The modern traditions of CMA are for show and have no martial application, unless you have a very cooperative opponent.
I think more TCMA schools should be looking at SD and borrowing some of the ideas to adapt their styles for modern day usage.
now, this is, of course, an entirely different discussion than what we were originally "debating" - again, be very clear that my entire discourse and example set was in regards to "flavor" - I made no claims or statements about martial efficacy - TBH, many of the guys I posted probably couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag - and that is regardless of how they do their forms; probably the Baji guy showing apps and the CLF guy would be the most able to actually use their stuff; possibly the Dragon guy depending on what he trained aside from forms; the Tong Bei, Kun Lun, Taiji and Bagua guys - I wouldn't hold my breath (even the bagua guy showing apps, although I like a lot of them, not so sure he'd do much in a fight); the best example of fighting, actually, was the push hands competition vid, because what you had there were two guys trying their hardest to resist what the other guy was doing (of course the skill level was very uneven)
as to why people think that TCMA-ists can't fight - it's not because their forms are weak, it's because they spend time doing forms in the first place, as opposed to other things that would be of greater benefit when it comes to fighting, like working against pads, or resisting opponents; these things not only give you real skill, they train all the stuff that forms proporte to train - rooting, stability, strength, balance, timing, coordination, speed, agility, etc. - in a FUNCTIONAL context, which contemporary Motor Learning theory research has shown time and again is one of, if not the strongest determinent of actual motor skill aquisition (KC - you must be familiar with the work of people such as Horak, Shumway-Cooke, Gentile and concepts of the contextual interference effect if you are in neuro rehab...)
again, my point had nothing to do with power generation or even inherent merit in regards to fighting - it was a matter of "style"; whether they are weak or strong, TBH, you can't say without seeing them in action
you can debate power generation all you want - the fact of the matter is, when you train under live conditions against skilled, resisting opponents on a regular basis, most of that goes out the window, because you end up with a common denominator that, sorry to say, looks like MMA, BJJ, Sambo, Boxing / kickboxing, San Da, Muey Thai, Bando, etc.
again, I have never commented on individual performances - my comments have ALWAYS been directed at content
that's a stretch - I don't know if they claim that per se, but obviously this is not a singular position - there are / have been many individuals who have trained in Shaolin arts that could be construed as being of "grand master" status; what he actually studied, well, I think it was a bit more variegated than what the party line puts out...
I personally find that hard to believe, considering that what I have seen of it looks very different from the classical Shaolin sets that I have seen in my years in the TCMA community, or what now can be easily found on You Tube; it looks like it is a few generations away, xerox of a xerox, etc., and based on the content, looks like it was learned piecemeal and reconstituted into its current form - which is fine, it's just not "the original and authentic" Shaolin style anymore (but then again, that is, evidently and entire argument in and of itself - I believe Sal Canzonieri and others are currently discussing this on other threads in the Shaolin forum, and their research skills and experience far exceeds mine in this area)
if he had the $$$, I;m sure they did, as they have done for many others (and, BTW, the Chinese don't inherently have a problem with this, because culturally it is understood what it means; the problem is when you come back to the US and put it out as an example of how someone is connected to the temple in a special sort of way)
I personally have a hard time with the entire lineage story, especially as the pic of the Shaggy DA Grandmaster looks a lot like a pic I recall seeing elsewhere in the past...also, the whole idea of one person transmitting 999 forms to another person and that person doing the same to another is highly suspect; that, and the fact that Sin The's teacher and his teacher's teacher are not mentioned anywhere else is suspicious (and the justifications for why this is are just a bit too pat); all in all, it's a very romantic, idealized story, which, as those of us who have studied with actual Chinese "old guys", knows is hardly the way it is (e.g. - none of them studied with only one person, none of them knew 999 forms)
the lack of independent verification is a red flag: a very good litmus test is whether independent, outside sources who have no vested interest in a system's veracity corroborate its claims (e.g. - Jigiro Kano can be "verified" by many source who have nothing whatsoever to do with Judo)
SD seems to have a fair amount of "cult of personality" to it; I suspect it is also pretty cliquey; and again, it seems like a lot of the explanations are a bit too convenient: explaining the use of gi's, why no one has heard of his teachers...
in the end, it's up to the individual to decide if it resonates as true or not, of course...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
