Is Shaolin-Do for real?

[cjurakpt]

My fupa PT I am sure you are Out pt, as I was for 11 years. I follow other precepts not a big fan of Maitland, I like Paris and Myo - Fascial met tech , Structural to Soft tissue. mobs. Strain counter strain and Corley / Kelsey tendon cond and Un-loading principles. So having said that what do i do for work. Likewise as you were not familiar with Bobath you may not be familiar with all the nuances of SD. as far as Dragon hand etc I am basing this on my DVD of the form by GMT it looks like a DRagon Hand not Immortal hand. I will look at the notes to be sure/.

Maitland is a nice system if that's all you use - it is internally consistent to a fault; mixing it with other things diminishes its efficacy, IMHO (to wit, I have worked with a few GDMT's from Oz - they were very effective using it alone); Paris seems to be basically Maitland mixed in with other stuff (Kaltenborn, Grimsby, Roccobado, etc.), from what i understand, but I never took his courses; MFR is ok, but Barnes is a bit culty and somewhat of an Upledger wanna-be; as for Dr. John, don't get me started, I spent a lot (too much?) time with him in my early years, before getting into more classical osteo stuff (Mitchel, Sutherland, Jones - counterstrain is the DEAL - fixes pretty much everything; the rest usually can be nailed with MET and adjustment - yes, I do a good deal of adjust / Gr. V - cuts down on rx. time when used appropriately in a big way!); on the neuro end, picked up PNF from Vicki Johnson, and as for Bobath, again to be clear, I studied NDT but have used it for peds (CP, etc.); never did any in-patient adult neuro, never that interested in it for some reason; and I am not familiar with Corley / Kelsey

as for SD, hey, whatever - I have seen more TCMA in my travels than I care to remember, and quite frankly, I think I can make a pretty good assessment of what is what, and SD just doesn't have the right taste to it - it looks like, in all the examples I have seen, a 4th or 5th generation xerox of TCMA: may have started out as it, but got messed with here and there to the point where it lacks all but a superficial reseamblance to it; but whatever, as I said, that's just my opinion, it won't change things one bit

[cjurakpt]

#1 Yes there is.

what informs that variety?

#2 I believe it is because any of the masters do not care about what people think either way.

obviously they do if they are promoting thir schools as being "authentic" and "original" Shaolin...

#3 Authentic and original forms have been changed and altered by masters in every style to suit their needs , why should SD be any differen? The forms are taught , for the most part , consistently the same way in most of the schools.

again, what informs their decision to change something and the way in which it is changed? there's a big difference between me going in and moving stuff around in Bethoven's Fifth and Leonard Bernstein doing it...

#4 So what do see as being the most intrinsic aspects of the forms and /or pieces of the forms that you have seen that are missing from what you have seen in SD ??

the moves themselves, how they are strung together, the way they are played - all TCMA, despite being comprised of 100's of styles, has a certain flavor to it - SD lacks that, IMO

#5 So you have seen nothing that was good in SD what so ever?? Material or otherwise.

nope

#6 So what makes you so qualified then to say one way or another as to what is correct or incorrect about what it is that SD does.

nothing makes me qualified - I am just giving an opinion based on 20+ years in the world of TCMA; take it or leave it, you obviously choose the latter

I mean it is easy to say from behind a computer, looking at a two dimensional video of forms to say" yeah they do not have this and this is not right, etc. But is it possible that looks my be deceiving ,that if you tried to test your beliefs against any of these people, that the you might be wrong??

why is it that you can look at other TCMA styles who post their vids, and you can see what is going on just fine, but when it comes to SD, that is not the case? why does "defense" of SD always involves complex arguments and justifications? I mean, I can do a CLF form, and someone may tell me I suck, but no one would ever suggest it's not actually CMA - but for some reason, something about SD consistently sets off bells, whistles and red flags for TCMA practitioners - just sayin'

look guys, you believe in your reality, it's obviously done right by you, so I'm just gonna drop it here and let it be, because there's obviously no point in pursuing this any further

[kwaichang]

Corley and Kelsey are a husband / wife PT team with 20 years of research and they are the ones that originated the suni unloading system. It is a de-weighting principle excellent for disc pathology and sports rehab. I worked with Doug F. the inventor of ex-pro program. As far as the SD Green Dragon the opening move is " Fu Pu Liang Chang" " Tiger step spread the palm" not Immortal points the way. The guy just F/U as people do . Please do not judge the style by the man as we are all imperfect. PT I think we could discuss tendon cond tech of C/K if you were open to it. KC

[tattooedmonk]

what informs that variety?


obviously they do if they are promoting thir schools as being "authentic" and "original" Shaolin...


again, what informs their decision to change something and the way in which it is changed? there's a big difference between me going in and moving stuff around in Bethoven's Fifth and Leonard Bernstein doing it...


the moves themselves, how they are strung together, the way they are played - all TCMA, despite being comprised of 100's of styles, has a certain flavor to it - SD lacks that, IMO


nope


nothing makes me qualified - I am just giving an opinion based on 20+ years in the world of TCMA; take it or leave it, you obviously choose the latter


why is it that you can look at other TCMA styles who post their vids, and you can see what is going on just fine, but when it comes to SD, that is not the case? why does "defense" of SD always involves complex arguments and justifications? I mean, I can do a CLF form, and someone may tell me I suck, but no one would ever suggest it's not actually CMA - but for some reason, something about SD consistently sets off bells, whistles and red flags for TCMA practitioners - just sayin'

look guys, you believe in your reality, it's obviously done right by you, so I'm just gonna drop it here and let it be, because there's obviously no point in pursuing this any further

It could be many things . I believe that this is something you would have to ask each person that does it differently.

So what makes this different than any other schools that teach authentic and original materal , that has variety and different interpretations on the same material??

So what is this flavor you speak of??I mean I have seen this material done with root , power , explosiveness , fluidity, continuity,etc. the same as any other CMA, but what do you see as being the differences??

I would say most likely their perception, their mind set,understanding of the material , and how they would utilize it in application, etc..

I am serious about knowing your opinion . I would like to see you post something that you believe has al the essential elements of CMA( FLAVOR).

[tattooedmonk]

As far as the SD Green Dragon the opening move is " Fu Pu Liang Chang" " Tiger step spread the palm" not Immortal points the way.

Correct.

[Golden Tiger]

As far as the SD Green Dragon the opening move is " Fu Pu Liang Chang" " Tiger step spread the palm" not Immortal points the way.

Hey, even I have an off day. Lesson #233, when in doubt, refer to your notes.

[sunfist]

My god, i actually can feel the abyss staring into me.

[cjurakpt]

I would like to see you post something that you believe has al the essential elements of CMA( FLAVOR).

this is a sample list of things I've seen recently:

Baji:
empty hand:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arch&plindex=8
weapons:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGBQv...elated&search=
application:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdqQH...elated&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQ9Qa...elated&search=

Kunlun
empty hand:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arch&plindex=1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...85909503964460
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...46862387479722

Choi Lei Faht
empty hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf_snOHmTCg&NR=1
application:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KL108-I-vlA&NR=1
qigong:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZ4Mdzs2jmk&NR=1

Bagua
emptyhand:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arch&plindex=3
application:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzqFt...elated&search=

Taiji
empty hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1yisB38Lws
push hands:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arch&plindex=9

Dragon
empty hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=887Pf...elated&search=

Tong Bei
empty hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVSWz9XM9NA

[Baqualin]

this is a sample list of things I've seen recently:

Baji:
empty hand:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arch&plindex=8
weapons:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGBQv...elated&search=
application:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdqQH...elated&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQ9Qa...elated&search=

Kunlun
empty hand:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arch&plindex=1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...85909503964460
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...46862387479722

Choi Lei Faht
empty hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf_snOHmTCg&NR=1
application:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KL108-I-vlA&NR=1
qigong:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZ4Mdzs2jmk&NR=1

Bagua
emptyhand:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arch&plindex=3
application:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzqFt...elated&search=

Taiji
empty hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1yisB38Lws
push hands:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arch&plindex=9

Dragon
empty hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=887Pf...elated&search=

Tong Bei
empty hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVSWz9XM9NA

I'm sorry cjurakpt I just don't see it.....I saw nothing that I haven't seen in a lot of SD people...except for the fact I don't see the power generation we're taught by GMS.....most of these guys would get killed by a good fighter.
The Kunlun looked like an offshoot of Chen Tai Chi to me.
The Baqua I've seen before (I know the guy is an old master)....not Impressed with the form at all.
Same with the Taiji...nothing to make me go wow, we need to take a look at what we're doing.

My favorite was the Kwan Do.....nice stances, flow and power......see the same in SD

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

[cjurakpt]

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

well, good luck with that then

[BentMonk]

Nice vids. IMHO the internal forms posted by SDIC were as good or better than the ones you posted. I liked the kwan dao form. I think JP's stances and over all movement are better than what you posted. I also think the drunken form posted earlier is as good or better than any of the empty hand vids you posted. Anyone can pick any form apart and point out every flaw. The fact that the forms are being performed by human beings and not robots means that there will always be a flaw somewhere, since there are no perfect human beings. TCMA is so buried in legends, lineage debates, and multiple interpretations of the same forms, that to single SD out for it is ridiculous. As many have pointed out, this is the age of information. Anyone beginning their martial arts journey is capable of doing the research needed to make an informed decision. SD, like every other MA has practitioners of assorted skill level. So if SD is so bad, why do we have so many happy students?

[Baqualin]

well, good luck with that then

Please don't take that as directed towards you...I like your post & critiques.....you only call it as you see it...just as I.
Best always,
BQ

[cjurakpt]

Nice vids. IMHO the internal forms posted by SDIC were as good or better than the ones you posted. I liked the kwan dao form. I think JP's stances and over all movement are better than what you posted. I also think the drunken form posted earlier is as good or better than any of the empty hand vids you posted. Anyone can pick any form apart and point out every flaw. The fact that the forms are being performed by human beings and not robots means that there will always be a flaw somewhere, since there are no perfect human beings. TCMA is so buried in legends, lineage debates, and multiple interpretations of the same forms, that to single SD out for it is ridiculous. As many have pointed out, this is the age of information. Anyone beginning their martial arts journey is capable of doing the research needed to make an informed decision. SD, like every other MA has practitioners of assorted skill level. So if SD is so bad, why do we have so many happy students?

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 wasn't trying to bolster my argument, just answering his question; in regards to my perspective, it's obviously pointless to argue it with anyone from SD, because it's not going to get anywhere, and I had stated above that I was no longer trying to do, but KC then asked for examples anyway; so for you guys to argue as if I were continuing to do so really makes no sense...

BTW, the argument "if a lot of people are happy with SD, that must make it right" has no basis in reality: you'd have to look at percentages, in terms of how many people who have EVER studied SD who are happy with it (probably most are not, like anything); as far as large numbers of people supporting something, that doesn't make it intrinsically good - millions of people supported the German government in in the 1930's, and that didn't turn out too well despite the numbers (no, I am NOT comparing SD to Nazi-ism)

[cjurakpt]

Please don't take that as directed towards you...I like your post & critiques.....you only call it as you see it...just as I.
Best always,
BQ

how could I possibly take it as directed to me?

[tattooedmonk]

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 wasn't trying to bolster my argument, just answering his question; in regards to my perspective, it's obviously pointless to argue it with anyone from SD, because it's not going to get anywhere, and I had stated above that I was no longer trying to do, but KC then asked for examples anyway; so for you guys to argue as if I were continuing to do so really makes no sense...

BTW, the argument "if a lot of people are happy with SD, that must make it right" has no basis in reality: you'd have to look at percentages, in terms of how many people who have EVER studied SD who are happy with it (probably most are not, like anything); as far as large numbers of people supporting something, that doesn't make it intrinsically good - millions of people supported the German government in in the 1930's, and that didn't turn out too well despite the numbers (no, I am NOT comparing SD to Nazi-ism)

Actually it was me that asked for your examples , but that does not matter.

So, now tell us what you see as being the difference between what you have seen from SD and in these videosa and similarities, if any.

I am truely interested in your perspective and opinion .

I have already seen things that I believe are different, but also similar.

What would you tell an SD practitioner to help them gain this FLAVOR?? Be serious . Do not say take another style.