View Poll Results: What to do about the 'Is Shaolin-Do for real?' thread

Voters
57. You may not vote on this poll
  • Unlock IS-Dfr. Merge all S-D threads together so it clears 1000 posts!

    22 38.60%
  • Unlock IS-Dfr. Let all the S-D threads stand independently.

    13 22.81%
  • Keep IS-Dfr locked down. All IS-Dfr posters deserved to be punished.

    5 8.77%
  • Delete them all. Let Yama sort them out.

    17 29.82%
Page 917 of 1335 FirstFirst ... 4178178679079159169179189199279671017 ... LastLast
Results 13,741 to 13,755 of 20011

Thread: Is Shaolin-Do for real?

  1. #13741
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Permanent state of Denial
    Posts
    2,272
    Quote Originally Posted by shen ku View Post
    within your own statments is the answer to what i asked... i look at some people and for all i know you may very well be one of those that i look up and think "wow they have a real grasp of what their doing and what they know"... put you arguement seems full of ... selfworth..

    my point was some people do things for ten years and only truly have one years worth of growth that they have just repeted doing over and over for ten years.. and some have ten years of continued growth and development.... do you not see this in people in life not just martial arts? do you not see those around you in your daily life that have not grown but have simple reached a level and just maintianed that? of course i have side tracked so... this has very little (as much does on here) with the subject...

    but for some of us application (which i do spend much time on) is not the end all be all of our training ... i have said that if someones only goal is to defend ones self... well by a gun and practice a few times a month and carry it everywhere....
    for the time you spend in training must surely have greater purpose.... then to simple be able to say.... i can woop somebodys a$$

    but then again thats just my path.... and i am simple a fool... but a fool on a journey.....
    LOL...I've never understood the stigma attached to self-worth. Even within your answer, which criticizes the values other individuals attach to certain courses of action and the "understanding" they reach, is filled with self-worth. The difference is that yours is dishonest and mine is honest.

    Here's the paradox. I play with with the techniques. I warp the techniques until they become Wookie-ized. The new wookie-ized technique works in all cases in which Wookie wishes to execute the technique, because Wookie understands the principles of leverage, torque, and structure. The SD "fool on a journey" looks at the Wookie-ized technique and says--you changed the material. You're "cheating" the technique. Wookie then explains the principles to other students that lie underneath the technique. When they apply principles, the technique begins to work. But they have to filter the principles through themselves and make the technique theirs.

    There's no such thing as a thousand-year old technique. There's only the thousand-year old cachet and the technique I just executed a second ago.
    Last edited by Shaolin Wookie; 02-20-2011 at 10:32 AM.

  2. #13742
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    kentucky
    Posts
    350
    lol.. your taking me all wrong man,,, i agree with what you're saying.. but i first you was kind of dising on others, kind of to me anyways, like you couldn't learn anything from someone elsa?? but yes i have a saying i like and it fits with your out look (or at least i think)..... i have said that " i don't do GMS's SD i do my SD" because kind of like you said once a move has been shown to you its yours, how you read it how you study it how you choose to work it ,, thats all for you .... if your like to strick you work it from there, if you like to grab you see it that way.. if you like to toy with your prey then you see the ways to do that..
    ...or is there something i have missed a glimpse of phantoms in the mist. Traveling down a dusty road bent forward with this heavy load..

  3. #13743
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Knoxville Tennessee
    Posts
    5,520
    A good teacher will recognize and cultivate your own unique abilities and help you make the techniques they teach work for you. Most of my teachers were gifted with more physical talent than I had (especially in the flexibility department). No matter how hard I tried, I would never be able to throw a hook kick, side kick or a round house kick the exact way that they did because my body was different. But I took the timing, principles and applications of the technique and found a way to make it work for me. And that was encouraged and complimented when effective.

    Here's the thing though; I never stopped trying to do the technique the ideal way. The forms and the techniques are taught in a way to encourage growth and development even if you never do them "perfectly." You succeed when you do them effectively. The forms teach timing movement and principles but they also push you to increase stamina, flexibility and strength. I know very few people that can do even the most basic forms "perfectly." That's ok as long as you never stop striving.

    So I guess I see and advocate both ways. The forms become yours once you learn them and your own style is how you can make the techniques work for you. However, you should never forget how the form was taught to you by others and continue to try to emulate your teachers. That is where the benefit of the tradition of the movement has worth.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oso View Post
    AND, yea, a good bit of it is about whether you can fight with what you know...kinda all of it is about that.

  4. #13744
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Permanent state of Denial
    Posts
    2,272
    That's where I disagree. I can show students applications for Short Forms #4, 7, 18, 25 (in CSC's system) etc. about a milltion times. Unless the student can grasp for himself or herself exactly what is going on (and it's the same **** thing in all four, but learned with different progressive applications all based on teh same entry/defense-against-a-throw move), one of the most important techniques of leverage and throwing the student can learn from the foundational CSC material will never make sense. It won't make sense for the student as long as the student is attempting to perform a technique in an "ideal" way. Performing the material in an "ideal" way only works in the abstract as a method of teaching material to large quantities of students at once (3+ students on up). As soon as a short person attempts to perform a technique on a larger student, the technique has to adapt and become completely personalized.

    What does this personalization of technique contain? I figure 3 things:

    1. understanding the underlying mechanics of leverage, root, and torque that operate in every technique--even in just standing up.

    2. Understanding that there are contingencies that arise in differential weights, size, balance, and height, and that there is no "cheating" a technique. It works if it takes advantage of Rule #1.

    3. Understanding that the "ideal" form is strictly a teaching tool, and not a tool from which personalized knowledge can be gained directly.

    It's a bit like a one-size-fits-all tee-shirt. You give the same t-shirt to every student. They're supposed to then take the t-shirt and shrink it to their personal fit. If someone comes back wearing a t-shirt that's too big, saying, "I like it this way because it's comfortable," that's fine, but it's a guarantee that the student in question hasn't learned jack-shirt just yet. (Excuse the bad pun.)
    Last edited by Shaolin Wookie; 02-27-2011 at 07:37 AM.

  5. #13745
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Permanent state of Denial
    Posts
    2,272
    Here...let me put it another way that doesn't sound so critical (and I wasn't criticizing you personally as an MA, JP, just to make that clear).

    Learning MA through the use of forms in any of its branches (Karate, TKD, Hung Gar, Wing Chun, SD, CSC, etc.) is very frustrating. It's frustrating because when you get a handle on underlying principles, you always feel like your teachers are teaching you the material "wrong." You imitate the ideal, and you always end up with garbage that doesn't work. You have to get a handle on the principles, and then ALL techniques and forms "work," even if you're doing BJJ, boxing, or whatever. It's always the same. It's the monkey-man technique that all higher apes employ in fighting.

    In reality, "ideal" forms are always wrong. There's always something missing. That "thing" is me.

    I'm not grateful to the Master of my school because he knows a lot of forms. I'm grateful to him for helping me understand the underlying principles that find expression in form and technique. He can't get inside my head and implant those principles, but by stressing principle over "ideal" forms at every turn, he teaches how to make all "ideal" forms find expression. All I try to do when I go to class for lessons is to figure out how to express underlying prinicples in new ways. Forms and techniques are really "useless" as "ideal" things. They have to be my things, and I have to express principles instead of mere "technique" or "structure."

    Once you grasp the underlying principles, all questions like "when do I do this technique?" or, "what if my opponent shucks instead of jiving?" go right out of the window. Why? Because you already know that the principles will find expression if you've got them in your back pocket.

  6. #13746
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Knoxville Tennessee
    Posts
    5,520
    Wookie I don't think we are disagreeing.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oso View Post
    AND, yea, a good bit of it is about whether you can fight with what you know...kinda all of it is about that.

  7. #13747
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    94
    Wouldn't the "thing" that's missing also be an actual opponent? I mean, I could train to throw a particular punch or kick a particular way all the time, but if I don't actually modify that technique to take into effect positioning and height, etc, it'd be pretty useless.
    Sith Legal Kung Fu is unstoppable.

  8. #13748
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    1,860

    Im Back

    All technigues have applications but like water there are different levels for different people, I do believe a technigue in its pure form is not known in any MA as it has been changed over time. Thus what we perceive to be the TRUE tech is in actuality a technique taught with ones spin or personality put in it, that is how a technique becomes our own. KC
    A Fool is Born every Day !

  9. #13749
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    152

    My 2 cents on "ideal"

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaolin Wookie View Post
    That's where I disagree. I can show students applications for Short Forms #4, 7, 18, 25 (in CSC's system) etc. about a milltion times. Unless the student can grasp for himself or herself exactly what is going on (and it's the same **** thing in all four, but learned with different progressive applications all based on teh same entry/defense-against-a-throw move), one of the most important techniques of leverage and throwing the student can learn from the foundational CSC material will never make sense. It won't make sense for the student as long as the student is attempting to perform a technique in an "ideal" way. Performing the material in an "ideal" way only works in the abstract as a method of teaching material to large quantities of students at once (3+ students on up). As soon as a short person attempts to perform a technique on a larger student, the technique has to adapt and become completely personalized.

    What does this personalization of technique contain? I figure 3 things:

    1. understanding the underlying mechanics of leverage, root, and torque that operate in every technique--even in just standing up.

    2. Understanding that there are contingencies that arise in differential weights, size, balance, and height, and that there is no "cheating" a technique. It works if it takes advantage of Rule #1.

    3. Understanding that the "ideal" form is strictly a teaching tool, and not a tool from which personalized knowledge can be gained directly.

    It's a bit like a one-size-fits-all tee-shirt. You give the same t-shirt to every student. They're supposed to then take the t-shirt and shrink it to their personal fit. If someone comes back wearing a t-shirt that's too big, saying, "I like it this way because it's comfortable," that's fine, but it's a guarantee that the student in question hasn't learned jack-shirt just yet. (Excuse the bad pun.)
    Isn't it true though that there is an "ideal" way to perform the form -- where the hand is, the feet are, the stance, etc. -- and doing it that way has its purposes; then also an "ideal" way to apply the technique(s) from the form, which may be infinite, and must be applied differently in the actual application -- a different way not only for each practitoner, but a different way against a taller or heavier opponent than with a shorter or lighter opponent. And some techniques, that wouldn't be applied at all to some opponents, because of their skill sets, body types, etc.

    So there can be and "ideal" way to perform a form, that is not necessarily the or an "ideal" way to apply what is learned from it. Who's sparring looks like their form practice?

    And maybe that is what each of you who have commented on the post are saying, just in different ways.
    Just One Student

    "I seek, not to know all the answers, but to understand the questions." --- Kwai Chang Caine

    (I'd really like to know all the answers, too, but understanding the questions, like most of my martial arts practice, is a more realistically attainable goal)

  10. #13750
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    152

    Evolution of forms

    Quote Originally Posted by kwaichang View Post
    All technigues have applications but like water there are different levels for different people, I do believe a technigue in its pure form is not known in any MA as it has been changed over time. Thus what we perceive to be the TRUE tech is in actuality a technique taught with ones spin or personality put in it, that is how a technique becomes our own. KC
    Does anyone doubt, that any form done today, that has been passed down from a prior generation (or more) probably resembles the form as its creator made it very little, if at all. Maybe in degrees less or more, for example younger styles, or those more rigid in practice, but particularly Chinese forms which have gone through so many "hands" I suspect look nothing like what they were originally. Doesn't mean good or bad, just different. Part of why it is also "art."
    Just One Student

    "I seek, not to know all the answers, but to understand the questions." --- Kwai Chang Caine

    (I'd really like to know all the answers, too, but understanding the questions, like most of my martial arts practice, is a more realistically attainable goal)

  11. #13751
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    152

    Forms practice

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaolin Wookie View Post
    Here...let me put it another way that doesn't sound so critical (and I wasn't criticizing you personally as an MA, JP, just to make that clear).

    Learning MA through the use of forms in any of its branches (Karate, TKD, Hung Gar, Wing Chun, SD, CSC, etc.) is very frustrating. It's frustrating because when you get a handle on underlying principles, you always feel like your teachers are teaching you the material "wrong." You imitate the ideal, and you always end up with garbage that doesn't work. You have to get a handle on the principles, and then ALL techniques and forms "work," even if you're doing BJJ, boxing, or whatever. It's always the same. It's the monkey-man technique that all higher apes employ in fighting.

    In reality, "ideal" forms are always wrong. There's always something missing. That "thing" is me.

    I'm not grateful to the Master of my school because he knows a lot of forms. I'm grateful to him for helping me understand the underlying principles that find expression in form and technique. He can't get inside my head and implant those principles, but by stressing principle over "ideal" forms at every turn, he teaches how to make all "ideal" forms find expression. All I try to do when I go to class for lessons is to figure out how to express underlying prinicples in new ways. Forms and techniques are really "useless" as "ideal" things. They have to be my things, and I have to express principles instead of mere "technique" or "structure."

    Once you grasp the underlying principles, all questions like "when do I do this technique?" or, "what if my opponent shucks instead of jiving?" go right out of the window. Why? Because you already know that the principles will find expression if you've got them in your back pocket.
    As I understand it, some schools preach forms very strictly. Some ignore them (isn't Jeet Kune Do and Ninjitsu and BJJ practice, among others, well respected styles but based on disavowing forms entirely, among others?). I've found that doing the forms has its athletic and conditioning component, that adds more to the physical conditioning and athletic training than just bare stretching and strength and endurance and cardio by itself. It also has its purpose and benefits in learning, from scratch, the things SW talks about -- torque, leverage, root, also balance, speed, focus, etc. And, I've found that with excessive repetition (doing it so many times not only that you do it right, but you can't do it wrong), the muscle memory factor is important -- I am by far no expert/master, but after constant repetition have found even me performing a technique suddenly when needed without thought -- learned from a repetitively practiced form. So I fall into the school of "forms practice is important".

    But as I learned to drive a car by driving only one car for hours, I could eventually drive any car anywhere (I know the analogy is not exact but I like it anyway). So you/we are all also correct, in my opinion, for the practice to have defensive worth, forms practice by itelf is not enough. One has to practice on a bag, on a person, spar, and quite frankly I think even actually fight someone, to get it right, or know if it is right -- which for defense purposes means, "Did it work when it counts?"

    My personal thought process has been for some time, that trying to perfect the application of short form X or sparring techique Y or long kata Z, as response to Attack Whatever, so that if opponent 1 does this, you respond with that, may make one a master after decades; BUT you have to prepare for opponent 1 doing an infinite variety of attacks, and an infinite variety of responses. I've often wondered, what is the one true best response, to each and every possible attack (I suppose every style thinks theirs is the answer to that).

    But in the short run one has to understand first, application of force by an opponent must be universally met with A, B, or C -- and it doesn't matter if the force is by hand or foot or to head or body, you have to know how to respond whatever it is, wherever it is, instinctively and automatically. If your brain/body has to calculate "okay, this attack is coming from there and going to me here, the response to that is such and such," that person might be in trouble.

    A variety of forms, practiced with practicality in mind, and practically applied, helps train a variety of reflexive responses. And I think maybe that is the point.
    Just One Student

    "I seek, not to know all the answers, but to understand the questions." --- Kwai Chang Caine

    (I'd really like to know all the answers, too, but understanding the questions, like most of my martial arts practice, is a more realistically attainable goal)

  12. #13752
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    1,860
    Even the Japanese arts changed the original Okinawan forms to have more emphasis on power over speed. It is just the nature of the beast, i feel one should strive to perform a technique as biomechanically perfect as possible and then the application will flow from there, KC
    A Fool is Born every Day !

  13. #13753
    Quote Originally Posted by kwaichang View Post
    Im back


  14. #13754
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    1,860
    Thanks My favorite skit on SNL of all time thanks Taai, BTW just finished a paper on the effects of the SI joint on the Hip capsule and connective tissue and ROM.
    A Fool is Born every Day !

  15. #13755
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Knoxville Tennessee
    Posts
    5,520
    Quote Originally Posted by Darthlawyer View Post
    Wouldn't the "thing" that's missing also be an actual opponent? I mean, I could train to throw a particular punch or kick a particular way all the time, but if I don't actually modify that technique to take into effect positioning and height, etc, it'd be pretty useless.
    PM me please.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oso View Post
    AND, yea, a good bit of it is about whether you can fight with what you know...kinda all of it is about that.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •