Is Shaolin-Do for real?

[One student]

WELL, I'LL ASK THIS, THEN I'LL TRY. iF I SHOWED UP TO PLAY A BASKETBALL GAME IN A BASEBALL OUTFIT WOULD ANYONE POINT, LAUGH AND STARE?

I WOULD SAY YES. REGARDLESS IF THAT GUY IN THE BASEBALL OUTFIT COULD PLAY, PEOPLE WILL STILL ASK WHY THE BASEBALL OUTFIT? OR WHAT IF THE WHOLE BASKETBALL TEAM WORE LAB COATS. WHAT IF I SHOWED UP TO MY WEDDING WHILE EVERYONE ELSE HAS SUITS AND TUX'S ON, BUT I SHOWED UP IN A CLOWN OUTFIT. YOU WOULDN'T ASK WHY? I WOULD

IN THE END, IT TELLS ME ABOUT YOUR TRAINING. WHETHER IT WAS AUTHENTIC, MADE UP, BORROWED, OR WHATEVER, IT WOULD INDICATE TO ME WHETHER YOU WERE PROPERLY TRAINED OR NOT.

MAYBE IT ALL FALL DOWN TO BEING HONORABLE. WHO KNOWS. ITS STILL NOT WHAT IT SAYS IT IS IN MY OPINION. BUT WHO AM I RIGHT?

I think the more accurate analogy would be, if someone showed up at a US, NBA, little league, etc., basketball game, wearing a uniform that they might wear in a different country, league, or level, but still a basketball uniform, what would anyone say? Depends if they are there for a fashion show or to play basketball, doesn't it? You're criticizing going to a martial arts class wearing what you (and to your credit, what others also) perceive to be a uniform from a different martial art, not from a different sport entirely.

[One student]

I'm generally okay at understanding the written word. What exactly is it that I'm not getting? You've laid out a number of opinions. Some of them are supported by logic and evidence. Those have been acknowledged. Others are supported by prejudice and ingnorance. Yet others are seemingly mutually exclusive to other opinions you articulate. It's the latter two sets that brother Penn and I have been asking you about. And, in response to those questions, you rarely answer the question that was asked and usually engage in some derisive opinionated hyperbole.

Neither JP nor I have said that SD is authentic shaolin kung fu. We've both suggested that it is not karate; an assertion that is supported by others. We've also both stated that it's Chinese in origin and influenced by Indonesian martial arts; an assertion that is also supported by others and somewhat demonstrable. Nonetheless, you keep calling it karate and saying that people aren't getting you. That, I don't get.

Old Noob is on point and simply correct. The site posted by others here (Ching Yi), also notes that no two people practice kung fu in the same way. That's one thing I've always liked about CMA over TKD or Karate, for example: you see someone do one of those forms well, and another person who does it well, looks exactly alike. Precision in the form is key. Isn't it true in kung fu, it is flexible and yielding, "like water," and each person makes it their own and adapts. That's why the Ching Yi school noted even a teacher and his/her student won't look the same doing the same material.

No one can dispute that GMT took what he got from who he got it from, who got it from who they got it from, a lot of which is rooted in TCMA, and adapted it to their own style and preferences, probably including influences from Indonesia where he learned it, and yes maybe from other influences there or since then. He passed it on, and those he passed it to tweaked it more. That's why you'll see two or more experienced SD practioners, even the older masters, who will and teach the same form differently.

Not saying if that is good or bad, it is what it is. And it'd be the same if SD didn't call itself Shaolin Do from the start. Any name it picked or stuck with or for that matter changed to, wouldn't change what it is: a martial art method and sets of forms taught by GM SKT, based on what he's learned, and how he wants to teach it. If you like it stick with it. If you don't, go somewhere else and do something else. I've always wondered how much animosity there is, from people who have never taken a SD class, that comes from wishing they could have access to such a diverse and multitude of forms and styles to practice. You can get all the forms for fun or exercise, and then really work hard the ones that your body type and skills are suited for, make that the heart of your practice. What's wrong with that? Sure its not the same as going to a school which only teaches a handful of forms, but works the heck out of them, and yes there is virtue to that method. But like I said, if you like the SD way, stick with it, if you want another way, do that instead.

[Syn7]

I guess, in the sense ancient Chivalry also had its good and bad, with Bushido I guess I'd have to reject the parts about if I dishonor my master or sensei or whatever I have to die or something.

Oh don't even get me started on euro style chivalry. It was considered unmanly to bathe. These fukcers sure could fight, but were d1ckheads in every other sense. Every once in a while a good man came around and didn't fold to peer pressure. But you had to be really high born to have the clout to not conform. It wasn't about having stones, many did and died for it.

But you can't argue against the parts about honesty, loyalty to freinds and family (even if the includes a school, kwoon, dojo, etc.), striving to live a virtuous and clean life, defending the weak, hard work towards a worthy goal, things like that. And you don't have to call it Bushido to still strive to walk that path.

No, of course not, you can call it whatever you want. But the moral value in Bushido is cultureless and common in all man. The unique aspects are either just trappings and gilt or some serious bullsh1t. There is nothing in Bushido that is great that you can't find in almost every other culture in some form or another. A few standout cultures may not conform to that, but not many and all examples are clearly morally wrong. For the most part, defending the weak and living clean are basics. Loyalty is another issue. Loyalty is neither moral or immoral, it comes down to what you are loyal to. So loyalty in itself is not a virtue IMO. And loyalty and pride come hand in hand and don't get me started on how much of a weakness pride is.

[Judge Pen]

ive defended myself successfully but i dont consider myself a successful fighter, because i dont fight other fighters in a public venue. i do consider those incidents as successful self defense situations that proved my training has been a benefit though. so yes that is a good thing that people can use their art to defend themselves. did sin the ever fight? like muay thai or sanda or american kickboxing?

I can agree with this statement. I dare say, Lucas, that you feel confident in your ability to fight and defend yourself even though you don't have a fight record and are not, therefore "a successful fighter." I can only speak from my own experience. I have seen a lot of bad sparrers in SD (advanced and otherwise). I've seen some that are good. Not many SD people go outside of their style and participate in open style tournaments (a problem and criticism). Some have. I have. I've done well. Didn't win, but placed and performed respectfully against people of "authentic CMA lineages". There are people on KFO who have seen this, or sparred with me, that can vouch for me that no matter what the origin of SD, I'm no sloach (in fact a detailed account of my sparring by non-SD people have been talked about on KFO in the past). So does that prove anything about SD or me? Debatable, but unless we are talking about a fight record, then ancedotal evidence by mostly anonymous internet posters are all the proof we have.

JP has some skill. He's a good guy. I've sparred him and watched him spar his ass off in a moderate contact tournament, fighting 6 or 7 fights (max 3, 2 min rounds as usual) but in something like just a 2 hour span of time. Irrelevent of the source, he's no slouch.

[Empty_Cup]

Congratulations to Sifu Jerome Cook, who was promoted to Master yesterday!

[Lucas]

I can agree with this statement. I dare say, Lucas, that you feel confident in your ability to fight and defend yourself even though you don't have a fight record and are not, therefore "a successful fighter." I can only speak from my own experience. I have seen a lot of bad sparrers in SD (advanced and otherwise). I've seen some that are good. Not many SD people go outside of their style and participate in open style tournaments (a problem and criticism). Some have. I have. I've done well. Didn't win, but placed and performed respectfully against people of "authentic CMA lineages". There are people on KFO who have seen this, or sparred with me, that can vouch for me that no matter what the origin of SD, I'm no sloach (in fact a detailed account of my sparring by non-SD people have been talked about on KFO in the past). So does that prove anything about SD or me? Debatable, but unless we are talking about a fight record, then ancedotal evidence by mostly anonymous internet posters are all the proof we have.

Ya I remember spying on those discussions

I'd put shaolin-do along with other martial arts in terms of being able to develop a person capable of fighting. As we all know, men will take the tools they have, and make them work if they're intent on doing so.

[Empty_Cup]

Ya I remember spying on those discussions

I'd put shaolin-do along with other martial arts in terms of being able to develop a person capable of fighting. As we all know, men will take the tools they have, and make them work if they're intent on doing so.

"Capable" is the key word there. No matter which system we talk about, it's up to the student to really take it upon themselves to achieve their goals. Teachers can only show the way...

[Old Noob]

Sparring and fighting are interesting. In schools that have belt ranks, I've always found that a person's objective sparring abilities have very little to do with their rank. Lots of things contribute to this. You may have a white belt in your system who has black belts in other martial arts. You may have someone who wrestled or just fought a lot as a kid. On the other hand, you may have black belt who never got in fights as a kid and never so much as lifted a finger to spar until they stepped foot into their first MA school. What is certian is that the black belt almost certainly is a better sparrer/fighter than that same person was when they showed up as a white belt. If that wasn't certain, then I would take a hard look at the system. Outside of the MAs where you have to beat folks of higher rank to advance (like BJJ for instance), I don't think you can look at a guy and be like, "oh he's a so-and-so system black belt and therefore a badass." It just doesn't work like that.

[kwaichang]

Good post, with that said then why do people think or believe that their system is superior to another . Why is that since there are good and bad in every system. It is not like some one loses a fight from a style and automatically their system is absorbed into another greater system. KC
Such as Traditional Hung Jia or SD or Wing Chun or SD etc???

[Lucas]

i would say that is generally due to several factors.

1. in-experience

2. ignorance

3. brain washing/misled

4. desire

[Old Noob]

Good post, with that said then why do people think or believe that their system is superior to another . Why is that since there are good and bad in every system. It is not like some one loses a fight from a style and automatically their system is absorbed into another greater system. KC
Such as Traditional Hung Jia or SD or Wing Chun or SD etc???

I have never understood why some people claim that their system is superior to all others. I guess I can imagine a circumstance where an evolution within a martial system creates a new system that pretty much renders the older system obsolete and, therefore, inferior. I'm not well versed enough in traditional martial arts to give an example but a good military example is the invention of gunpowder and firearms eventually making plate armor and shields obsolete. Still, the analogy doesn't hold directly. Judo was an evolution from japanese ju jitsu, but traditional ju jitsu players can still give judoka a run for their money. Brazilian ju jitsu was an evolution from judo but judoka can still give BJJ players a run for their money. Consequently, I don't think an objective person can say that bjj is superior to judo is superior to traditional ju jitsu. At the end of the day - and I've inadvertently circled back to my original point - it come down to the skill of the individual within the system. How well has that individual internalized the techniques and made them automatic? How athletic, coordinated, and powerful is that individual naturally? How well suited is the system to the individuals natural strengths and weaknesses?

The more I think about it and write about it, the more I think that anyone who says that a whole system is superior to another is full of it. I believe some systems might be predisposed to be vulnerable to certain aspects of other systems but I couldn't comfortably go further than that.

[Empty_Cup]

I have never understood why some people claim that their system is superior to all others. I guess I can imagine a circumstance where an evolution within a martial system creates a new system that pretty much renders the older system obsolete and, therefore, inferior. I'm not well versed enough in traditional martial arts to give an example but a good military example is the invention of gunpowder and firearms eventually making plate armor and shields obsolete. Still, the analogy doesn't hold directly. Judo was an evolution from japanese ju jitsu, but traditional ju jitsu players can still give judoka a run for their money. Brazilian ju jitsu was an evolution from judo but judoka can still give BJJ players a run for their money. Consequently, I don't think an objective person can say that bjj is superior to judo is superior to traditional ju jitsu. At the end of the day - and I've inadvertently circled back to my original point - it come down to the skill of the individual within the system. How well has that individual internalized the techniques and made them automatic? How athletic, coordinated, and powerful is that individual naturally? How well suited is the system to the individuals natural strengths and weaknesses?

The more I think about it and write about it, the more I think that anyone who says that a whole system is superior to another is full of it. I believe some systems might be predisposed to be vulnerable to certain aspects of other systems but I couldn't comfortably go further than that.

Good post. Just like the cycle of destructino of the 5 elements, I would think each style represents aspects that can gain advantage over other styles but has its own weaknesses.

[Old Noob]

Good post. Just like the cycle of destructino of the 5 elements, I would think each style represents aspects that can gain advantage over other styles but has its own weaknesses.

And each practioner of each style adds his or her own strengths and weaknesses to the calculous.

[kwaichang]

Perhaps this is the reason behind the structural and esthetic appearance of the SD system as it was influenced by IE Chang Ming and GMT and others under him to make SD or S Tao or CSC or what it is what it is today so how do we know what it is or isnt since it has been altered to fit the Physique etc of those who train or teach it. KC

[Judge Pen]

Perhaps this is the reason behind the structural and esthetic appearance of the SD system as it was influenced by IE Chang Ming and GMT and others under him to make SD or S Tao or CSC or what it is what it is today so how do we know what it is or isnt since it has been altered to fit the Physique etc of those who train or teach it. KC

Sure, but that can't be the end of the analysis because that is true of any art. I think one of the reasons is that SD is such a patchwork art. You switch from forms and styles of very divergent systems. Tiger, Crane, Hsing-Ie, Tai chi, Pa Kua, Hua, mantis. All these systems have very distinct mechanics, movement, tempo, flow and power generation. For most people that practice SD (in my experience anyway) these forms bleed into one another. The common denominators seem to rise to the surface. Take Frank's videos for example of a non-SD person: his structual aesthetic is very much influenced by his physique and phsyical stengths and limitations. But all he did was HSCLF so his mechanics, altered as theyh are for him as an individual, are all CLF movements.

You can take our best forms person, have them do Hua and have someone that has only trained in hua do the same form and you will see a significant difference. It's not saying that our Hua isn't good, or that the way we trained wasn't effective, but it does intorduce other elements into our forms and distinguishes us, sometimes severly, from people that only practice in a single style or system.