Is Shaolin-Do for real?

[Old Noob]

i would say to ignore the videos of the students. they are just doing what they were shown and having fun doing it. but pay attention to the videos of the top guys in the system. bill leonard and sin the. look at how they move. explain it. there are a few great martial artists in the system but they become great from therei own hard work not from sin the's teaching.

Bruce,

I agree with most of what you've said here, particularly with regard to how EML moves. But to say that the great martial artists in the sytem became great because of their own hard work and not from Sin The's teaching isn't totally fair. While The is definitely a liar (either to his students or under oath), his students, even his great ones, learned from their own hard work AND from Sin The's teaching. After all, they're still doing SD's stuff. I know that pretty much all of SD's internal comes from other places, but I'm talking about the external portion. Both Grooms and Nance, and the others who are the good MAs in the system, still practice the external sets of the system and they haven't relearned all of the stuff from other systems. They've taken what they've learned (from Sin The) and, through independent research, hard work, and natural talent, improved upon it.

[tattooedmonk]

Bruce,

I agree with most of what you've said here, particularly with regard to how EML moves. But to say that the great martial artists in the sytem became great because of their own hard work and not from Sin The's teaching isn't totally fair. While The is definitely a liar (either to his students or under oath), his students, even his great ones, learned from their own hard work AND from Sin The's teaching. After all, they're still doing SD's stuff. I know that pretty much all of SD's internal comes from other places, but I'm talking about the external portion. Both Grooms and Nance, and the others who are the good MAs in the system, still practice the external sets of the system and they haven't relearned all of the stuff from other systems. They've taken what they've learned (from Sin The) and, through independent research, hard work, and natural talent, improved upon it.

Agreed. What's more is that there are thousands of people working out everyday getting healthier , making friendships and supporting the community. Which is way more important than whether its Kung fu, karate, Chinese,or Japanese . Get a clue people.

[tattooedmonk]

Thats a nice thought. but, as longs as lies are still being spread about the truth of SD.....people won't get past that.

Where have you been!? I am sure everyone is already aware of SD is and isn't .

[Fa Xing]

if you are a kung fu practitioner and leave out two man forms, then you are missing a chunk of awesome information gained from learning them. no, i won't go into what that is, but i know i will never abandon two man forms. ever.

I think they are important most certainly from an historical purpose if they have traditionally been in your style for sometime, which would not be a bad thing to know. Some have argued before that they are useful for learning the "flavor" of a style's fighting.

Most likely I would be picking it apart after learned it with my partner figuring what weaknesses the form has as well as strengths. However, I am a MAist who believes thinking about how martial arts works and not just believing in it because someone told me so.

[brucereiter]

Is it a possibility that they look the way they do because sin the learned it from an old man who was strung out in opium!? That what it looks like to me.

That may be possible but I do not think the evidence say that is possible. I really think that sin the did not learn chen tai chi CHUAN specially chen xin jia 83 form from ie Chang Ming whomb I have heard but have no proof was a opium addict.

[Empty_Cup]

Where have you been!? I am sure everyone is already aware of SD is and isn't .

This mega-thread and bullshido have done more than enough to reveal controversy within the SD system to any current or prospective internet-literate students. They have done more than enough to deface the credibility of the system's founder and top student(s) if not in fact then by sheer volume and vehemence. That is/was the goal of SD antagonists, wasn't it?

So what I don't understand is the reason there continues to be the same, exhaustive points made about all of this. If the goal has been reached, why not just move on? I'm sure it makes folks feel good to sit on the throne of kung fu righteousness, bestowing wisdom upon the blissfully ignorant SD masses.

To be honest, I came to this thread to hopefully have some insightful and intelligent discussions with others who practice SD; even if SD is a pile of sh!t in the eyes of "true kung fu" practitioners. Instead, I have to wade through 50 posts of the same old arguments and accusations that have either already proven their point or are completely unprovable by this community.

I'm sure this post will also get buried. Ah well I guess we carry on...

[brucereiter]

Bruce,

I agree with most of what you've said here, particularly with regard to how EML moves. But to say that the great martial artists in the sytem became great because of their own hard work and not from Sin The's teaching isn't totally fair. While The is definitely a liar (either to his students or under oath), his students, even his great ones, learned from their own hard work AND from Sin The's teaching. After all, they're still doing SD's stuff. I know that pretty much all of SD's internal comes from other places, but I'm talking about the external portion. Both Grooms and Nance, and the others who are the good MAs in the system, still practice the external sets of the system and they haven't relearned all of the stuff from other systems. They've taken what they've learned (from Sin The) and, through independent research, hard work, and natural talent, improved upon it.

I have met people from all of the factions of Shaolin do and there are some very talented people and some very physically fit people. Almost everyone of them it has been a pleasure to know and train with. I have no problem with them... I am one of them.

From my own experience learning hsing I for example I had to look outside of the system. If I had not my hsing I would look more similar to what bill leonard was doing.
I can not really comment on the external stuff I never learned or practiced it.
I can comment on yang 64 as I feel I have developed at least a basic understanding of this style. I learned much more from Chang man chings book than I did from Shaolin do about it. Any of us are capable of taking a lesson from a book and through hard work improving on it. I do not have a problem with that. I have a problem with being lied to. I have learned plenty of things from books and videos. I have never told anyone I was teaching that they were passed down from a hairy monk from Shaolin temple.

I will comment again that no one that I know of has become skilled in tai chi CHUAN or hsing I as a result of training those arts with sin kwang the. They did it on their own or with outside instruction. That is my opinion based on everything I have witnessed since I started I the art in 1997. I stayed around 10 years.

Please note I do think there are many very tough fighters in Shaolin do and many people have become more healthy and learned how to defend themselves from sin the's teaching. I thnk that is a different topic...

[brucereiter]

To be honest, I came to this thread to hopefully have some insightful and intelligent discussions with others who practice SD; even if SD is a pile of sh!t in the eyes of "true kung fu" practitioners. Instead, I have to wade through 50 posts of the same old arguments and accusations that have either already proven their point or are completely unprovable by this community.

I'm sure this post will also get buried. Ah well I guess we carry on...

I would be glad to trade ideas about yang 64 and hsing I linking.

Do you have any questions or comments on the practice of those styles?

[Empty_Cup]

aside from the lies, if shaolin do is worth its weight in salt, it will stand on its own. in the end, all that really matters is whether or not SD is effective or not in a life and death situation.

in the purest of honesty, it doesn't matter what you train, its how you train. train for reality, approach all techniques from a combative perspective.

the best thing all of shaolin do can do look at the true arts SD is allegedly based off of. know how the true masters do it, then absorb the right way. the other best thing it can do to honor Sin The or whomever is to be successful. make it work. clean it up. listen to what the real kung fu people are saying and fix it up. if people from the sources are saying you are doing it wrong....get it right.

This is a great post hsk. Of course I disagree with your premise that SD is not "true" or "real" kung fu (whatever that means) but overall I agree with your point. SD, like any MA, should always keep the reality of combat in perspective. It should be an exercise in lifelong pursuit of self-development and bitter work. It should be adaptive to the practitioner to make it work.

As far as listening and improving common material based on input from those who exclusively practice those styles...I'm all digital ears. I believe there's always more to learn and don't feel SD is failing me if I get outside information on common material. The true challenge is getting out of the subjective mindset of "right" and "wrong" and getting to the heart of kung fu principles as expressed via technique. I feel there's a lot of collaboration to be had and that we get along a lot quicker when we discuss technique and principles.

[Empty_Cup]

I would be glad to trade ideas about yang 64 and hsing I linking.

Do you have any questions or comments on the practice of those styles?

I would love your input on a thread I started on Chen taijiquan http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/foru...ad.php?t=64498

As far as yang 64, I don't really have any questions/comments right now but have been practicing this set for awhile. I'm working on following your example and getting some excerpt video of myself to put out there for critique to help develop more. I'll let you know when it's out there.

Hsing I is really interesting. I just recently started into this material and haven't learned linking yet so don't have much to say on it. However, I've been having a lot of fun practicing the 5 elements. Have you had a chance to work the Cycle of Destruction with a partner and, if so, what did you think? Also, what kind of qigong do you practice for hsing i and what's your experience been thus far?

[Old Noob]

This mega-thread and bullshido have done more than enough to reveal controversy within the SD system to any current or prospective internet-literate students. They have done more than enough to deface the credibility of the system's founder and top student(s) if not in fact then by sheer volume and vehemence. That is/was the goal of SD antagonists, wasn't it?

So what I don't understand is the reason there continues to be the same, exhaustive points made about all of this. If the goal has been reached, why not just move on? I'm sure it makes folks feel good to sit on the throne of kung fu righteousness, bestowing wisdom upon the blissfully ignorant SD masses.

To be honest, I came to this thread to hopefully have some insightful and intelligent discussions with others who practice SD; even if SD is a pile of sh!t in the eyes of "true kung fu" practitioners. Instead, I have to wade through 50 posts of the same old arguments and accusations that have either already proven their point or are completely unprovable by this community.

I'm sure this post will also get buried. Ah well I guess we carry on...

This is an excellent post and you're right. For every SD criticizer, there's someone who says, "well I don't think much of the system but [insert individual practioner of SD] is a good martial artist, so it can't be all bad." Also, its clear that a student isn't always a pale immitation of a teacher and that an art can actually improve as it passes generations rather than diluting. Toward that end, I'm all for talking about SD as SD, with the understanding that it's senior folks have engaged in misleading practices. I'm afraid I can't lend much to the internal discussion as I'm a 1st black who has opted not to do internal as a seperate program. Consequently, I am just becoming acquainted with Yang 64 and Pa Kua. I do feel like I have a decent command over the hard-style material; I've taken my time getting where I am.

[tattooedmonk]

now this thread is getting on track...We need to talk about more of the positive attributes rather than the negatives or similarities rather than differences.

Some of you blowhards that want to school all the SD students and instructors about Kung fu should start really offering positive , constructive criticism and help those who are stupid or ignorant or clueless, rather than all this other horse sh!t.

How about the first movement of the 5 animal form after the salutation...as SD and DFW students know it...White Crane Flies to the edge of the Sky?

Anyone?

How about what some people call short form # 1? Damo Knocks at the Gate

[tattooedmonk]

I have met people from all of the factions of Shaolin do and there are some very talented people and some very physically fit people. Almost everyone of them it has been a pleasure to know and train with. I have no problem with them... I am one of them.

From my own experience learning hsing I for example I had to look outside of the system. If I had not my hsing I would look more similar to what bill leonard was doing.
I can not really comment on the external stuff I never learned or practiced it.
I can comment on yang 64 as I feel I have developed at least a basic understanding of this style. I learned much more from Chang man chings book than I did from Shaolin do about it. Any of us are capable of taking a lesson from a book and through hard work improving on it. I do not have a problem with that. I have a problem with being lied to. I have learned plenty of things from books and videos. I have never told anyone I was teaching that they were passed down from a hairy monk from Shaolin temple.

I will comment again that no one that I know of has become skilled in tai chi CHUAN or hsing I as a result of training those arts with sin kwang the. They did it on their own or with outside instruction. That is my opinion based on everything I have witnessed since I started I the art in 1997. I stayed around 10 years.

Please note I do think there are many very tough fighters in Shaolin do and many people have become more healthy and learned how to defend themselves from sin the's teaching. I thnk that is a different topic...

I agree , its not that SD students couldn't be better at all these different arts , there are just too many of them. forms and styles are changing every day, month, and year . There is just way too much material and not enough time is spent studying and practicing the finer points and details that make a style unique , have a certain flavor or whatever....

[tattooedmonk]

what are the first strategies / tactics or actions/tools being used in the application? anyone?? someone from all sides will make this fun.

thanks

I have a couple I would like to share.

[sean_stonehart]

now this thread is getting on track...We need to talk about more of the positive attributes rather than the negatives or similarities rather than differences.

Some of you blowhards that want to school all the SD students and instructors about Kung fu should start really offering positive , constructive criticism and help those who are stupid or ignorant or clueless, rather than all this other horse sh!t.

How about the first movement of the 5 animal form after the salutation...as SD and DFW students know it...White Crane Flies to the edge of the Sky?

Anyone?

Yeah... that's not where the hoi jong ends. There's only one way to learn that...