FatherDog (E-Chuan clarification)

[Ray Pina]

I left out a major point the other day, something I now take for granted but that I think distinguishes us from the usual style:

We have no inside to outside block or vise a versa ... also, no up and down blocking.

The theory is, if you're walking down avenue X and I'm walking down avenue Y and we just happen to meet ... wow, what great timing. But don't count on it. But if you're walking East an avenue X and I'm walking west on Avenue X ... well, we will meet.

So our hands never go left or right. They guard the chin/neck and only go out and back .... but not too far. The foot's job is mobility.

This is not to say that the hand's job is too block though. He helps out from time to time, puts a little effort in, but his job is too hit. It's the elbow's job to block. And only he goes out to stop the hook or down to stuff the uppercut, but the hands stay.

This is the beginning level. Later on, there is no block per se but not like White Crane's rediculous claim. It's more like plaining you out as I come in from under or over .... I believe the influence of this came from Hsing-I's Von Quen or wood element.

Another huge principle of ous is: I know you're big and strong and young... we are small and weak and old. Everything we do is built off of that.

We have a lot of principles, like “close your door, open the other guys door, then hit.”

And “never fight capital to capital.”

At the same time, we don’t like the popular understanding of “soft, soft, soft.” Those kind of taiji guys don’t fight. If I’m hard you have a hell of a time, so why should I be soft? It’s knowing who’s soft and who’s hard. How quick you can change from one to the other, and how long you can maintain it. I’ve seen the good ground fighter though, and I know you know this principle.

[MoreMisfortune]

I left out a major point the other day, something I now take for granted but that I think distinguishes us from the usual style:

We have no inside to outside block or vise a versa ... also, no up and down blocking.

The theory is, if you're walking down avenue X and I'm walking down avenue Y and we just happen to meet ... wow, what great timing. But don't count on it. But if you're walking East an avenue X and I'm walking west on Avenue X ... well, we will meet.

So our hands never go left or right. They guard the chin/neck and only go out and back .... but not too far. The foot's job is mobility.

This is not to say that the hand's job is too block though. He helps out from time to time, puts a little effort in, but his job is too hit. It's the elbow's job to block. And only he goes out to stop the hook or down to stuff the uppercut, but the hands stay.

This is the beginning level. Later on, there is no block per se but not like White Crane's rediculous claim. It's more like plaining you out as I come in from under or over .... I believe the influence of this came from Hsing-I's Von Quen or wood element.

Another huge principle of ous is: I know you're big and strong and young... we are small and weak and old. Everything we do is built off of that.

We have a lot of principles, like “close your door, open the other guys door, then hit.”

And “never fight capital to capital.”

At the same time, we don’t like the popular understanding of “soft, soft, soft.” Those kind of taiji guys don’t fight. If I’m hard you have a hell of a time, so why should I be soft? It’s knowing who’s soft and who’s hard. How quick you can change from one to the other, and how long you can maintain it. I’ve seen the good ground fighter though, and I know you know this principle.

mkay
so basicly, nothing really really new
right right?

[FatherDog]

I left out a major point the other day, something I now take for granted but that I think distinguishes us from the usual style:

We have no inside to outside block or vise a versa ... also, no up and down blocking.

The theory is, if you're walking down avenue X and I'm walking down avenue Y and we just happen to meet ... wow, what great timing. But don't count on it. But if you're walking East an avenue X and I'm walking west on Avenue X ... well, we will meet.

So our hands never go left or right. They guard the chin/neck and only go out and back .... but not too far. The foot's job is mobility.

This is not to say that the hand's job is too block though. He helps out from time to time, puts a little effort in, but his job is too hit. It's the elbow's job to block. And only he goes out to stop the hook or down to stuff the uppercut, but the hands stay.

So, basically the same concept as boxing.

We have a lot of principles, like “close your door, open the other guys door, then hit.”

Pretty much the same as /any/ striking art.

And “never fight capital to capital.”

Capital?

[rubthebuddha]

i think he's talking about avoiding fighting nose to nose -- that flanking or attacking the back is a better idea. which, unless you do a rule-ridden competition art that can't attack the back, is about as old news as wolves hamstringing their prey.

[FatherDog]

i think he's talking about avoiding fighting nose to nose -- that flanking or attacking the back is a better idea. which, unless you do a rule-ridden competition art that can't attack the back, is about as old news as wolves hamstringing their prey.

In that case, yeah. Old news.


I think the amount of flack you're getting on this forum, Pina, is that you keep talking about how e-chuan is new and different and unique, but /everything/ you've told us about it is old as the hills and present in just about any other group of arts you'd care to name. Nothing new, nothing unique, nothing particularly special.

[dezhen2001]

sounds the same as evolutionfist back in the day?

[Ray Pina]

Not fighting capital to capital refers to most people who are quite happy to exchange punching to the head ... but this is like Moscow bombing D.C and D.C. bombing Moscow at the same time.

Our theory is to kill the troops first then go to the capital or strike down the missle first while shooting your missile.

We don't strike long. We strike incoming strikes short. Or, strike ones defensive posture, forearms, stick for a split second (stick hand), open the door (push hand) and then hit.

Everyone always says they have evrything and that's fine and dandy. My father was a boxer and learned in Military school in Cuba. Moved to Brooklyn and fought golden gloves. He taught me as a kid. I know some boxing and have played with boxers. They close their door well but duck and bob and weave. We are different.

Everyone says its looks the same. But do you say you look like your neighbors dog? You both have two eyes, a nose and a mouth? What's different? I have money, Bill Gates has money .... we're the same right?

Anyway, I posted this because you asked what's the differences. The best way to really see is to come and see it for yourself.

Just know this: I started training in Isshin-Ryu when I was four. Studied that for 12 years, did Hung Gar, Wing CHun, S. Mantis, played with a lot of guys of a lot of different styles.

If it's the same, why would I drive through all that traffic on the LIE, BQE, Manhattan. If I'm going to Manhattan, and its all the same, why not make a right when I get over the Williamsbourgh Bridge and go to Gracie's? It's just as close and cheaper?

I wonder why I wouldn't do that? I've told folks looking for schools here that its better to look for a year and only train 3 months with a good teacher than the other way around. I'm guessing I would've done the same.

So maybe I'm just retarted? But I'm a kung fu guy who isn't talking about chi and form and this and that. I'm a traditional kung fu guy that feels confident to fight.

OK, so people ask and then don't really want to discuss why it's different. I posted some limited differences. It's funny, I still see a lot of side to side blocking and long punching out there reaching for the head ... but maybe it's just me. At the same time, if you guys all have this then I guess you agree we're on the right track.

I won't post about E-Chuan again until I post some footage. All I can say is, until then, come and see it for yourself. I truly believe any fighter would benefit from it.

.....

PS, we're not like a lot of Ba Gua that's talking about walking around the guys back and flanking him. That's not so easy. If you can do that so easily you're a lot better than the other guy already.

[Christopher M]

Ray,
To FatherDog's point, I think that the way you described it is similar to boxing. Actually, I think that in many ways the neijia "theory of the fight" is closer to that of boxing than that of most of the waijia. I seem to recall reading that there was a period of fascination with western boxing among some of the Beijing neijia groups that had some influence.
On the other hand, to your point, there are definitely some important differences. As you say, people seem to be motivated to believe that whatever they study contains everything. Realistically speaking, this seems like an implausible belief, but for some reason people tend to confuse descriptions of stylistic differences as assertions of stylistic superiority, and thereby become reactionary.
I think that what makes discussing these differences difficult is that most of them are only clear through physical experience. I don't think this is surprising, since these are martial arts, after all. But it does mean that people without direct experience will often be unable to notice that there's any difference. I'm not sure it's possible to explain such a difference if they're already motivated against acknowledging it.
I do not have any experience with your teacher's style, but I assume that it shares properties in this regard with xingyi and bagua. In which case I'd say quite strongly that the experience has to be felt; and when it is felt, there's no longer any doubt.
Unfortunately, this is something of a catch-22 when it comes to trying to discuss it.

P.S. I don't know any reputable bagua teachers who advocate trying to walk in a circle to get behind someone. The more common theory in bagua is that flanking occurs through controlling your opponent with contact rather than with footwork alone.

[red5angel]

"Not fighting capital to capital refers to most people who are quite happy to exchange punching to the head ... but this is like Moscow bombing D.C and D.C. bombing Moscow at the same time."

I odn't get it Ray, wouldn't you want to finish the fight as quickly as possible by hitting the guy where it really counts?


"If it's the same, why would I drive through all that traffic on the LIE, BQE, Manhattan. If I'm going to Manhattan, and its all the same, why not make a right when I get over the Williamsbourgh Bridge and go to Gracie's? It's just as close and cheaper?"

sometimes these things are honestly just a matter of taste, or the quality of training. For example I could walk to the local karate mcdojo if I wanted to and thought it was all the same. I drive 40 minutes to Capoeira instead because I like the art itself and it seems to suit me in some way the other arts I studied didn't.


"OK, so people ask and then don't really want to discuss why it's different"

I think you're right in that the only way to show it is different is to experience it in some way, either by fighting one who has it or by taking a few classes to feel the difference. It's hard to differentiate the small things different arts do over the internet or any other sort of written medium.

[Chief Fox]

The theory is, if you're walking down avenue X and I'm walking down avenue Y and we just happen to meet ... wow, what great timing. But don't count on it. But if you're walking East an avenue X and I'm walking west on Avenue X ... well, we will meet.

What if I left my house on avenue X at 10:00am traveling west and you left your house on avenue X at 10:00am traveling east and we never met. Where would our house's be in relation to each other?

Furthermore, what if I didn't live on avenue X but my cousin does. I go over to my cousin's house everyday at 6:00pm and you live across the street from my cousin but you leave your house everyday at 5:30pm to take your dog for a walk and return at 6:15?

One last thing to consider. What if I live in town Z but work in town Y. You also work in town Y and our places of work are both on avenue X. I work the night shift and get off at 7:30. You work the day shift and don't start until 8:30. BUT I leave work and go to cafe P to use the payphone and you just happen to be using the bathroom. What then?

[Ray Pina]

[QUOTE=red5angel]
I odn't get it Ray, wouldn't you want to finish the fight as quickly as possible by hitting the guy where it really counts?
QUOTE]

Of course you want to end the fight ASAP. But if you punch my head and at the same time I punch your head but you have a .75-inch reach advantage ... that's all it takes. You T-out ... are you familiar with that term? ... and you're hitting me and I'm not hitting you. This is why Ali was so succesful in his prime .... he had a reach advantage. Butterfly

Our method is to strike the arms first. When you are longer than me, I strike your forearm first or bicep, then I bring my back hand into play (usually straight up the middle covering my strike zone) if it hits you, great. But most likely you will block it .... but what about my first hit that was in your bicep ... that goes right to your chin without pulling back.

Being able to produce power from touching ... that is also a prerequisite. The first year and a half of training is trully just developing body awereness and potential, a certain type of ability.

Some call this short power but we don't like that term ... sounds funny. Somebody is paying for it. It asking everybody to give something to the fist so it doesn't have to reload.

So, usually, if all goes well, it's ask for the first hand, ask for the second hand then hit. It's a triple jump, not a long jump.