LMFAO ...those pictures ~! I rest my case
Registered User
LMFAO ...those pictures ~! I rest my case
Registered User
GFH,
thank you very much for your comment
I have listened to the thread go round and round ( no pun intended) and it seems to be stagnant.
- indeed so...
People have addressed the ring and yet you seem to assume that many here do not understand its use because we haven’t been indoctrinated properly into its deeper training methodology.
- I don't think a word like indoctrination is a fitting one to use, unless you wish to imply something. In that case why not do it directly? It would be much easier. In any case it has nothing to do with indoctrination, or anything deep - the rattan ring is a very SIMPLE traning tool that beginners and advanced studens alike use as a part of their. Training, it is a supplementary thing, not something "deep" or "special" - I never claimed such things...
Well body mechanics are the same for most people (unless you have some mutant third arm that you use in your training ) and a lot of people here have the tacit knowledge necessary to understand martial development. (This is not to say that development and attribute training is always the same and can’t vary considerably.)
- Exactly, and yes many people may have that knowledge - unfortunately, it seems that the major players in this discussion don't...
However, I have still yet to hear you answer the question as to why ‘splitting’ energy is so important and why the training with the ring is a superior way to develop this.
- "splitting" is just one aspect amongst others, I ventured to explain something, but I never received the requested information. Why should I bother explaining my position in detail, when all of the counter-arguments are of equal substance? And anyways, certain people have already bluntly stated that however the arguments I might put forth, they would not change their view... Do you think such an attitude warrants any efforts of explanation of my part? Also, consider that I alreade stated that I have no desire to pursuade anybody of anything, people are free to believe what they like - the thing I was commenting on initially was merely that one shouldn't slight things one doesn't know of. With regards to your argument above, to use your own reasoning, a MMA fighter who has good knowledge of application skills, strength training and conditioning telling you that your wing chun sucks because you spend an awful lot of time training in useless exercises (from his perspective). Would you really feel that such a person's condescending talk about you style is relevant. He has the knowledge about how the body works and experience, but does that qualify him to really have a relevant opinion from your perspective?
Here are some major problems with the ring and why I see no (important) skill development that translates to martial application with the ring. And since you accuse other people of not reading your posts, please follow this next bit very carefully…
- sure
The ring needs to be suspended by your own force. This action, no matter how slight, is going to create the energy of chasing hands.
- do you start chasing hands just because somebody applies pressure on your bridges? Or do you chase hands in a movement such as the bong wu + turn from chum kiu form. If your answer is no, then this applies to the rattan ring as well as it simple "sits" on your arms (because of gravitiy, as it hardly more than a pencil or two, there is no danger of excessive upwards energy). Now, that very statement indicates that you really don't have an idea about what is going on... I am very sorry that you have a hard time excepting this.
This is because the ring (unlike a dummy or a live partner/opponent) DOES NOT HAVE A CENTER MASS.
The ring is a suspended bridge – not connected to anything but your own mass.
- so is the pole...
In WC the bridge is important because it is a bridge TO something.
- and what are you training in the Chum Kiu form?
I want to affect someone’s center of gravity – whether that is through strikes, locks, or throws.
- yes, of course but again, the rattan ring is not for that so why bring it up all the time. I tell you again, your assumption about it is wrong, and as long as you fail to realize this, you can never understand it.
AmunuJRY (Justin) has already pointed this out and yet you still accuse him of not have relevant experience with the ring.
- I am not accusing, it is a fact. He quantified his training experience himself, which amounts to... well, nothing really.
Anyone who has experience with good pole work will know what it means to have the upper and lower body ‘connected.’ Also, IF you have this experience you will know that it is much more than just muscles at work. Just some of the following
- Now, I asked for for a description of what is going on inside the body, your throwing out the term "connection" is conveniently vague...
*CNS coordination between core muscle groups of the hips, low back, and abdominals
- what muscle chains/synergies are at work here, how do they work, what is their purpose in this?
*The use of inertia and timing to overcome the weight of pole and connect it to your structure
- "connecting" it to structure, what does that really entail, how do you do this. Is the way you move the pole the same as in punching for example?
*Maximizing the transfer of force to the end of the pole without upsetting your COG
- Is your COG the same when lifting a light object or heavy object, is it affect by movements of the extremeties. If yes, how so?
Beyond this it would take a text book to explain all of what is going on with the pole (or the dummy).
- no need...
However in closing I might remind you that the cult of sports science has yet to develop a better form of yoga, taiji, gung fu, jujitsu, or kali/escrima/arnis.
- ah... so you were already biased the instance the word sport science came up. Sport science is not neccessarily about improving things (the ancestors did a great job finding out what is good or not), but also about explaining things, facilitating the identification and hence rectification of mistakes.
All of these disciplines were created and developed by cultures without the benefit of western anatomical and physiological analysis. So the argument of the ‘profound insights of sports sciences’ and its need in understanding martial motion and development is greatly exaggerated and yet to be shown.
- as I said, not neccessarily for improvement but understanding. Sports science has a proven track record so to speak when it comes to enhancing the performance of athletes in various fields, so to dismiss it like you do, is equivalent to what initially sparked this whole debate...(maybe you don't you think wing chun is a physical discipline?)
JLQ
@ K Gledhill
Why doesn't that response surprise me...
Registered User
JLQ,
Yeah, I wish to imply teaching…Originally Posted by JLQ
From Merriam-Webster: Main Entry: in•doc•tri•nate
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: probably from Middle English endoctrinen, from Middle French endoctriner, from Old French, from en- + doctrine doctrine
1 : to instruct especially in fundamentals or rudiments : to TEACH
As you have admitted that English is not your first language, please read a dictionary before correcting me on vocabulary or usage.
If the usuage of the ring is so “SIMPLE” then why do you assume that none of us know what we are talking about?
Ditto. Why should I venture to go into a detailed analysis of the kinesthetics of pole motions when you have demonstrated not one iota of understanding of its development?
Take a class.
No you chase hands when another object is present and in contact and yet the action is localized at the bridge, instead of being transferred to the other person’s/object center.
And your statement tells me that you can just as well do the motion in the air without a RING and develop the same energy? Please be consistent. Either it is an important training tool that develops something motion by itself does not or you are contradicting yourself.
I am sorry you need a RING to develop an energy that you could just as well develop by yourself.
Yes, but you aren’t using the ring to attack someone…or are you?
How to move and retain your center of gravity for one - and few hundred other things. So are you saying that the ring is a continuation of the development of chum kiu?
Because keeping our center and affecting someone else’s center is what we train to do. If you are not training this, then you aren’t training wing chun. And if that’s the case then why bring up the ring at all?
And I find your dodging of the questions of development and application conveniently habitual. If you don’t know what is described by saying ‘connect’ your lower and upper body…then please go practice and come back when you have something to impart.
Again, why should I expend the time and energy to explain something to you when you have not demonstrated to me that you know anything of wing chun mechanics?
It would be like explaining jazz improvisation to a 3 year old.
No. A higher degree of structure adjustment and more sophisticated timing are required for good pole work. Not as much for the punch. In regards to your first comment…take a class.
You can learn this from any physics text book. However, more than likely it won’t help your wing chun and someone with no knowledge of physics, anatomy, kinesiology, etc. will still be able to beat your @ss.
Not biased. I was a personal trainer for 9 years and find many aspects of the science of training helpful. However, like all things it has its limits and its place.
Who said I dismissed it? I merely stated that the kind of analysis we find in sports science has yet to prove necessary to the development and application of martial motion. To quote you, “please don't be too creative when interpreting my words…”
Perhaps it is you who need it ‘explained’ to you so you may understand. If so that’s okay, but most of us here know how to develop body unity and motion without an in depth analysis.
Theory has it’s place. However, I have known hundreds of great jazz musicians who could play but couldn’t analyze their music. But they could play!
-GFH
Registered User
JLQ ~ one day a cricket [ someone who knows more than you] may fall into your well and explain to you that all you see above you in that small 'ring' of sky is just a small window to the view available if you just swallow your ego [not the cricket] and let go of what you have filled your cup with....take the crickets hand and start climbing.... the views pretty nice .
Registered User
GFH,
my, my...
I really did offend you, since you find it neccessary with such mature display of decorum and non ad hominem attacks. My sincerest apologies, it was by no means intended.
Again bold statements, indeed considering you have no idea about me and my background both educational and in terms of training experience...
But I guess it makes you feel good...
Let me point out something to you that you apparently fail to grasp, the reason I am asking questions is to see how much knowledge you have and to learn how you see things with the purpose of using it as a reference for discussion, not because I need you to teach me anything about it...
Perhaps you got too emotional to see this point?
You wrote:
Theory has it’s place. However, I have known hundreds of great jazz musicians who could play but couldn’t analyze their music. But they could play!
Very true, I never said something to the contrary... As for the rattan ring, I stated on multiple occasions that it is merely a supplementary training tool - it is not a crucial determinant of your wing chun skill, but has the potential to enhance it. It really is as simple as that, you may not agree, which is fine (I also said that on many occasions). It seems that the real issue is that people feel offended because I had the audacity to point out that I feel it is rather ignorant to dismiss something when one doesn't really know about it. Does it hurt your Ego when your are told you may not understand something? Apparently, so...
Anyways, as long as you have to go to that level displayed in your latest post, there isn't really any purpose in taking this any further now, is there?
Peace
JLQ
@ K Gledhill
What a surpise!!! - you DO in fact have the capacity of expressing yourself in a more philosophical manner... Not all is lost, I see... ;D
Registered User
JLQ,
Don’t go away so soon.Unless you are threatened by discourse and/or are not able to state your position.
You didn’t “offend” me in the slightest; so there really is no need to apologize.
I am merely using your standard - that is analyzing your arguments and judging your knowledge by what you are posting. You have not shared who you studied with or what your real name is.
And you expect to learn all of that from a single thread? Why is it that you assume you can learn how I see things or how much knowledge I have. That is quite presumptuous on your part.
On the contrary, I wasn’t at all emotional. Merely discussing the issue. Perhaps, you are too judgmental to see other people’s points of view and to enter into authentic debate. Why don’t you stick to the topic?
To what skill are you referring? How does it enhance it?
“Know” about it. What do you mean by this? How do you “know” something? It would be nice if you would not use such vague terms and tell us by which epistemology your concept of knowledge comes from and what methodology you are using to attain said knowledge.
Not in the slightest. Does it hurt yours when someone tells you to practice and go to class? Apparently so…
Oh, you mean the level of addressing the issue? Of course if you don’t want to address the issue then I suppose there is nothing more to say.
Regards,
GFH
Registered User
GFH,
Don’t go away so soon. Unless you are threatened by discourse and/or are not able to state your position.
- You are a stubborn one... You should read again what I have written on many occasions. If you fail to see my intention, I guess it is because you have no desire to...
You didn’t “offend” me in the slightest; so there really is no need to apologize.
- Fair enough, but in that case I fail to understand the tone of your last post and this one, for that matter...
I am merely using your standard - that is analyzing your arguments and judging your knowledge by what you are posting. You have not shared who you studied with or what your real name is.
- if you really want to know, just ask.. PM would be a good start. Anyways, I don't think I have slightest anyones experience or intelligence EXCEPT as pertains to the use of the rattan ring, have I now? Let me try ONCE AGAIN, I do not care whether you believe one way or the other, anything is really fine. I have no desire to convince you otherwise - arguments have already been stated, primarily by others than me. You don't appreciate those, fine nothing more to be said!!! I just don't appreciate how certain people go about presenting their views, that's really all there is to it...
And you expect to learn all of that from a single thread? Why is it that you assume you can learn how I see things or how much knowledge I have. That is quite presumptuous on your part.
- again, you just don't seem to want to understand my words in the way they are intended, eh. I don't think it is too diffucult to understand what I was trying to say...
On the contrary, I wasn’t at all emotional. Merely discussing the issue. Perhaps, you are too judgmental to see other people’s points of view and to enter into authentic debate. Why don’t you stick to the topic?
- ad hominem attacks is merely discussing the issue? Which issue would that be? If you are not emotional, why these rather crude attempts at "attacking me"?
To what skill are you referring? How does it enhance it?
- based on your recent posts, would you really appreciate it? Anyways, it has already been stated many times - and again, I have no desire to change your opinion...
“Know” about it. What do you mean by this? How do you “know” something? It would be nice if you would not use such vague terms and tell us by which epistemology your concept of knowledge comes from and what methodology you are using to attain said knowledge.
- again, is it really so difficult to understand what I mean? I think the problem is somewhere else...
Not in the slightest. Does it hurt yours when someone tells you to practice and go to class? Apparently so…
- now that is really an impressive counter LOL
Oh, you mean the level of addressing the issue? Of course if you don’t want to address the issue then I suppose there is nothing more to say.
- you know what I mean, why the games?
Regards to you as well (no sarcasm, just to make sure
JLQ
Registered User
JLQ,
Your first post on this thread was criticizing someone for stating their opinion. You used such words as “arrogant”, “condescending”, and “ignorant.” You also suggested that someone use “more reservation” when sharing their opinion and those who do not subscribe to the use of the ring had a “lack of vision.”
I’m not one to suffer hypocrites well.
Merely giving you a taste of your own medicine. And apparently you feel that I am emotional and offended. Perhaps this is how people perceive you.
By this I mean, that it appears that you have some emotional investment in the use of the rattan ring. For me, if you could give me valid arguments as to why it is important or more specifically in your own words:
Perhaps there are those of us on this board, like myself, that spent a good deal of time considering the benefits of training with the ring and decided that it was not a good tool for development. AND HAD VERY SPECIFIC REASONS FOR MAKING THIS DECISION.
I am not going to adopt a training tool or methodology because the dogma of tradition dictates it.
And I honestly believe that you should understand when someone says “connecting the hip and the elbow” or “unifying the lower and upper body.” If you have been studying wing chun (or any martial art for that matter) in depth then you should know what they mean without asking for a detailed kinesthetic analysis of this connection.
You may want to re-read where you stated that people that didn’t agree that the ring was a valid tool had a “lack of vision.” Your words…not mine. So who is it that is interested in attacking people?
To specifically point out to you that you yourself are engaged in the EXACT behavior you are accusing others of.
So please next time you suggest someone “reserve” their comments regarding “things one obviously doesn’t have any idea about” you may want to ask a few more questions before passing judgment.
Sincerely,
Stephen (a.k.a. GFH)
Last edited by GungFuHillbilly; 06-08-2006 at 07:29 PM.
URD!
Not with you.
JLQ, it is my disheartening observation that you are exactly what WC doesn't need.
Sapere aude, Justin.
The map is not the Terrain.
"Wheather you believe you can, or you believe you can't...You're right." - Henry Ford
Registered User
GFH,,
sorry for responding this late - but I was tied up working the whole weekend...
You wrote:
Your first post on this thread was criticizing someone for stating their opinion. You used such words as “arrogant”, “condescending”, and “ignorant.” You also suggested that someone use “more reservation” when sharing their opinion and those who do not subscribe to the use of the ring had a “lack of vision.”
I’m not one to suffer hypocrites well.
- that is fair enough, except you STILL seem to miss the point I was making in my intial post (and have explained SEVERAL times during the numerous follow-up posts): I did NOT criticize anybody for stating an opinion - it was the HOW, and my reference to "lack of vision" didn't refer at all to the fact that people wouldn't accept the rattan ring as a great tool - the words referred merely to the fact that people state a strong opinion on things without really knowing about the subject matter (for you, KNOWING implies having learned it's purpose and methods from a source who actually uses this, not some autodicact person who came up with his own ideas - but I wrote this before already).
I fail to see how I can be a hipocrite, considering that I am not the one making bold statements about the merits of this or that training method. I may not agree with certain things, based on my experience however vast or not that may be, however I would listen what people had to say who actually use this tool - but apparently, you guys aren't interested in this... Rather you insist on your views to be the correct ones. The least one could do is ask, provided one is genuinely interested in learning more... Your comment will be something along the line of "well, you didn't provide an argument that would convince me otherwise", but - once again - I didn't enter this discussion with the purpose of changing your mind (that was a hopeless endavour from the outset) but would have been willing to provide my point of view, if you had bothered to answer the questions I posed, with the purpose of establishing a point of reference - but you didn't... The point was completely lost on you, instead you started your petty ad hominem "attack" strategy. In spite of your claims, it does indeed apear your ego was offendend - otherwise the kind of postings you have made make no sense, to me at least.
Once again I suspect either that you just don't want to get my meaning or that you don't read my words thoroughly...
Merely giving you a taste of your own medicine. And apparently you feel that I am emotional and offended. Perhaps this is how people perceive you.
- a taste of my own medicine? As far as I see it, I am not the one "going for the man", of course if you feel that pointing out that you may not know enough to really have a good opinion on the merits of something is a personal attack, then I am truly sorry. In my book, it is not. If the situation had been reversed, you would find me curious to know exactly why you think so - and I wouldn't be offended by somebody asking some questions first - but apparently that is not how you handle such things... Emotional and offended? What exactly would I be offended about? That you don't think the rattan ring is a necessary or particularly training tool? If that is the case, ONCE AGAIN I suggest you read my posts more thoroughly - I have gone to great lengths to explain my position on this... To make it simple for you, though: The rattan ring is just ONE of many training tools/methods used in wing chun. Like any SUPPLEMENTARY training instrument, your wing chun skill doesn't ultimately depend on whether you use it or not... However, it does enhance certain attributes and skills that can help your wing chun. If you agree or not is of no importance to me. Did that clear things up for you as to my emotional attachment to it?
By this I mean, that it appears that you have some emotional investment in the use of the rattan ring. For me, if you could give me valid arguments as to why it is important or more specifically in your own words:
- see above
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLQ
what if you are really missing out on a great tool that can enhance your wing chun skills, just because you are too arrogant and ignorant to try to understand it's merits...
Perhaps there are those of us on this board, like myself, that spent a good deal of time considering the benefits of training with the ring and decided that it was not a good tool for development. AND HAD VERY SPECIFIC REASONS FOR MAKING THIS DECISION.
- as I said before, I don't have any problem whatsoever with this. Let me try to formulate my meaning in another way, that is more palateable to your sensibilities: I am suggesting that your conclusions MIGHT be different, if the premise were different, ie. if you have learned it from a source which has this training method in it's curriculum. Maybe they wouldn't, but at least you would be able to make a more fair assessment as to the reasons for it. Just because I think it is a great training tool, doesn't mean that you have to agree with me - so once again, it was never about the actual opion...
I am not going to adopt a training tool or methodology because the dogma of tradition dictates it.
- if you are implying that this is the reason for my thinking that the rattan ring does indeed have merits for development of wing chun skills, you are once again interpreting too much stuff in my words, stuff that isn't there. Please don't assume too much
And I honestly believe that you should understand when someone says “connecting the hip and the elbow” or “unifying the lower and upper body.” If you have been studying wing chun (or any martial art for that matter) in depth then you should know what they mean without asking for a detailed kinesthetic analysis of this connection.
- did you notice that I already pointed out in my previous post my reasons for those questions? Just in case you didn't, and you don't have the inclination or desire to do that, you can also just see above
You may want to re-read where you stated that people that didn’t agree that the ring was a valid tool had a “lack of vision.” Your words…not mine. So who is it that is interested in attacking people?
- see above
To specifically point out to you that you yourself are engaged in the EXACT behavior you are accusing others of.
- once again, you assume to much... I am not being personal with your or anybody else for that matter.
So please next time you suggest someone “reserve” their comments regarding “things one obviously doesn’t have any idea about” you may want to ask a few more questions before passing judgment.
- So it is indeed the words that seem to be the problem... Anyways, with your experience as a personal trainer if somebody told you that he thinks a biceps curl is a bad exercise to develop the biceps because his forearm tends up and impinges in a negative way on his performance (his experience, not that it actually does, heck it may even be better because of irradiation
Regards,
JLQ
Registered User
AmanuJRY,
you wrote:
Not with you.
JLQ, it is my disheartening observation that you are exactly what WC doesn't need.
- LOL!!! thank you very much for letting me hear your "expert" opinion on this
URD!
Anytime...and thanks for your 'expert' opinion on the rings.- LOL!!! thank you very much for letting me hear your "expert" opinion on this
Sapere aude, Justin.
The map is not the Terrain.
"Wheather you believe you can, or you believe you can't...You're right." - Henry Ford
Registered User
AmanuJRY,
LOL
...OK...
regards,
JLQ
Registered User
I don't read many opinions here of people pro the rings. How about this article:
http://www.discountmas.com/attachmate.html
The only one move possible to do without making the bag turn in circles is shown in the picture. Again a move where the power of both hands must go to outside directions. As it is probable the case with the rings also. Some wrote I have no experience with the rings and that’s true. I have only learned by observation. In November I saw a demonstration with the rings in China and I was certainly not impressed . . .
Cheers,
GJ.
Registered User
Hi Gert,
you are right, not too many advocating the use of the rattan ring in this discussion...
But then again, the ones that did decided trying to discuss the merits of the ring as a training tool very quickly realized the folly in trying to pursue this discussion...
Also, you might wish to consider that Wing Chun from mainland China is rather rare in the Western world, especially when compared to the availability of HK wing chun.
Just alternatives to the reason you are implying... ;D
The training apparatus to which you provided a link is designed to be used as a substitute for a dummy, I would think, however the designers apparently didn't consider that a dummy needs to be stable to resist the impact it is subjected to when practiced on. I agree with your analysis of the problems with this training tool - it would spin, yes. I also understand your reasoning about how the power has to go in separate directions to keep the thing from moving. Actually, I think the guy is just posing, so there isn't really any energy going in any directions and he doesn't need to hold the thing in place
As I said, the real problem with the training tool is that it is supposed to double for the wooden dummy, but it doesn't have the essential features as the jong - immovability, stability. The rattan ring serves a completely different purpose, it doesn't need that kind of stability to be used - so you can't really draw any parallels here, I am afraid.
Generally you don't have to press the ring in any directions, it will stay where it is by itself - does the dummy have to do anything, push in any directions, to hold a ring, put around it's arms? Of course the dummy is not moving, so you would argue that the ring would fall of when moving the hands from position to position, but it doesn't it is supported by gravity, and the position/movement of the limbs. The trajectory of the movement (the energy) is the same whether you do a movement with or without the ring. And before you will argue that force is indeed going in the wrong direction because you have to defeat gravity, please note that the rattan ring weighs ...well... almost nothing. If you front such an argument, you might as well say that any movement where you lift your arms from a side hanging position would make your energy go in the wrong direction.
Speaking about the dummy, where is the energy going when you perform it? I am sure you would say "to the center" or something to that effect, but how about in such situations as the bong sau on the "diagonal" arm after the neck pulling hand or high and low gang sau? Or the pak saus? Or kwun sau? What I am really after is not necessarily an answer or explanations to all of these questions, I am just curious as to whether or not your method employs movements where energy goes in different directions...
You were not impressed with what you saw - I say that is fair enough. We all have our own, subjective standards and opinions on what is impressive or not. How does the saying go? ...one man's gold is another man's... something
I would never question you on that account - although, I have a difficult time understanding how one could be "impressed" (or not) with a training tool. Is a long pole impressive? Or a wall bag? I believe we are talking about how the rattan ring is used, and you state now that your experience is based on visual impressions - but you, as a ving tsun exponent, should know that there are many things that you can't see when watching from the outside, especially "energy" or "intent", wouldn't you agree?
Anyways, to make something clear - just in case the point got lost somewhere along the line - the rattan ring is just a complementary/supplementary training method, best used when at home when you have no training partners or perhaps you are the odd man out in class - if you have people to do partnerwork with, I think this is the preferable thing to do.
Cheers to you as well
JLQ
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote