Public vs, Private

[couch]

Sharing is acheived through discussion more than fighting imo.

You know, it's hard not to wax and wane on the "MMA/BJJ' stuff when it's so prevalent and in your face like Brittany Spear's you know what. Face it, popular culture and fads brainwash and that's what that marketing is designed to do. (Just another side of the coin)

The above quote from LT108 makes me think about my acupuncture education and now my martial education.

In acupuncture schools, (esp. in large schools) you are taught in the 'western way' in that you sit in front of a prof in a big room and just listen and take notes. That's NOT how acu and Chinese medicine was learned back in the day. It was learned via master-disciple transmission. Now there is a resurgence in Chinese medicine called Classical Chinese Medicine (to label it differently than Traditional Chinese Medicine - the 50 year old 'westernized' version of the medicine) to bring the medicine back to its Taoist and master-disciple roots.

When I was in school, I was blessed with a small class. Sometimes I was the only one in the class and one of my instructors (who is now my friend) would ask me if I just wanted to grab a Starbucks and shoot the crap. He would teach me about Taoism, Tai Chi, quantum mechanics, manifesting your destiny, how to grow an acu practice, etc. Not once did he sit down and teach anything 'physically' to do with acupuncture and CM. And I know now that that was the BEST part of my education.

In the Moy Yat family, they call that Kung-Fu life. Now looking at the above, I pose a question that is on the top of my head: Obviously we have to DO the physical part of the art and pressure test, but how much of the way of combat is learned via discussion? How much of the art is in the 'transmission' vs. the mash-mash? Is this way still valid or does it waste time or miss the point?

Just a side note, there are lots of MMA/BJJ schools who have a UFC night for all their students to keep up the comradeship, but is it the same as in the KF schools?

[t_niehoff]

In the Moy Yat family, they call that Kung-Fu life. Now looking at the above, I pose a question that is on the top of my head: Obviously we have to DO the physical part of the art and pressure test, but how much of the way of combat is learned via discussion? How much of the art is in the 'transmission' vs. the mash-mash? Is this way still valid or does it waste time or miss the point?

In my view if we look at martial arts as athletic endeavors (like any sport) as opposed to "something else" (whatever that might possibly be), then the answer to your question is obvious. Do you become a better golfer by sitting around talking about golf? A better basketball player by sitting on your @ss? Or, do you develop better skills through practice, by doing it?

That's not to say that good (PROVEN) athletes can't give good pointers, inspire, etc. verbally. But physical skills are learned and developed by and through performance.

[LoneTiger108]

... I pose a question that is on the top of my head: Obviously we have to DO the physical part of the art and pressure test, but how much of the way of combat is learned via discussion? How much of the art is in the 'transmission' vs. the mash-mash? Is this way still valid or does it waste time or miss the point?

I'm glad to see a post of mine made someone think at last!

Honestly, and especially where Wing Chun is concerned, most if not ALL the 'knowledge' can be picked up from general discussions and direct transmission. How we decide to use this knowledge is completely individual imo. I like to use the knowledge to improve peoples lives, to enrich their experience within Chinese Martial Arts (Chinese being the operative word here as language is very important imo) I've never been a fighter, and never intend to be one either.

I have nothing against the 'DOers', the fighters, the athletes but I do find that their attitude tends to also be as 'mixed up' as their martial arts. Many a time have I seen a fighter enter the hall and 'believe' in himself so much that he thinks nothing will hurt him, and if he connects with his right hook, clinch, or round kick then it will all be over. 10/10 times I have aslo seen very 'young' students dance around these guys as if they were a tree. Dominating the space time and time again.

Bottom line is that it's all subjective to the individual. People I guess like to smash ten tonnes out of eacother and feel that they are 'learning'. Although fighting is learning to some extent, it isn't the only way martial arts should be promoted.

I find nothing more barbaric than watching two grown men pit themselves against eachother in a 'cage', but then that's just me. I have a lot of respect for the athletes, the sportsmen, and I would hope they have respect for the older 'Classical' practitioners too.

[sanjuro_ronin]

This is a good example of what I mean: you use an example of a nonfighting demo to "prove" your point of the usefulness of TMA. "Boards don't hit back."

Why not a demo of your PE while sparring with a (genuine) muay thai fighter?

Actually, the point of that demos was how to STRUCTURE the PE fist, hence I mentioned how he can't even do a PE fist push-up so he has no business even trying to do it in a fight.
As for me doing it in a fight, I have done them in real fights and in bare knuckle matches, certainly not in MT, gloves and all that, but I used them in my kyokushin matches, though at the time it was not as well developed as I have it now, and they worked "just fine".
I used to do them in sparring but my partners didn't think it to kosher so, like elbows, I tend to use them "half power" just to make a point.
By the way, I don't know if you have ever been hit by a full force tempered PE fist, I have, in a full contact match and took out my right shoulder in one shot.
I friend of mine once described a true PE fist as a "blunt push-dagger".

[t_niehoff]

Actually, the point of that demos was how to STRUCTURE the PE fist, hence I mentioned how he can't even do a PE fist push-up so he has no business even trying to do it in a fight.
As for me doing it in a fight, I have done them in real fights and in bare knuckle matches, certainly not in MT, gloves and all that, but I used them in my kyokushin matches, though at the time it was not as well developed as I have it now, and they worked "just fine".
I used to do them in sparring but my partners didn't think it to kosher so, like elbows, I tend to use them "half power" just to make a point.
By the way, I don't know if you have ever been hit by a full force tempered PE fist, I have, in a full contact match and took out my right shoulder in one shot.
I friend of mine once described a true PE fist as a "blunt push-dagger".

I agree that not being able to do something outside of fighting indicates that you won't be able to do it in fighting. However, being able to do something outside of fighting is no indication that you will be able to do it in fighting -- or that if you can that you'd necessarily want to (that it produces good results).

I don't find personal anecdotes to be particularly compelling evidence (for a number of reasons). If I did, then I'd accept stories of alien abductions and Yeti sightings.

[Grilo]

Sorry sanjuro_ronin I did read it wrong. I totally mis read it. Will teach me to read two things at once and try to reply to each.

On Transmission vs Action I have read many pages, with a grain of salt, that old WC Sifus would teach parts and then in the Kung Fu way of life talk about the rest while walking en the garden or having tea. If talking about it doesnt help you get better you are viewing it as a sport. and Yes having done research in the field of sports psychology elite athletes do talk about their sport just as much as they practise.

If you dont talk about your art and fully understand it how do you know you are doing it right? There are tons of people doing the wrong thing right and the right thing wrong. and WC specific if you are not talking about your Concept as it is a concept art how do you even know you are doing WC. Center line THEORY not technique.

IMO

[sanjuro_ronin]

Sorry sanjuro_ronin I did read it wrong. I totally mis read it. Will teach me to read two things at once and try to reply to each.

On Transmission vs Action I have read many pages, with a grain of salt, that old WC Sifus would teach parts and then in the Kung Fu way of life talk about the rest while walking en the garden or having tea. If talking about it doesnt help you get better you are viewing it as a sport. and Yes having done research in the field of sports psychology elite athletes do talk about their sport just as much as they practise.

If you dont talk about your art and fully understand it how do you know you are doing it right? There are tons of people doing the wrong thing right and the right thing wrong. and WC specific if you are not talking about your Concept as it is a concept art how do you even know you are doing WC. Center line THEORY not technique.

IMO

No worries, it happens.
I think that talking about a MA or sport is vital for many fighters or trainees, Cus D'amato used to talk about the old times fighters with Tyson all the time, too bad Tyson didn't "listen"

I think that doing is crucial, but understanding is what completes a MA/fighter.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Yes, we are aware of that, doesn't change the FACT that the people going into the early UFC's had no clue, does it?
Heck I heard of GJJ before the first lethal weapon, where it made its "debut"

Wanted to add something to this, The Gracies tested their MA in public VS all systems and people, but they did train in "private" and kept many things "in the family".
Supposedly they still do.

[Kansuke]

I find nothing more barbaric than watching two grown men pit themselves against eachother in a 'cage'.

Why "barbaric?"

[sanjuro_ronin]

bar·bar·ic /bɑrˈbærɪk/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[bahr-bar-ik] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. without civilizing influences; uncivilized; primitive: barbaric invaders.
2. of, like, or befitting barbarians: a barbaric empire; barbaric practices.
3. crudely rich or splendid: barbaric decorations.
[Origin: 1480–90; < L barbaricus < Gk barbarikós. See barbarous, -ic]

—Related forms
bar·bar·i·cal·ly, adverb

—Synonyms 1, 3. See barbarian.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)

American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This
bar·bar·ic (bär-bār'ĭk) Pronunciation Key
adj.

1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of barbarians.
2. Marked by crudeness or lack of restraint in taste, style, or manner.


[Latin barbaricus, from Greek barbarikos, from barbaros, foreign.]
bar·bar'i·cal·ly adv.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
CITE THIS SOURCE|PRINT
WordNet - Cite This Source - Share This
barbaric

adjective
1. without civilizing influences; "barbarian invaders"; "barbaric practices"; "a savage people"; "fighting is crude and uncivilized especially if the weapons are efficient"-Margaret Meade; "wild tribes" [syn: barbarian]
2. unrestrained and crudely rich; "barbaric use of color or ornament"

[sanjuro_ronin]

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
bar·bar·i·an /bɑrˈbɛəriən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[bahr-bair-ee-uhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. a person in a savage, primitive state; uncivilized person.
2. a person without culture, refinement, or education; philistine.
3. (loosely) a foreigner.
4. (in ancient and medieval periods)
a. a non-Greek.
b. a person living outside, esp. north of, the Roman Empire.
c. a person not living in a Christian country or within a Christian civilization.
5. (among Italians during the Renaissance) a person of non-Italian origin.
–adjective
6. uncivilized; crude; savage.
7. foreign; alien.

[t_niehoff]

If you dont talk about your art and fully understand it how do you know you are doing it right? There are tons of people doing the wrong thing right and the right thing wrong. and WC specific if you are not talking about your Concept as it is a concept art how do you even know you are doing WC. Center line THEORY not technique.
IMO

When does someone "fully understand" golf or tennis or basketball -- or wrestling or boxing? "Understanding" isn't really an issue. Performance is. And performance doesn't come from understanding but understanding (fwiw) comes from performance. Increased skill in performance comes with practice (from repeated performance).

Focusing on "understanding" comes from viewing WCK as a "conceptual art" ("I must understand the concepts"). It's not a conceptual art. But some people try to teach it from that approach. However, you can't teach or develop skill in athletic activities, like golf or tennis or boxing or wrestling -- including WCK -- from a conceptual approach.

You asked about knowing when you are doing something "right." You know that you are "doing it right" when you can consistently and reliably use the movements of WCK (the movements from the forms and drills) successfully in fighting with competant, genuinely resisting opponents. Just like you know you're drive in golf is "right" or your forehand in tennis is "right" by your performance results. You don't need anyone to tell you that you are doing it right.

[LoneTiger108]

Why "barbaric?"

I think Sanjuros posts say it all! Albeit a little too precise for what I was meaning I think.

I just don't like fighting for competitive reasons, money and fame.

Any fight I've been in (and yes there have been a few scraps!!) ended very very quickly, and normally from one strike. I personally have yet to pound someones head in the ground for them to know they can not 'win'.

Martial Arts is, or should be, about self preservation imo. Not violence and competitions.

Focusing on "understanding" comes from viewing WCK as a "conceptual art" ("I must understand the concepts"). It's not a conceptual art. But some people try to teach it from that approach. However, you can't teach or develop skill in athletic activities, like golf or tennis or boxing or wrestling -- including WCK -- from a conceptual approach.

Probably the worst post from you in a while T.

[SimonM]

Mas Oyama was a Karate guy.

BJJ is basically the ground work of judo.

The break was between judo and JJJ and it was Kano.

The only "break" between BJJ and judo was the gradual inclusion of vale tudo into BJJ.

I defer to your superior knowlege on jma and the relationship of jma personages to the origin of BJJ.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I defer to your superior knowlege on jma and the relationship of jma personages to the origin of BJJ.

It was Kimura not Oyama, by the way.