Some observations on TCMA

[jdhowland]

I'm going somewhere with this--I think.

For now, I'll just post some observations and welcome comments and criticism.




Traditional Chinese fighting arts are propagated through a social network--the men-pai systems.

These societies are based on both Confucian and practical values. They allow for a recognition of authority and for some degree of control over a tradition. The traditions and lineages are cultural constructs that may be as important to the membership as any actual skills gained by participation.

The ultimate test of the methods taught within these systems is personal combat, whether it be a life-or-death struggle or challenging in a public arena.

Success within a traditional system may be based more (or entirely) upon recognition as a lineage-holder than proven skills as a fighter.

A fighter may do very well in his field regardless of any standing within a pai or men.

A fighter with "bad" or sloppy technique can still win over a fighter with superior skill in certain techniques, e.g.: a "brawler" over a picture-perfect "boxer."

The traditional systems have developed high-level skills and pedagogy to support their schools and traditions. Perhaps the greatest asset of these traditonal societies is that they preserve well-structured systems of training and discovery.

[Bernard]

I see most Chinese martial arts school as Physical Culture rather than fighting gyms. Where I'm from, most of the old Chinese martial art clubs don't practice like how they use to. It was a lot rougher back then and you would need to keep a stock of that bruise liniment. Today its more for the kids, lion dance and all.

Today, you would need to gather the students who are serious about fighting and have them train their preferred techniques with harder contact on their own.

[jdhowland]

I see most Chinese martial arts school as Physical Culture rather than fighting gyms. Where I'm from, most of the old Chinese martial art clubs don't practice like how they use to. It was a lot rougher back then and you would need to keep a stock of that bruise liniment. Today its more for the kids, lion dance and all.

Today, you would need to gather the students who are serious about fighting and have them train their preferred techniques with harder contact on their own.

This is one of the points I was hoping someone would make. "How they used to" implies a recognition that these societies once gave higher priority to fighting skills, but there are other elements that preserve some of the structure of the school in a different context.

[Bernard]

A good teacher can pass on great techniques through forms practice I feel. For example, there's a tai chi technique (I can't remember the name of that certain Chen tai chi posture) that pulls an opponent off balance by grabbing the wrist and elbow, but many people who perform that posture in the form have their hands spaced out too far apart as if they're doing the technique on a giant!

[jdhowland]

[QUOTE=Bernard;1205743]A good teacher can pass on great techniques through forms practice I feel...QUOTE]

So even if a system is incomplete it still retains value in what is passed on structurally?

I tend to agree. My first sifu said that every teacher will show you what he wants you to learn, but it is up to you to fill in the gaps (what he didn't know or held back from teaching). This can be done with enough experience.

I think this is where training in a traditional system has an advantage over going it alone. Past experience is built into the structure of the training.

Two of my teachers strongly disagreed, believing that only those with considerable fighting experience can truly reveal a system. I see the point in this, but the fighting experience doesn't have to come from the same school, and there are many problems associated with sparring only within the same "style."

Can a system that has lacked real fighting experience for a couple of generations be returned to its combative roots?

[EarthDragon]

I see most Chinese martial arts school as Physical Culture rather than fighting gyms. Where I'm from, most of the old Chinese martial art clubs don't practice like how they use to. It was a lot rougher back then and you would need to keep a stock of that bruise liniment. Today its more for the kids, lion dance and all.

where are you from? this a is not the case with a lot of the schools I have visited but there are a lot that do however I find this is gross assumption. I personally teach fighters. We don't teach kids we don't wear silk uniforms we just train kung fu. 8 step is a viscous fighting system through and through.

I have taught fighter who have won in the UFC and the USMTA ans well as full contact tough man matches.

I do however preserve the culture as I teach traditionally in the language all in Chinese, I have not modified or changed any of the methods other than to update certain techns and I preserved the health side as well learning bone setting tui na acupuncture, qigong and taji

[Kellen Bassette]

Can a system that has lacked real fighting experience for a couple of generations be returned to its combative roots?

Absolutely. If two people began training the apps for real and testing them on each other, they will learn how to fight with their system.
Shifu can't give that to you even if he has it. You have to take it; and you can take it whether he gives it to you or not. It's right there if you want it.

[Bernard]

[QUOTE=jdhowland;1205748]

A good teacher can pass on great techniques through forms practice I feel...QUOTE]

So even if a system is incomplete it still retains value in what is passed on structurally?

I tend to agree. My first sifu said that every teacher will show you what he wants you to learn, but it is up to you to fill in the gaps (what he didn't know or held back from teaching). This can be done with enough experience.

I think this is where training in a traditional system has an advantage over going it alone. Past experience is built into the structure of the training.

Two of my teachers strongly disagreed, believing that only those with considerable fighting experience can truly reveal a system. I see the point in this, but the fighting experience doesn't have to come from the same school, and there are many problems associated with sparring only within the same "style."

Can a system that has lacked real fighting experience for a couple of generations be returned to its combative roots?

I've given this question some thought. I believe its possible. One of the most important things my first (and main) teacher taught is to think for myself.

After I left his school, I dabbled in quite a few martial arts. And without exception, I feel kung fu help me pick things up faster. For example, my classmates in a jujitsu school told me they were amazed at how easy I pick up the joint locks and how effortless I made it look. Thing is my kung fu teacher didn't spend a whole lot of time on locks!

I believe the way he taught forms ingrained certain principles of movement that made it almost second nature for me when it came to qin na.

[-N-]

A good teacher can pass on great techniques through forms practice I feel. For example, there's a tai chi technique (I can't remember the name of that certain Chen tai chi posture) that pulls an opponent off balance by grabbing the wrist and elbow, but many people who perform that posture in the form have their hands spaced out too far apart as if they're doing the technique on a giant!

Doesn't that just mean that many people have not been able to learn great techniques through forms practice alone?

That's how hippie Tie Chee got invented.

After teaching us form and it's applications, my teacher lectured us that the form is useless if we didn't train the techniques(against each other) until we owned them.

[Bernard]

Doesn't that just mean that many people have not been able to learn great techniques through forms practice alone?

That's how hippie Tie Chee got invented.

After teaching us form and it's applications, my teacher lectured us that the form is useless if we didn't train the techniques(against each other) until we owned them.

True. Usage training and forms practice should always go hand in hand. Didn't mean to imply otherwise.

[mooyingmantis]

Success within a traditional system may be based more (or entirely) upon recognition as a lineage-holder than proven skills as a fighter.

Very sad, but true in some systems.

[-N-]

The traditions and lineages are cultural constructs that may be as important to the membership as any actual skills gained by participation..

Success within a traditional system may be based more (or entirely) upon recognition as a lineage-holder than proven skills as a fighter.

Lineage without skill is an embarrassment. Better to have no lineage than to claim one and not be able uphold the standard of skill. That is the traditional view.

Old school teachers have told their students not to start fights. Not necessarily because of peace and harmony. But because they did not want it known that they were the teacher of such a poor student.

Traditional martial arts that have lost their tradition and their combat skills have nothing left but to rest on past achievements of their ancestors.

In this modern time of instant gratification and delicate self esteem, wannabees use lineage to represent themselves and self promote, rather than themselves representing the standard of their lineage.

There was a reason for teachers granting discipleship or expelling a student, and not necessarily political as it has turned into in modern times.

[SPJ]

Traditional martial arts that have lost their tradition and their combat skills have nothing left but to rest on past achievements of their ancestors.

History is a big part as always.

Lineage is a convenient way to group schools.

We may trace our learning from our teachers.

And our teachers' teachers.

etc.

That is history, too.

Students are just students.

There are good fighters and there also many not so good.

That goes to all schools of all lineages.

[-N-]

History is a big part as always.

Lineage is a convenient way to group schools.

We may trace our learning from our teachers.

And our teachers' teachers.

etc.

That is history, too.

Students are just students.

There are good fighters and there also many not so good.

That goes to all schools of all lineages.

If there are no fight skills, then isn't it just a martial flavored social club?

I would call that "formerly traditional".

[Robinhood]

It all depends on level of the teacher, any move will work if you are at a high skill level, the problem comes from people that are at a low skill level and don't know it. Thus their art seems to not work and their students are left at their skill level or usually at a lower level. Thus lies the evolution of most commercial styles.

I.E. Don't follow a style, but find a teacher that can pass on a path that leads to a high level, not a teacher with a high level of wasted time and effort with little to no results.