Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 24

Thread: What should Tanglangquan look like in sparring?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Canton, OH
    Posts
    1,848

    What should Tanglangquan look like in sparring?

    A discussion in the mantis videos thread deserves its own thread I believe. The discussion was between Oso, Sanjuro (both of whom I respect) and myself. So here goes...

    What do you think tanglangquan should look like in hard contact sparring?
    Richard A. Tolson
    https://www.patreon.com/mantismastersacademy

    There are two types of Chinese martial artists. Those who can fight and those who should be teaching dance or yoga!

    53 years of training, 43 years of teaching and still aiming for perfection!

    Recovering Forms Junkie! Even my twelve step program has four roads!

  2. #2
    Greetings,

    It should look like fighting.

    mickey

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Posts
    245
    I believe this video will answer everybody's questions

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIT5ZkIrtu8

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Canton, OH
    Posts
    1,848
    Quote Originally Posted by xiao yao View Post
    I believe this video will answer everybody's questions

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIT5ZkIrtu8
    LOL! We are not that advanced yet!
    Richard A. Tolson
    https://www.patreon.com/mantismastersacademy

    There are two types of Chinese martial artists. Those who can fight and those who should be teaching dance or yoga!

    53 years of training, 43 years of teaching and still aiming for perfection!

    Recovering Forms Junkie! Even my twelve step program has four roads!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Canton, OH
    Posts
    1,848
    Here is the video that we were discussing:



    This is one of my intermediate fighters battling for his second place medal. My fighter is wearing the white chest protector with the red circle on it.
    Richard A. Tolson
    https://www.patreon.com/mantismastersacademy

    There are two types of Chinese martial artists. Those who can fight and those who should be teaching dance or yoga!

    53 years of training, 43 years of teaching and still aiming for perfection!

    Recovering Forms Junkie! Even my twelve step program has four roads!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Posts
    245
    Sorry, couldnt resist it

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    One of issues with TCMA has always been WHY it doesn't look the same in training as it does in a real fight ( under pressure).
    My view on that is;

    Yes, there is a disconnect between TCMA FORMS and real fighting under pressure and that is symptomatic of TCMA as a whole, not just any one system.
    The question is WHY?
    The answer is, IMO, because NOT ENOUGH hard contact sparring is done, which means what Richard and his students are doing now ( full contact fighting) is the WAY to address this issue.\
    To which Frost asked, quite correctly:


    and when that sparring starts to look nothing like the majority of the forms or the theories they are meant to represent, what should happen then?
    To which I replied:

    Not for me to decide BUT based on MY experience the more you pressure test your MA the more your forms look like fighting as opposed to "prancing".
    It isn't the theories in TCMA that are bad, I don't recall any that didn't have a solid base in reality, it how they are applied by those with limited or no actual fighting background.
    Remember, no MA systems was EVER developed to FIGHT against ITSELF and as such, the theories that make it its heart and soul will simply not work as well ( if at all) against itself.
    Psalms 144:1
    Praise be my Lord my Rock,
    He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    Boxing looks just like boxing in training and in the ring AND VS a non-boxer opponent.
    Same goes for Muay Thai or kick Boxing or MMA.

    Yet, we routinely see that in the case of TCMA ( typically) there is a disconnect.
    Psalms 144:1
    Praise be my Lord my Rock,
    He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,381
    Quote Originally Posted by sanjuro_ronin View Post
    Boxing looks just like boxing in training and in the ring AND VS a non-boxer opponent.
    Same goes for Muay Thai or kick Boxing or MMA.

    Yet, we routinely see that in the case of TCMA ( typically) there is a disconnect.
    There is a disconnect, and usually the more forms and the more none contact partner work in a style (be it chi sau, bridging or locking work) the greater the disconnect.

    Oso said he was surprised to see us here still, I am as well a bit lol

    For me I want TCMA to work and be useful, but even after all these years of training I still fall back on thai, boxing, wrestling and Judo when it gets really really hard in sparring or fighting .

    I have come to the opinion that most fighting styles arenít that different, all grappling styles look similar and so really should all striking arts, punch kick, elbow and knee, those are the basics of nearly all styles, look at CLF 10 seeds for example, straight punch, hooks, overhand etc all there, the more esoteric and different a style looks the more it seems to fall apart under pressure

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Canada!
    Posts
    23,101
    Form is shape. It is typically max range of motion shape. It is supposed to be flexible in application.
    If you don't get to the point of application where you come to understand the flexibility of the form shape, then you need to practice more.

    Forms should be at the end of training, not the beginning.
    Basic stance, punches, kicks, throws and locks first, then drills and apps, then spar, then when proficient, re-communicate all through forms.
    Kung Fu is good for you.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Frost View Post

    I have come to the opinion that most fighting styles arenít that different, all grappling styles look similar and so really should all striking arts, punch kick, elbow and knee, those are the basics of nearly all styles, look at CLF 10 seeds for example, straight punch, hooks, overhand etc all there, the more esoteric and different a style looks the more it seems to fall apart under pressure
    I wanted to focus on this part because we have discussed this before:
    the more esoteric and different a style looks the more it seems to fall apart under pressure
    Yes, we see this a lot and the reason is this:

    No one ever develops a style to fight against itself ( WC was not developed to fight against WC but other systems, Mantis the same, Hung Ga, the same and so forth).
    The principles and structures of the style were not developed to be used against itself, but others.
    So when a system is in a vac um and trained and fought against itself only, then those key principles and attributes end up being converted to be used against itself rather than others.
    This isn't very noticeable with "natural methods" such as boxing But the more specialized ( more exotic) the system ( like SPM, Pm, Northern Mantis and so forth) the more disconnect in practice there is.

    EX:
    Imagine if the left hook works best against a right cross, it is developed to work against a right cross, all its principles are for VS a right cross BUT it is only trained Vs a left hook.
    How good a left hook do you think it would be? how effective will it be when it does fave a right cross?
    Psalms 144:1
    Praise be my Lord my Rock,
    He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,381
    Quote Originally Posted by sanjuro_ronin View Post
    I wanted to focus on this part because we have discussed this before:


    Yes, we see this a lot and the reason is this:

    No one ever develops a style to fight against itself ( WC was not developed to fight against WC but other systems, Mantis the same, Hung Ga, the same and so forth).
    The principles and structures of the style were not developed to be used against itself, but others.
    So when a system is in a vac um and trained and fought against itself only, then those key principles and attributes end up being converted to be used against itself rather than others.
    This isn't very noticeable with "natural methods" such as boxing But the more specialized ( more exotic) the system ( like SPM, Pm, Northern Mantis and so forth) the more disconnect in practice there is.

    EX:
    Imagine if the left hook works best against a right cross, it is developed to work against a right cross, all its principles are for VS a right cross BUT it is only trained Vs a left hook.
    How good a left hook do you think it would be? how effective will it be when it does fave a right cross?
    And that comes back to too many forms and no contact work within the art AS well as not testing outside your own environment
    I agree with you, BUT the question really is how many generations back do we have to go before we find teachers teaching the art from a view point of this actually worked because I regularly tested it against other styles and fought for my life with it?
    How many decades is that for most arts, back to the boxers rebellion, a hundred years ago?
    Even more, how much stuff is being taught that simply doesnít work because its never been tested on a regular basis, for example what did wing chun look like when it was used regularly in a fight, did it look the same as today, or was it stripped down, basic and more like all the other arts out there?
    We know for example Lama kung fu was a series of exercises, principles and techniques never forms when it started, was this the same for all styles, did they look similar
    And of course the flip side is, are these so called esoteric systems better than the so called natural styles, is the time spent doing learning and testing and honing those unique aspects of fighting better spent getting better at the natural aspects which seem to work well under pressure

    I guess thatís a question for each person to answer, but I think its telling that weapons work in nearly all styles is similar, ie when something really mattered and you had to get it right or die you looked pretty much like the next guy did, and I suspect fighting bare hand when it mattered way back when was the same, when the changes happened is anyones guess

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    I agree with your post, but wanna expand on this:
    We know for example Lama kung fu was a series of exercises, principles and techniques never forms when it started, was this the same for all styles, did they look similar
    And of course the flip side is, are these so called esoteric systems better than the so called natural styles, is the time spent doing learning and testing and honing those unique aspects of fighting better spent getting better at the natural aspects which seem to work well under pressure
    Esoteric systems ( I prefer to call them specialized systems) came about when a master wanted to address a specific need, in the case of short hand systems, they were developed to counter long hand systems ( gross generalization but one that is ok for this discussion).
    A highly specialized style has the advantage of bring something different and unique to the fight ( maybe a fist formation or different power generation).

    The issue is that to be effective it must be applied in the original manner it was develop for AND against the original "opponent" it was intended to.

    Old school TCMA developed their skills and attributes through hard training, many repetitions of the basics of the system, speed and strength and stamina were developed, bodies were forged, etc etc and combat was the core of it all ( combat drills and actual fighting).

    And they were pressure tested. Over and Over.

    There was never a TCMA that was developed in which it's history did NOT involved lots of fighting by it's master.
    How else do you know if your system works?

    Honestly, that is what is missing.

    When I started TCMA as a kid, there was NEVER and TCMA attack in the sparring drills, they were always the most common attacks.
    When I did SPM the sparring drills involved one person doing SPM and the other NOT.

    Honestly, this is a no-brainer and the only ones that don't grasp this, don't because they don't want to.
    Psalms 144:1
    Praise be my Lord my Rock,
    He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    18
    I guess I have a different view on this than most, but I've always looked at formwork to have a lot less direct fighting application that some people make it out to be. I view forms as textbooks. Maybe a good analogy would be a scientific formula. E=mc2, f=ma, etc... Knowing the formula is important, but you have to do a lot more work to make a formula applicible to the real world.

    Some things are just exercises. You don't see boxers doing the exact same motions for hitting a speed bag, or skipping rope.
    Authentic Chinese Martial Arts in Western New York

    www.buffalokungfu.com

    www.laoshimarkle.com

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    out there fer sure
    Posts
    423
    Jack Mace---

    What is this guy on??? Who did he learn from? His mantis is um...retarded? LOL. Yeah..that's it..

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •