Thinking outside the box

[Airdrawndagger]

Why? Because you said so? I don't think that's a very good case for anything.

Here is my experience, which I suspect you will discard, based on your attitude in previous posts.

MMA, and other sportive styles have this fantastic component of one-on-one competition.

You win and it's all on you. But when you lose, it's all on you.

When you win, it's about your physical state of readiness, your technical state of readiness and your mental (spiritual, if you prefer) state of readiness. If any one of those things are off, you cannot compete at your top cability. There are people around you that can help you develop all of these traits, but the onus is on you. YOU are the one who has to push till you feel like puking and your muscles don't work. YOU are the one that has to practice your game plan with precision, ad nauseum, until it's finely tuned, rep after rep, hour by hour, day after day. YOU are the one that has to have the mental discipline and focus to do the appropriate visualization exercises, the drive to not break down and quit working hard even when you can barely stand or function, and stick to the schedule and prepare.

So, winning and losing is largely up to you. And people talk about competition all being about ego. Well, the guys with the biggest egos - 1. Rarely compete, 2. Never work out with anybody that can kick their ass, 3. Make excuses for losing.

4. They don't last long because there is always somebody that can beat you.

There are the rare phsyically/athletically gifted specimens who don't have to work that hard, and still wax everybody, but most of the people who got to the top have a modicum of talent and a bottomless pit of heart and drive.

They call that spiritual and mental strength. And its development or possession is a pre-requisite for consistent success.

So saying it's a smaller part is flat out wrong.

What does that have to do with what you have quoted above? Your preaching to the quire.

[Airdrawndagger]

An encyclopaedia could be written on this, but doing a google or Amazon search for a book called "Enlightenment Blues".

Well that settles it then, theres a book on "Enlightenment Blues"--- It must be right.

Crude semantic hair splitting and you know it. The people who advertise Wing Chun in such terms, like yourself, are usually alive ... though perhaps there's an argument that you are dead from the neck up. Of course I would never stoop so low as to say that.

Im feeding you the same crap you keep trying to feed me, entertaining no?

No ****, Sherlock. You seem to be trying to make the point that TMA are "superior" because they have a "spiritual" side. Crap. Plenty of boxers have faiths of one kind or another. MT has many "spiritual" rituals. Not all MMA'ers are crude brawlers. Read up on Genki Sudo sometime.

When did the word "superior" ever get thrown into the mix? You assume to much. You are trying to make a point that some how being spiritual is "wrong" in regards to kung fu, not TMA is "superior".

I've heard many variations on the theme "We don't compete or fight because we concentrate on the spiritual side of Kung Fu, and are too pure to sully our style by fighting with the less spiritual than ourselves."

Yes, these types of points do seem to come up in regards to WC, but that is another subject all together. I have been and will always be an advocater of sparring and competitiion with WC dispite the fact that you are not allowed to use certain weapons due to rules and regulations. If you can perform well under "rules" than you can perform better without them.

You also like wearing tights by your own admission, so forgive my confusion.

WRONG AGAIN, I sarcasticly said we (WC community) need to trade in our sashes for a pair of tights. So are you confused about liking men or wearing tights? Somehow they seem to go together quite well...

[anerlich]

Im feeding you the same crap you keep trying to feed me, entertaining no?

Moderately, I suppose.

[anerlich]

Did canglong ever get a reply back from GM Cheung about his take on the completeness of TWC?

[Airdrawndagger]

Moderately, I suppose.

-- LOL --

[Merryprankster]

That being said there is so much more personal acountability that plays a larger role with the devolopment of a TMA, than the style which he chooses to develop.

This is what you earlier wrote.

My response was a counter to the idea that personal accountability plays a larger role within the development of TMA than the style that unkokusai chooses to develop, because that's what it seemed you were saying.

I see now that is NOT what you meant. I will read more carefully.

[canglong]

Did canglong ever get a reply back from GM Cheung about his take on the completeness of TWC?

No, not yet.

[Ultimatewingchun]

William Cheung is on the road at the present time (I attended his seminar last Sunday in New Jersey.)

It might be awhile before he responds.