You "pointed out" by ridiculing him in regards to a methodology none of you were familiar with!!!!
By "pointing out" that he was "wrong" in the way that you guys did, you did nothing but, by extension, insult his Chow Gar training.Originally Posted by Frost
Yes and he got those views from being exposed to AUTHENTIC Chow Gar training, something that none of you have any experience in......Originally Posted by Frost
If you go back to that particular thread you will see that my first post there was addressed to the Chow Gar practitioner(David) and not any of you. Then you guys took an exception to my views on the subject and started to make posts to enlighten me on the benefits of weight lifting, even the Olympic variety.....LOLOriginally Posted by Frost
You would not let go even when I made it clear that I was fully aware that certain types of weightlifting were used in TCMAs for centuries....LOL
My experience is in kung fu and not weight lifting. If I want to increase my kung fu striking power, I ask a kung fu master and not a weight training coach!!!!Originally Posted by Frost
Some of you guys just don't see the woods for the trees!
[Even though most people posting here do not have any experience in true TCMA training - it is called the Mcdojo phenomenon and it was not invented by me - the real fact was that none of you had trained Chow Gar and hence were not familiar with the lesser known methodologies of that style.Originally Posted by Frost
So, you decided that if you were not aware of a certain practice then it was not valid; it did not exist; it was fantasy, etc. Taking into account your overall cluelessness regarding authentic kung fu practices, you guys are really pompous!!
My background is in kung fu. I have enough background to know that there are TCMA methodologies that do not use weight training exerecises to gain their strength and power, including the Chow Gar shock power.Originally Posted by Frost
Giving any more details about my background on the World Wide Web is meaningless specially when those who are asking the questions are clueless to the actual methodology in question and are asking questions, NOT because they are really interested, but because they are attempting to "interrogate" the person who dared to show them for the clueless (at least in regards this particular methodology) lot that they are!
As far as more details regarding the particular methodology itself is concerned then as I said before these things are kept away from the public arena and with good reason, I might add.
HW108