Spaztaztic Southern Mantis (Maybe)?

[MysteriousPower]

Good posts. On this point, and here's the rub: given that whoever is being trained is a normal human, it will not take longer to learn A than B, where they are not totally dissimilar in complexity. So the basic punches and kicks from system to system, not too different, same amount of time to ingrain them. So, given that we all agree that the systems don''t approach punching, kicking, throws, and locks in too dissimilar a fashion, if there is a difference in the time it takes to get proficiency, it has nothing to do with those moves, which comprise the styles, but in how they are trained.

So, when you get a guy who does five years of kung fu, leaves it because the methodology doesn't allow the practitioners to approach the style, and goes to something with a more useful methodology(training methodology, which is not related to style as much as culture and history), that person gains a capacity to judge the new style based on effectiveness, but, unless they do the same with the previous style, they do not have that capacity in any real sense. They do have a Fair gripe with the training environment, but the style has never gotten a proper introduction to them.

What kung fu needs, and many are doing the reforms necessary to get, is people training kung fu like fighters, whatever they wish to do with it from there. What kung fu does not need is people who previously never trained it with aliveness making proclomations about it's usefulness, either positive or negative, based on their lack of proper, meaning relevant and alive, training.

I for one do not consider it to require endless training under a teacher to gain competence in kung fu. If one is learning many styles of it, perhaps longer, but each style of open hand can be approached by a competent individual in a reasonable time if they are given the info and the environment to ingrain it. Add weapons and all, and again those will require time for each, but we're talking open hand for the most part.

You can't compare results in ingraining styles between two completely different training approaches and rule out the training methodology as the cause in order to blame the style instead.

I need to inject a little humor to all this serious posting. This is a small matter but I need to bring it up.

KC Elbows, no matter how much you disagree with me or try to demonize me everything we argue about is philosophical. None of us is right or wrong...until now. Frost confirmed that nobody respnded to his post from a couple of pages ago even though you vehemenently disagreed with me and said a semi-pro fighter responded. I was right and you were wrong...on that topic. I guess that means I am one up on you.

Mysteriouspower +1
KC Elbows 0

[Yum Cha]

Dahm! Does Canada outlaw Ginsing?? Or is it just the tax?

Some other long term skills might include:
targeting?
sensitivity?
ringcraft?
breathing?

And my old favorite, strategy?

And it all combines into an ad-lib empty minded ability, as opposed to a pre-configured response?

In Pak Mei, the way we issue force hyperextends the tendons, they build up and get stronger over time. This opens some doors as you learn to use it. I rate that pretty highly in the world of TCMA.

A lot of secrets are just as easily called tricks. Older you get, more tricks you have. Simple, eh? Non-denomenational.

Fighting is a young man's game. Teaching is an old blokes option, teaching has a whole host of skills too, including the aforementioned "optimisation." Can we call that a 'secret' or long term skill too?

Theoretically, this long term benefit may apply to all types of combat sports. However, in practical terms, it usually doesn't to anywhere near the same extent as TMA. That's the importance of the 'love of the art' as opposed 'need to fight' angle?

Skill and ageing is a natural process, the teacher is always better than the student to start, but there comes a point where the student will become better than the teacher, if he is lucky.

That's just the human condition.

[Yum Cha]

Sanjuro and Luk Hop, thanks for the SPM vids.

I can certainly see more similarity to Pak Mei in your examples than in Sifu Cama's video.

I understand exactly what you mean about 'power' Sanjuro, because the same principles apply in my style.

However (there's always a but), I still appreciate what Sifu Cama is doing, and here's why.

SPM has that dynamic tension thing going on that they use to generate faat ging. Train it one way to have the skill surface for cultivation.

It appears to me, he is simply working that particular energy in isolation, be it the tension or the faat ging, its his demonstration of his level of evolution. I assume that is a recognised exercise from the system, not an ad lib? It wouldn't make much difference.

So, instead of being a 'pure fighting' technique, it is a pure skill, and then, given that skill, its up to the system and your innovation to learn how to apply it, blah, blah, blah....

Pulling skills out of techniques and indulging in training the skill is something high level TCMA are known for.

So, as a non-student of SPM, please forgive my insolence...

[sanjuro_ronin]

I'll throw the gud stuff over the fence, flash my handy dandy US Passport CARD, tap dance passed the Mounties, sidle along the fence for my contraBAND, then sashay by casa de Ronin with some flowerz fo Mizus Ronin an t der gud stuff fo der Master

Silver tonged devil !

[taai gihk yahn]

Silver tonged devil !

There seems to be a lot of that going around lately...

[sanjuro_ronin]

Sanjuro and Luk Hop, thanks for the SPM vids.

I can certainly see more similarity to Pak Mei in your examples than in Sifu Cama's video.

I understand exactly what you mean about 'power' Sanjuro, because the same principles apply in my style.

However (there's always a but), I still appreciate what Sifu Cama is doing, and here's why.

SPM has that dynamic tension thing going on that they use to generate faat ging. Train it one way to have the skill surface for cultivation.

It appears to me, he is simply working that particular energy in isolation, be it the tension or the faat ging, its his demonstration of his level of evolution. I assume that is a recognised exercise from the system, not an ad lib? It wouldn't make much difference.

So, instead of being a 'pure fighting' technique, it is a pure skill, and then, given that skill, its up to the system and your innovation to learn how to apply it, blah, blah, blah....

Pulling skills out of techniques and indulging in training the skill is something high level TCMA are known for.

So, as a non-student of SPM, please forgive my insolence...

Perhaps, for me and again this is in MY view, I don't like forms that are flicky and gay.

I have never meet James but have heard mostly good things about the man and his SPM, but the clips I have seen has always been with that "flickety-flick" hand stuff and I just don't like it.

[PlumDragon]

Wow, Im having a difficult time keeping up with you guys posts lol! Please bear with me...

Good posts. On this point, and here's the rub: given that whoever is being trained is a normal human, it will not take longer to learn A than B, where they are not totally dissimilar in complexity. So the basic punches and kicks from system to system, not too different, same amount of time to ingrain them. So, given that we all agree that the systems don''t approach punching, kicking, throws, and locks in too dissimilar a fashion, if there is a difference in the time it takes to get proficiency, it has nothing to do with those moves, which comprise the styles, but in how they are trained.

Thanks KC!

Unfortuantely, I definitely disagree that even basic punches and kicks are approached in a similar way from system to system. Two skill sets of similar complexity and size, can be learned at the same rate, of course...when in the same *context*. The fundamental issue I have is that in many arts, this skill set is taught slowly as a solo drill and performed often times slowly with partners and such for a very long time (months to years, depending on the system). Once its "internalized", then the speed goes up and things get real sloppy. At this point, the teacher say, "Now you have to learn it in this new context". Effectively, all the initial solo drilling is a waste; its sub-optimal. If your *goal* is to do movements like this for fun, then its optimal. But for the person interested in the martial part of martial arts, they have effectively doubled or tripled the time necessary to train simple basic punches and kicks.

Training should include pressure from day 1. I dont mean resisitance, Im not talking about MMA's regurgitation-of-the-day, a "resisting opponent". Im talking about pressure, about intensity, putting the training in context immediately to optimally suit the goal at hand.

So, when you get a guy who does five years of kung fu, leaves it because the methodology doesn't allow the practitioners to approach the style, and goes to something with a more useful methodology(training methodology, which is not related to style as much as culture and history), that person gains a capacity to judge the new style based on effectiveness, but, unless they do the same with the previous style, they do not have that capacity in any real sense. They do have a Fair gripe with the training environment, but the style has never gotten a proper introduction to them.

Sure, I agree with that. Logically, your thoughts are well put together (probably the best Ive seen on this forum) and I have no argument. The only cavveat I would mention is this: The assumption above is that this actually happens to all the people that switch styles after 5 years.

The fact is, I dont care what the name of the system is. I dont care who made it, how old it is, or what type of special moves or "techniques" it claims to have. I care about a solid training method that produces results. And if most of the traditional martial artists (Im not taking sides with the MMA guys, they spend time on sub-optimal non-pressurized drills also) out there used *their* system with a more sound training method, they would explode forward in their evolution as martial artists. But the fact of the matter is, they are still too tied up with treating forms as some kind of secret and making their students spend class time performing footwork drills without even a partner in front of them.

I dont think anyone needs to empty their cup at all. I think they need to hang on to their chosen methods of combat. I just think they need to train them in a different way...

I know thats a bit of a ramble, sorry about that =)

What kung fu needs, and many are doing the reforms necessary to get, is people training kung fu like fighters, whatever they wish to do with it from there. What kung fu does not need is people who previously never trained it with aliveness making proclomations about it's usefulness, either positive or negative, based on their lack of proper, meaning relevant and alive, training.

Again, I am in agreement with you. To reiterate, while I do have some problems with the body method of some systems, ultimately my biggest concern always comes back to training method. Time is short for most of us, and I want to make the most out of every second I get to train. Are you making the most of your time?

I for one do not consider it to require endless training under a teacher to gain competence in kung fu.

You get good and what you work on. If you work on stepping drills and pre-choreographed 2-man drills with low intensity, then this is what you will get good at. If you work your reaction under pressure and intensity, then you will build skill in this context.

You can't compare results in ingraining styles between two completely different training approaches and rule out the training methodology as the cause in order to blame the style instead.

As I mentioned before, I dont really care about this whole blame-game. I dont really mean to blame a style, or a person. All I care about is optimal training. Fact is, the human brain interacts in a very very complex way with methods and social dynamics and this and that and the other. I certainly dont expect anyone of us here to understand the nuances of exactly why one system produces results better than another. However, I do expect us to observe and identify that this does indeed take place and draw some conclusions at a high level as to why...

Some other long term skills might include:
targeting? sensitivity? ringcraft? breathing?

I would contend that training targeting, sensitivty, and breathing can go very quickly if they are done in context. Sure, the finer points take time, but a good sound level of these an be done quickly. I have no idea what ringcraft is...

And it all combines into an ad-lib empty minded ability, as opposed to a pre-configured response?

This is the sub-optimal Im talking about. It can be an empty-minded thing almost entirely right off the bat. Working for years on pre-configured responses before feeling like its "empty minded" is not necessary.

In Pak Mei, the way we issue force hyperextends the tendons, they build up and get stronger over time. This opens some doors as you learn to use it. I rate that pretty highly in the world of TCMA.

Thats a good one...but again, this isnt really a skill so much as its a conditioning that is limited by the bodys ability to build these parts of the body.

Teaching has a whole host of skills too, including the aforementioned "optimisation." Can we call that a 'secret' or long term skill too?

Thats a good one, but it doesnt apply to martial arts only. Its across the board, in every facet and every activity in the world.

Theoretically, this long term benefit may apply to all types of combat sports. However, in practical terms, it usually doesn't to anywhere near the same extent as TMA. That's the importance of the 'love of the art' as opposed 'need to fight' angle?

Once again, I think it all comes down to objective. I see a lot of fighters get old and they relax a bit, come out of the ring and work on their finesse. They stay in shape, keep moving and teaching, and live well into old age with little to no health problems and a vital energetic spring in their step.

I used to train at a Straight Blast Gym, while taking a break from CMA. My "coach" would talk to me and try to make me sympathize with his points of view. I remember telling him that the CMA I study wasnt just about fighting, it was about health and longevity. So he asked me, "So, you dont feel healthy and alive after training here at the gym?". I started to think about it and realized that, despite an injury here and there, my overall health was fantastic as long as I was training anything and using my body. Sure, had I entered the cage I would have gotten bashed up a bit and this isnt healthy, but this doesnt mean that these types of arts dont offer an element of health and longevity in them. Fighting in the ring/cage, no thats not something that lasts forever. But training in the art intrinsically provides long-term benefits, and to come back to what was actually said, these skills dont go away as you lose muscle mass into older age, etc. Theres nothing profoundly different about the way the body is used in CMA that allows the skills to stick around longer...

[sanjuro_ronin]

I used to train at a Straight Blast Gym, while taking a break from CMA. My "coach" would talk to me and try to make me sympathize with his points of view. I remember telling him that the CMA I study wasnt just about fighting, it was about health and longevity. So he asked me, "So, you dont feel healthy and alive after training here at the gym?". I started to think about it and realized that, despite an injury here and there, my overall health hadnt change. Sure, had I entered the cage I would have gotten bashed up a bit and this isnt healthy, but this doesnt mean that these types of arts dont offer an element of health and longevity in them. Fighting in the ring/cage, no thats not something that lasts forever. But training in the art intrinsically provides long-term benefits, and to come back to what was actually said, these skills dont go away as you lose muscle mass into older age, etc. Theres nothing profoundly different about the way the body is used in CMA that allows the skills to stick around longer...

You make a valid point and let's focus on that for a bit.
Sport combat systems have on recently been "aimed' towards the every day person and not the fighter and as such, there has been some changes, but typically, what gives a fighter the edge of a layman is his ability to deliever pain AND absorb pain and if you look at the typical methods used in MT, for example, you will see that many of them are not condusive to longevity ( not to say that there aren't any old time MT fighters that are healthy).
TCMA on the other hand, tend to take do BOTH the short term training ( taking shots to the gut to develop the ability to absorbe them) and the long term ( IB work that develops the "inside" of the body).

[bawang]

u keep kung fu secrets if u dont like someone but still teach them for the monies
its the gay

[PlumDragon]

You make a valid point and let's focus on that for a bit.
Sport combat systems have on recently been "aimed' towards the every day person and not the fighter and as such, there has been some changes, but typically, what gives a fighter the edge of a layman is his ability to deliever pain AND absorb pain and if you look at the typical methods used in MT, for example, you will see that many of them are not condusive to longevity ( not to say that there aren't any old time MT fighters that are healthy).
TCMA on the other hand, tend to take do BOTH the short term training ( taking shots to the gut to develop the ability to absorbe them) and the long term ( IB work that develops the "inside" of the body).

Just to make sure we are on the same page, originally, the statement was:
- Arts not based in Kung Fu will provide skills faster but these skills detioriate over time.

Hopefully we dont have any more argument anymore that this is ridiculous and not true.


Having commented on Yum Chas post, the discussion now seems to be:
- Arts not based in Kung Fu dont promote helath and longevity as much.

I would say that arts like MT promote health and longevity insofar as the actual physical work. What I think youre getting at is that they damage eachother through hard contact, and this itself is not a healthy longevity-promoting aspect. And of course, there lies a dicotomy between combat and health in reference to dealing with injury. But this is true with Kung Fu as well. If a Kung Fu person wanted to actually fight, he would be subject to the same issues with injury. So, I think we can agree that serious cage fighting and the preparation for such will produce more injury, regardless of art.

One thing I dont like is that those big boxing gloves can really ring you. I tend to think that too many hard strikes from a 16 oz pair of gloves could be detrimental to brain function...

[sanjuro_ronin]

My point was that TCMA, typically, address the long term MA application more than the typical Sport combat systems.
Different ways to "take abuse" that work in the log term, different wasy to produce power that work when the speed and mass aren't there as much.
But of course these methods work WITH the typical ones used in sport systems not against or instead off.

[KC Elbows]

Plum Dragon,

No problem(on the difficulty of responding to all of us), this should help, as your last post and mine are in total agreement, which should save you some time.

Unfortuantely, I definitely disagree that even basic punches and kicks are approached in a similar way from system to system. Two skill sets of similar complexity and size, can be learned at the same rate, of course...when in the same *context*. The fundamental issue I have is that in many arts, this skill set is taught slowly as a solo drill and performed often times slowly with partners and such for a very long time (months to years, depending on the system). Once its "internalized", then the speed goes up and things get real sloppy. At this point, the teacher say, "Now you have to learn it in this new context". Effectively, all the initial solo drilling is a waste; its sub-optimal. If your *goal* is to do movements like this for fun, then its optimal. But for the person interested in the martial part of martial arts, they have effectively doubled or tripled the time necessary to train simple basic punches and kicks.

Correct, and this has been what I was getting at: what you are talking about is the training methodology. The strikes, save for an odd chop or specialized strike here and there, are close enough to the same for our purposes. Internalizing something designed for pressure, using your term, requires pressure, or you're internalizing something else. I am not for saving the pressure for year ten.

Training should include pressure from day 1. I dont mean resisitance, Im not talking about MMA's regurgitation-of-the-day, a "resisting opponent". Im talking about pressure, about intensity, putting the training in context immediately to optimally suit the goal at hand.

I really wish you would disagree with me more. I'm not sure you understand the internet.

Sure, I agree with that. Logically, your thoughts are well put together (probably the best Ive seen on this forum) and I have no argument. The only cavveat I would mention is this: The assumption above is that this actually happens to all the people that switch styles after 5 years.

The fact is, I dont care what the name of the system is. I dont care who made it, how old it is, or what type of special moves or "techniques" it claims to have. I care about a solid training method that produces results. And if most of the traditional martial artists (Im not taking sides with the MMA guys, they spend time on sub-optimal non-pressurized drills also) out there used *their* system with a more sound training method, they would explode forward in their evolution as martial artists.

I'm gonna call for you to be banned if your ideas mesh with mine once more! You were warned.

But the fact of the matter is, they are still too tied up with treating forms as some kind of secret and making their students spend class time performing footwork drills without even a partner in front of them.

Okay. "They" do so. I don't. Neither do a number of others in the modern era. I keep a general principal of allowing others their choices and seeking to be a good example more than a herald. That's all.

I dont think anyone needs to empty their cup at all. I think they need to hang on to their chosen methods of combat. I just think they need to train them in a different way...

Unless they are dishonest about what they are doing and it affects others, it is not my place to tell them to do anything.

I know thats a bit of a ramble, sorry about that =)

Rambling is a forum requirement.

Again, I am in agreement with you. To reiterate, while I do have some problems with the body method of some systems, ultimately my biggest concern always comes back to training method. Time is short for most of us, and I want to make the most out of every second I get to train. Are you making the most of your time?

No, I can't quit the forum. Can anyone help me?

You get good and what you work on. If you work on stepping drills and pre-choreographed 2-man drills with low intensity, then this is what you will get good at. If you work your reaction under pressure and intensity, then you will build skill in this context.

That's it. Your agreement will be duly noted with the mods.

As I mentioned before, I dont really care about this whole blame-game. I dont really mean to blame a style, or a person. All I care about is optimal training. Fact is, the human brain interacts in a very very complex way with methods and social dynamics and this and that and the other. I certainly dont expect anyone of us here to understand the nuances of exactly why one system produces results better than another. However, I do expect us to observe and identify that this does indeed take place and draw some conclusions at a high level as to why...

When you say "us", you are stuck asking if you have reasonable expectation that others should behave as you want them to, especially in the case of strangers. I say no.

That said, I try to do the same as you.

[KC Elbows]

I need to inject a little humor to all this serious posting. This is a small matter but I need to bring it up.

KC Elbows, no matter how much you disagree with me or try to demonize me everything we argue about is philosophical. None of us is right or wrong...until now. Frost confirmed that nobody respnded to his post from a couple of pages ago even though you vehemenently disagreed with me and said a semi-pro fighter responded. I was right and you were wrong...on that topic. I guess that means I am one up on you.

Mysteriouspower +1
KC Elbows 0

In fairness, you should give yourself a second point for getting me to respond to your troll.

That said, it's too bad you didn't opt to do this with your regular handle. I ran into one of the instructors, I think from your mma school, but I lost contaxt with him. A friend was looking to train with him, I figured you'd have the contact info.

If you are merely copying the troll style of who I'm talking about, disregard the previous paragraph.

[Yao Sing]

Training should include pressure from day 1. I dont mean resisitance, Im not talking about MMA's regurgitation-of-the-day, a "resisting opponent". Im talking about pressure, about intensity, putting the training in context immediately to optimally suit the goal at hand.

My personal opinion is the MA newbs, when pressured, will react with whatever their reflex dictates. That could be anything from an attemtped block to just a duck-and-cover. What the training is supposed to do is replace whatever that reflexive action is with the response you're training.

So as long as the attack is coming at you full force you will reflexively react with something else instead of the preferred action. Slowing the training down to just below the reflex allows you to control the response and once you get used to it then you can speed it up and still react with the 'correct' response.

Considering that most schools are dealing with newbs with little to no fighting skills or experience you can see why the soft/slow approach is needed.

Sport combat systems have on recently been "aimed' towards the every day person and not the fighter and as such, there has been some changes, .......

And this is my point above. When you're training a bunch of physically hard core guys (the type initially attracted to MMA gyms) it's easier, and safer, to throw them into the deep water. Most CMA schools are dealing with peeps that got picked on or beat up as a kid so they want to learn MA to physically be on par with the guys that picked on them.

One thing I dont like is that those big boxing gloves can really ring you. I tend to think that too many hard strikes from a 16 oz pair of gloves could be detrimental to brain function...

Now this touches on my opinion of why grappling coaches more commonely roll with their students and why CMA teachers don't 'touch hands' as much.

You can grapple full out day after day with minimal injury. Boxing takes it's toll so nobody wants to get hit in the head, or knocked out, day after day. Now look at MA moves, fast breaks & soft target strikes, and you'll see that nobody wants to even attempt practicing them full out let alone on a regular basis with students.

So which would you rather do, roll using progressive compliance submissions or spar using fast breaks and soft targets (eyes, pressure points, groin, back of head, etc.)?

*When I say fast breaks I mean breaks that require a fast movement or strike to suceed. As opposed to progressive submissions which use increasing tension on a joint while isolating the body (much safer to train allowing one to submit).

[KC Elbows]

You can grapple full out day after day with minimal injury. Boxing takes it's toll so nobody wants to get hit in the head, or knocked out, day after day. Now look at MA moves, fast breaks & soft target strikes, and you'll see that nobody wants to even attempt practicing them full out let alone on a regular basis with students.

In fairness, sparring in boxing is not, when learning, done full tilt. Joe Frazier has a book, box like the pros or something like that, and he says several times that you can tell a bad gym by people at the beginning and intermediate levels coming out of sparring often hurt. He says a bunch of times that the winner of sparring is the one who uses it to learn, not the 'victor' of a session. If you do the most hits, but learn nothing, you fail.