PDA

View Full Version : No Secrets in BJJ ?



MaFuYee
11-17-2000, 11:38 PM
i've noticed that when visiting BJJ/NHB web sites, often times they have techniques a-plenty shown/demonstrated on their site. - i've watched gracie instructional videos; and found the quality and openness in showing their art to be great.

however, i've also watched tons of CMA videos... and have always walked away with the impression, that they really don't want to show much of the system to the public. - maybe with the exception of wing chung videos. - often they will show a form, but never delve deeply into the meanings of the movements. - i'm sure there are others out there who know what i am talking about.

what i was wonder though, is, do you feel that BJJ has 'weakened' itself as an art by so openly teaching their art? - seems every KF magazine reading weekend warrior knows what a 'guard' is, etc. - where on the opposite end of the scale, there is tai chi, which most people have next to no understanding of, even though there are thousands of videos out on the market, and tons of books etc...

if a non-practitioner of BJJ at least familarizes themselves with BJJ techniques, then you can prepare youself to counter their techniques, while, the BJJ person really has no idea of what the other stylist is about. (except for styles like karate, muay thai, WC, TKD, etc. where more is known about them than say tungbei, or bajiquan.)

it is great for KF guys that BJJ people would like to think that it's all just about eye pokes (haha) and ripping ones nuts off. (*blush*)
(even if that is what newbie KF guys think it may be about.

illusionfist
11-18-2000, 01:31 AM
I think that if you think you are a special "standing" art, you are gonna be sorely mistaken if you fight against a bjj'er or a groundfighter in general. This goes back to the old debate of "there are so many ways the human body can move." Grapplers and groundfighters all prepare for the same thing, which is closing the gap on a stand up guy. It doesn't matter if you do baji, hung gar, karate, or tae kwon do, you are pretty much going to stand the same way. The same goes for bjj and other groundfighting arts. We all have the same standing methods.

The point is that bjj guys train to close the gap and they know you can only throw a limited amount of things at them from certain positions.

Now for them selling themselves short, IMHO, i dont think they have. I mean yeah sure you know what a guard is, but can you use it? Do you know how to get passed it? It's fine and dandy if you know terminology and all that, but it doesn't mean jack ****e if you cant use it.

It doesn't matter how many theories and terms you know, experience is gonna save your butt more than anything.

Peace /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

DragonzRage
11-18-2000, 02:25 AM
when everybody is familiar with an effective art, that means everybody is working on the techniques and constantly making things better and improving upon the original art:)! It is the ignorant secretiveness and quiet attitude that Gung fu traditionalists have that makes their art weaker. If the Gracie family had never revealed their art in America, Bjj today would probably still be limited to the stuff Royce was using to destroy everyone in the early UFCs. All of the progress made through the years since Bjj was popularized would be non-existent!! As of now, Royce, who is limited to the techniques he's always been using, cannot even hold a candle to most of the best competitors out there. Royce and Rorion's Bjj may have been weakened since they haven't seemed to incorporate anything new since their rise to fame. But there are also plenty of other Bjj guys who have made so much progress that it is pretty amazing. Because of this exposure and free exchange of technique and research, Bjj (as well as martial arts in general) have been greatly strengthened.

IMHO, one of the reasons why Gung fu has become so backward and technically weak is because most sifus isolate themselves so much from the martial arts community that they lose the opportunity to learn more and enhance their arts through crosstraining and shared research. Many of the earlier UFC fighters were competitive kickboxers, freestyle wrestlers or grapplers experienced with fighting opponents in Brazil or Japan. None of them knew jacksh!t about Pa Kua, wing chun, five animals fist, etc...but that didn't stop them from beating all the Gung fu fighters senseless. The only Gung fu UFC competitor who didn't lose is mantis fighter Joel Sutton who competed in alternate bouts in UFC 6 and 7 and won both times. The only other Gung fu guy who even has any victories at all is Jason DeLucia. All the others went down in a matter of seconds. Go to the UFC site and read the stats of all the Gung fu fighters and you'll see. Gung fu was in fact originally one of the most represented styles in the UFC, yet it probably has the worst track record of any style. All these guys had the chance to learn about Bjj, grappling, etc and prepare properly before going in. Obviously they didn't take advantage of that opportunity. Whatever "deadly secrets" of Gung fu they might've had (and no don't gimme that eye gouging and groin crushing crap) obviously didn't amount to beans. Pa Kua practitioner Thomas Ramirez implied publicly that the Gracies feared him due to the "lack of knowledge of Pa Kua"...unfortunately Thomas was knocked out in something like five seconds by Don Frye in the first bout of UFC 8. Frye was trained in western boxing and wrestling which are so publicly accessible styles (especially in the USA!) that it seems extremely silly that so many martial artists weren't prepared to deal with his skills. In my opinion Gung fu sifus should get over themselves and their egos, crawl out of the cave they've been isolating themselves in, and participate in the free exchange of knowledge that has been going on in the martial arts community! Anyone who thinks this weakens an art is fooling themselves.

You won't lose much if you go only halfway, but you won't win much either.

MaFuYee
11-18-2000, 03:00 AM
illus. - you missed my point.
i am asking, do BJJ schools hold back techniques, as in the movie "the Kung Fu Instructor", with Ti Lung. - or do they freely teach all of their techniques to anyone and everyone?

i tend to think they don't hold back with their teaching. - they even go as far as showing hundreds of techniques on their web sites.

... Traditionally, with CMA's, their techniques were jealously guarded, as, if another school were privy to that knowledge, they would 'lose an edge', so to speak, that of surprise.

* take UFC-I for instance; the majority of the contestants were ill prepared to deal with a guy who wants to roll around on the floor. (not to mention that most seemed to me to be second rate fighters.) - hence, gracie wins... now, go forward in time to UFC-III or IV, and now everybody knows exactly what to expect from BJJ'ers. - they were much more prepared to handle them. - just in that short period of time, they were able to modify their game plan, and do enough training to fare well against them.

this is not a question of can "my art" beat BJJ. please don't read any assumptions into my post. - although if you want to go into that... /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
take the 'best' BJJ'er and the 'best' CMA'ist, and my money goes on CMA. (et tu? - if not, then why aren't you doing BJJ?)

** i wasn't saying that because some kid who buys IKF magazine, and reads a BJJ article, that he will be able to beat r.gracie... that is silly; and that you would use that as an argument is even sillier. - but, if all of their (BJJ) techniques, are freely available to anyone with $20 who wants to buy one of their videos, and they work hard and train to defeat their techniques, ... as those guys in the later UFC's did... then, the BJJ'ers lost a big edge, in my opinion. - how much harder would it have been for them to do the same, had they no idea what BJJ was about? - they would have had to use trial and error to learn how to beat them at their own game... that could have taken generations... but, instead they can go and spend $20 on a video, put out by their 'opponents' and have them teach them how to counter their own techniques. hehe /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

take for instance, any kung fu book on the market... they really don't show much, except for maybe a form, and some really basic applications. - then you compare that to a judo book; they will show you hundreds of throws, and actually present it in a way that a dedicated person can actually learn from it. - same with BJJ. not the case with most CMA's. (IMO)

*** and, i never said, "selling themselves short" - where do you come up with this stuff. - i said "weakened" their art, by making all their techniques 'common knowledge', or at least readily available. (let's see how you misquote me on that one. hehe)

Peace Outside...
you know what i'm say?
- Tai Mai Shu (search on napster)
/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

MaFuYee
11-18-2000, 03:34 AM
DR:
actually, my take on why the gracies started to lose, is ... well, just look at those guys who started to compete in the later UFCs... they're HUGE!!! - they were just outmatched in strength, and training. (like you mentioned, western boxing... plus wrestling... striking + grappling, vs. just grappling.) the first UFC was a joke, as far as skill level of the competitors... (although that gireard gardeau look like one tough mofo.)

as far as the art "improving"... i don't know that i can agree with you there... i don't think there was any improvement in any art... just in the fighters.

in answer to you claims that kf was the most represented art... i haven't heard that one before... - although i can see that being the case. - as you already probably know, most kf guys are weekend warriors... myself included. (nothing wrong with that.) - if they thought they can step into a ring against highly trained and conditioned fighters... well, it's not my fault they are dumb.

* the thing about western boxing and wrestling that is good, is that it can be learned much quicker than most CMA's which tend to take a much longer time to get good at. (and that is only with many hours of daily dedication. - you can study half assed for 40 years, and still suck. - hey, i know, i'm well on my way there. - but, again, that is ok; i'm not looking to be the next UFC champ, my well being doesn't depend on MA. (thank god))

** but, be warned, don't think that a BJJ weekend warrior is much better off than a KF weekend warrior. - you are just kidding yourself if you think that doing 3-4 hrs a week of BJJ will enable you to beat any KF guy doing the same amount of training... it all comes down to "you" - not the style.

if a BJJ guy beats a KF guy, it is probably because of the amount of sweat they invested. - and remember that BJJ is more limited in scope that KF. (e.g. no weapons) - therefore they are able to gain proficiency in that kind of match, because that is all they do. - you look at CMA's - and a lot of times, it's not even all about fighting... it can encompas everything from health, to art, to spiritual enlightenment.

* if you think that CMA's should be more "open" in teaching - learn one, and then share with the rest of us. - simple. - i'm always interested in seeing the 'good stuff' from any martial art.

if you think about it deeper, you will realise that your reasoning that CMA's should be more open stems from your wanting to know them. (understandable enough) - but, to say that to do that would make them "stronger" or "better" is simply illogical. - they can study other arts, and broaden their knowledge, without disclosing any of their art. - that would make it "stonger" - no? - but to make the art public domain - means it would be easier for other stylists to defeat them. - right

MaFuYee
11-18-2000, 03:52 AM
another point i would like to add.
even if some KF master reavealed his entire system for the public to see... wouldn't it do very little good to you without personal time and dedication to practice?

e.g. western boxing is not 'hidden' or 'secretive' - but how good of a boxer are you? - would you even dream of stepping into a ring against roy jones jr? - or oscar delahoya?

like you said, wrestling is well known, and openly taught, would you fight mark coleman?

- i study tai chi; i like seeing how other martial arts deal with situations, but, it is mainly from an intellectual point of view. - i don't care to learn/practice that other style. - when would i have time for that anyway? - i think it is better to stick to one style, - otherwise you may end up with a tasteless hodgepodge that isn't really good for much. (unless you practice 'combat tae bo' - then just drop it, and pick another style.) /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

8stepsifu
11-18-2000, 05:25 AM
Kung Fu styles did all this stuff and still do. We still fight and learn the product of many centuries of fighting. There arent any secrets, there are things that take many years of practice to get the understanding of. We learn things that high ranking karate blackbelts learn within our first year of Kung Fu (Sifu Program). You can't accuse us of over secrecy there. We also don't hide in a basement. While kung fu practitioners are young, most of them fight. When your in your fourties and fifties, you don't anymore because your body doesn't heal as well. By the time you learn all the cool kung fu stuff, you are past your fighting prime, but that doesn't mean you can't be an awesome fighter. A fighter uses selected techniques, but doesn't have a system to pull from. What that means is that they have 20 awesome techniques that they train the hell out of. Maybe after 10 years or sooner, people figure it out and learn to fight against you (Sakuraba and the Gracies) Then it's back to your Sifu to drill the hell out of 10 new techniques so you can continue to be an awesome fighter. If you are a technique collecter from place to place, you will get your set of cool moves, but after people learn how to fight around them, your sunk. Thats the beauty of kung fu and any well developed system. After you are getting past your prime as a fighter, you can still learn all of the fighting system to make yourself better in old age, to preserve all the techniques and to pass them onto the next generation.
BTW If you didn't know already. Joes Sutton did 8 Step. He was an example of a Fighter that learned enough to kick everyone's ass, but didn't have a system.

[This message was edited by 8stepsifu on 11-18-00 at 10:37 PM.]

DragonzRage
11-18-2000, 05:41 AM
"actually, my take on why the gracies started to lose, is ... well, just look at those guys who started to compete in the later UFCs... they're HUGE!!!"
Not true. Guys like Kimo, Teila Tuli and Dan Severn were all pretty big strong guys but that didn't save them from defeat in the early UFCs. Besides, Royce never lost in the UFC.

"they were just outmatched in strength, and training. (like you mentioned, western boxing... plus wrestling... striking + grappling, vs. just grappling.)"
Sakuraba doesn't have that much of a strength advantage on Royce...neither does Wallid Ismail for that matter. But when you talk about Royce being outmatched in training, I think you hit the nail right on the head. That was precisely my point.

"as far as the art "improving"... i don't know that i can agree with you there... i don't think there was any improvement in any art... just in the fighters."
I think that if the fighters keep getting better, that must mean that the training and hence, the arts are getting better. You have to remember that its not as if the early UFC promoters hand picked a bunch of losers for Royce to dessimate. There were some top ranked athletes in those competitions. The fact is that there really weren't very many great freestyle fighters back then. Right now there are very many great fighters and that is a testament to the fact that crosstraining has made the martial arts stronger.

"in answer to you claims that kf was the most represented art..."
It obviously was never THE most represented art..but if you look at the records of the early UFCs you'll see that it was one of them /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif There were more than a handful of Gung fu guys in the UFC.

"but, be warned, don't think that a BJJ weekend warrior is much better off than a KF weekend warrior. - you are just kidding yourself if you think that doing 3-4 hrs a week of BJJ will enable you to beat any KF guy doing the same amount of training... it all comes down to "you" -not the style."
LOL, I agree to a certain extent. I don't think a Bjj weekend warrior is any sort of tough guy. Neither is the Gung fu weekend warrior. But I must say that IMHO, for the most part the Bjj weekend warrior will still beat the Gung fu weekend warrior just because Bjj training (weekend warrior or not) is generally superior in terms of applicable fighting methods to traditional gung fu training (note the use of the word GENERALLY, hehe). I also totally agree that in the end how good you are depends solely on you, but I do think that your training (not necessarily your style) still plays a large role. You can put all the dedication you have into practicing sh!tty techniques unrealistically but in the end you'll still suck and you'll still get your arse kicked. On the other hand, if you are practicing practical techniques realistically then your dedication will not be in vain.


"if you think that CMA's should be more "open" in teaching - learn one, and then share with the rest of us."
Hehe, you obviously don't know me very well. I've pointed out on many occasions that I've had five yrs of Hung Ga training...doesn't that qualify /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif ? I've also been doing Jun Fan for awhile. Jun Fan has a whole lot of Gung fu in it and it is in fact one of the methods I rely upon the most. The only reason I'm here instead of being confined to Mousel's forum is because I have a continued interest in Gung fu and the future direction of CMA.

" to say that to do that would make them "stronger" or "better" is simply illogical. -they can study other arts, and broaden their knowledge, without disclosing any of their art. - that would make it "stonger" - no?"
Yes it would make their art stronger, but not to the highest extent possible.

"but to make the art public domain - means it would be easier for other stylists to defeat them. - right"
IMHO, that is a very backward and outdated attitude towards practicing martial arts and the fact that there is so little good CMA around nowadays attests to that. When you share your best techniques with the rest of the Gung fu and MA community, everyone has the chance to research different ways to make the techniques more well rounded and find different ways they can work better for different people. Not to mention that people will be able to develop ways to incorporate the techniques into the general mixed martial arts spectrum. If everyone was so **** selfish about keeping their own stuff secret, then no one would be getting any better. If an opponent beats you only after learning your techniques and knowing what your strategies are, it is still a kind of a victory for your art. No matter how many Gracies Sakuraba beats, no mixed martial artist will ever deny the important impact Bjj has had and the progress they've made as martial artists due to this contribution. Regardless of how many kickboxers have been beaten by grapplers in the past, all the top fighters are using muay thai and boxing techniques in their arsenal. Through all the shared knowledge, countless numbers of open minded martial artists have made leaps and bounds in their training methods and overall skill. Through being a part of this spectrum, styles such as Bjj, muay thai, etc are made stronger, as are the martial arts in general, IMHO.

"e.g. western boxing is not 'hidden' or 'secretive' - but how good of a boxer are you? - would you even dream of stepping into a ring against roy jones jr? - or oscar delahoya?
like you said, wrestling is well known, and openly taught, would you fight mark coleman?"
No, i would not tangle with those guys unless I had a death wish. But the reason wy we can find phenomenal competitors such as them in their respective sports is because there is an EXTREMELY large pool of trained boxers and wrestlers out there...and that is in turn precisely due to the fact that boxing and wrestling are very widely known and widely practiced. If they were secret arts practiced only by a handful of old sifus and a small pool of ****y out of shape wallflower students, how many Colemans and DeLaHoya's do you think we'd be able to find?

There is only one martial art.

illusionfist
11-18-2000, 07:47 AM
"what i was wonder though, is, do you feel that BJJ has 'weakened' itself as an art by so openly teaching their art? - seems every KF magazine reading weekend warrior knows what a 'guard' is, etc. "

This is the basis of the selling themselves short comment (i just used my own wording, i'm sorry). I was not misquoting you.

"i am asking, do BJJ schools hold back techniques, as in the movie "the Kung Fu Instructor", with Ti Lung. - or do they freely teach all of their techniques to anyone and everyone?"

You just contradicted the whole basis of your first post. They are two totally different questions.

"** i wasn't saying that because some kid who buys IKF magazine, and reads a BJJ article, that he will be able to beat r.gracie... that is silly; and that you would use that as an argument is even sillier"

No personal attacks from me, so why are you trying to make them towards me? I never insulted your intelligence, so why do it to me?

"if a non-practitioner of BJJ at least familarizes themselves with BJJ techniques, then you can prepare youself to counter their techniques, while, the BJJ person really has no idea of what the other stylist is about. (except for styles like karate, muay thai, WC, TKD, etc. where more is known about them than say tungbei, or bajiquan.)"

This paragraph is the basis of my initial post.

I'm sorry if you were offended by my post, but what i posted is what i gathered from your first question.

Peace /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

MaFuYee
11-19-2000, 03:35 PM
didn't mean to offend ya I.F. ...

re: You just contradicted the whole basis of your first post. They are two totally different questions.

yes, they are 2 questions, sorry to have confused you... but, if you disagree that BJJ'ers tend to show their enitre art, then how could you possibly agree that they 'weakened' themselves by revealing everything(?) - can't you see how the 2 questions are related? - one is the basis of the other.

re: No personal attacks from me, so why are you trying to make them towards me? I never insulted your intelligence, so why do it to me?

sorry again, i didn't know you were so sensitive... and you are mis-reading my posts again... i said that for you to use that argument was silly. - nowhere did i call you stupid.

* and i wasn't offended by your post in the least. i am just begining to question my own ability to articulate my thoughts... i thought i was being pretty clear. /infopop/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Paul DiMarino
11-19-2000, 04:04 PM
MaFuYee,

BJJ doesn't hide any of it's techniques at all, but I don't think that it weakens the art. Technical knowledge alone won't get you anywhere in BJJ. You can only be successful after you have developed the timing and sensitivity that can only come from hours upon end of rolling. Knowing sweeps, guard passes, pins and hold downs, and even submissions isn't enough. You have to be able to flow and feel exactly when you should execute the technique. Even holding a mount is an art unto itself. These things can only come from the experince gained from rolling with other skilled grapplers.

MaFuYee
11-19-2000, 04:43 PM
DR:
re: if the fighters are getting better, it means the training has gotten better, therefore the art has gotten better. (paraphrased)

what art are you referring to? NHB fighting? UFC style? - i don't think the gracies have changed their art due to the UFC. - certainly muay thai hasn't all of a sudden incorporated grappling into it. (right?) - if all of a sudden, people started training harder, because of their motivation to win the UFC - that doesn't mean that anyone changed their training methods, only that people started training harder. - since i assume you may have meant that "general mixed MA" have added stuff to their regiment, ok, maybe so, and maybe they have gotten better... maybe one day, it'll be up to par with other KF styles such as hung gar, mantis, bak mei, choy lay fut, etc... /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
(maybe like 200 years down the line... hahaha!)

re: BJJ weekend warrior will beat the KF weekend warrior. (paraphrased)

well, that is just a matter of opinion, isn't it. and for me to say the opposite, would also mean exactly as much, or as little.

re: 5 years of hung ga training.
maybe if you stuck with it for another 10-15 yrs... 5 years really doesn't mean much of anything, unless you were training about 6-8 hrs a day 5-7 days a week.

re: jun fan.
shoulda stuck with the hung ga. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

re: that is a very backward and outdated attitude towards practicing martial arts and the fact that
there is so little good CMA around nowadays attests to that.

isn't that a bit presumptuous to be calling something 'backwards and outdated' just because it isn't what you believe. - the christians thought every non-christian to have 'backwards and outdated' beliefs; and in their misguided folly decided to go around 'converting the savages'.
(at the cost of approx 10 million lives.)

- to not be able to understand the other side of the coin is a symptom of narrow mindedness. (so prevalent all over this world.)

* perhaps this isn't the best analogy, but here goes...

is it 'outdated and backwards' for the US not to share their 'stealth' technology, or their nuclear capabilities with everone? - it was just **** selfish of the US govt to not share their psychological warfare methods with every terrorist nation in the world. (not that the US isn't the worlds largest terrorist nation. - but they want to keep it that way.)

why should i care if 'general mixed martial artists' don't ever get beyond the basic pummeling methods, akin to a heavy rock tied to the end of a stick. - if i have a sword, and all they have is a stick... is it just '**** selfish' of me not to teach everyone else how to make a sword? - well that's just tough noogies on you, isn't it? /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
(actually it can be argued that the knowledge is out there for anyone interested, but, no one wants to put the required time and effort into it. - isn't that why you quit hung ga after 5 years? - it was too difficult, or you didn't see the results you expected, even after spending 2-3 hrs a week training... - i'm being faceitous here, but hopefully you get my point.)

let's try and look at it this way:
BJJ'er: 'my heavy rock tied to stick' is superior to your 'sword' - simply because, look how easy it is to make. - your sword is hard as hell to make. it takes so long, and is so difficult... and most of these people who try to make a sword, end up with a flimsy piece of crap that my rock will smash... i tried to make a sword before, and i made a piece of crap, therefore swords must be useless

MaFuYee
11-19-2000, 04:49 PM
Paul D:

i agree 100% with the part about "having the skill" as opposed to just "knowing the terms".

/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

but, i do think that their art being so "open", did make it much easier for other stylists to beat them, in the later UFCs, because they were able to train against their techniques.

it's like a football team having the other guy's playbook. - you couldn't see that as an advantage?

GinSueDog
11-19-2000, 06:00 PM
How has keeping the techniques in Kung Fu hidden helped Kung Fu? If anything I think it has hurt Kung Fu by dividing it and by providing a false sense of security. The main thing about BJJ is that the standard bar has always remained the same and the fact that inorder for you to meet that standard, you have to train hard through sparring.-ED

"The grappling arts imply most fights end up on the ground...take them there. The striking arts imply all fights start standing up...keep them there. The mixed martial arts imply any fight can go anywhere...be ready and able to go everywhere."-a mix martial artist

Master Po
11-19-2000, 06:09 PM
MaFuYee,

Are you frigin crazy.. BJJ is a rock on a stick??? Obviously you have never learned any BJJ. Most people who have even gone to one or two classes have come away realizing BJJ is one of the most advanced and technical martial arts concived. Now I'm not knocking what ever it is you do and I'm not saying you should "like" BJJ or even try it but to say it is primitive or brutal shows a lot of ignorance.

I dont think BJJ is any kind of "greatest art" because I dont think there isn't one. But to say it is not technical or incredibly intricate is just stupid.

Another thing is CMA people think that only Kung fu can be practiced by older people. Oviously no one is going to be entering UFC at 70. Still, look at Helio Gracie for instance. The guy was still teaching classes and grappling hard with strong young students well into his 70s. I hear he still likes to get onto the mat now and he is in his 80s. Believe it or not other arts are good for older people too /infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Paul DiMarino
11-19-2000, 06:27 PM
MaFuYee,

I can see where you're coming from, but the analogy just doesn't fit. The "plays" aren't really what's important; it's the time spent perfecting them and the sensitivity to know when to apply them that will give one the advantage. What you're saying is like taking a pro basketball team, giving them the RAMS playbook, and then expecting them to actually stop them because they "know what they're going to do." If you go the ground with a grappler and all you have is technical knowledge, you'll get eaten alive. A purple belt in BJJ and a black belt both have relatively the same technical knowledge. However, in most cases the black belt will blow away the purple belt. This is just because of advanced sensivity and timing, and that can only be attained by practicing with other experienced grapplers.

DragonzRage
11-19-2000, 06:41 PM
I guess that we'll just have to agree to disagree on this. But in any case, it is an interesting thing to think about. I still stand by my opinion that participating in the free exchange of martial arts knowledge can only benefit your style and the martial arts in general. As for some other points you made, i think the assumption that you have to study Gung fu for 15-20 yrs in order to get any good is nothing more than the biggest fallacy that many traditionalists have been hiding under for a long time. The idea that you have to dedicate 15 yrs before seeing any real progress is quite frankly ridiculous considering the fact that you can train 3 yrs in many other methods and come out prepared to deal with 98% of traditionalists who've been studying their arts for close to 20 yrs. If you go to any Gung fu school that is serious about fighting I don't think that any of them would tell you that you'd have to study for two decades before you'd be able to fight well. The Gung fu of anicent China was used to prepare warriors for real battle. You think any of those fighters had 20 yrs to spend learning how to fight?? That would be pretty ridiculous, especially in a wartime situation. Also, to call stuff like Bjj "a rock tied to stick" while Gung fu is "the sword" you had better first be able to prove that the sword is sharp! Find me someone who's been studying your style for 15 yrs and have him go kick a skilled MMA fighter's a$$. Then you can talk about how much more refined gung fu is. But until that happens, talk is cheap.

There is only one martial art.

LEGEND
11-19-2000, 07:31 PM
MA FU YEE...I actually agree with his thread...I actually predicted his thread years ago...when a style gets out there...peeps will pick it up and crosstrain...some will not necessarily study the style hard core but will develop effective counters to it! This is not to say BJJ is no longer effective...it's just that it can be countered...

Many standup stylists know that for a PURE BJJ GUY to be effective he needs to take down the striker...standup strikers...learn wrestling and how to counter takedowns...then strike back hard...
Of course BJJ guys figure this out...they work harder on their fients and entry and takedowns...to counter the sprawl etc...

I actually still hope MMA doesn't become MAIN STREAM...imagine a society of pure warriors??? Man you'll have streetfighters everywhere...

A

jojitsu27
11-19-2000, 08:10 PM
And what people here in the US don't realize is that the Brazilian jujitsu fighters in Brazil are constantly coming up with new techniques and counters to common bjj techniques. That is why it is so hard to actually beat brazilians from brazil at a BJJ match. They are constantly innovating new techniques, escapes, and reversals.
-jojitsu27

MaFuYee
11-19-2000, 08:23 PM
to everyone.
thanks for your replies...but, i still think that in general, KF is more refined than BJJ at it's higher levels. - but, granted, there aren't many that are able to reach those levels; probably myself included.

to say that you can really learn a system of KF in a few years, training like most of us do, today, in our 'modern' society; i think, is a greater fallacy, than thinking it takes 15-20 years to gain proficiency in an art. - it does, unless you train like they did in the old days. (then maybe you can cut the time drastically, to say 3-5 years. - but, realistically, very few of us have that luxury, of not needing a full time job to support ourselves.) - also, like i mentioned previously, you can train for 40 yrs and still suck eggs. - to get really good at KF takes an extraordinary effort.

i'll agree that training in BJJ, you can get fairly proficient at it in a few years. - but the same goes for boxing, muay thai, JKD, etc. (not to say that you wouldn't get better, the longer you practice.)

but if you think that somehow, that makes BJJ 'superior' - i'll have to disagree. BJJ works good for UFC/NHB type events. but, in the street, rarely is a confrontation 1 on 1, and you just can't afford to take a fight to the ground. (also, i always carry a blade on my person. can you afford to try and take me down then? - and don't think that if i plan on using it, that you will know about it. - i understand the importance of 'surprise'.)

in a fight, the last place that i would want to be is on the ground. - if i was trying to deal with one person, while rolling around on asphalt and broken glass, i would be foolish to assume that the person doesn't have friends with him. and on the other side of the coin, if i were taken to the ground, there is a good chance that that is when my friend would come with a beer bottle to the guy's head. - that is the "Reality" of the streets. - that's why i think it is so funny that BJJ'ers think that KF guys are the ones not dealing with "Reality".

-lets also take into account the types of people that certain arts draw. - certainly this is a generalization, but, people like to generalise about the types that take tai chi, so turnaround is fair play. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BJJ IMO seems to attract big, muscle bound guys that are into 'fighting', and want to 'fight'. - like they have something to prove. - i think KF gets lots of guys that are into many things besides fighting, such as personal development, health, the artistic aspect, etc. (hence the 'juice bag' look vs the 'beer gut' look. (more generalisations.))

but, lets say that someone decided to document one's system for public dissemination; do you think that the gracies would incorporate that into their curriculum? - i doubt it. - they may train to fight against their tactics, but, that wouldn't really change/"improve" the art. (e.g. they wouldn't start practicing high kicks - as a poor example.)

lets take iron palm as another example. - certainly, any mixed martial artist can learn it, and it would be to great advantage in the ring. but first, they would have to acknowledge it's effectiveness in their own minds, before they would come to the conclusion that it is worth training in. - now, who couldn't use more powerful strikes as a fighter? - so why don't they? - anyone can go buy brian gray's books/videos or wing lam's etc. etc.

now kung fu, also embraces philosophy, in many cases, and it is part and parcel of it... and a KF teacher may not teach a student iron palm, if they feel that they would go out and use it for 'base' purposes. (as it would bring 'dishonor' to the school.)

now, i am not saying that this is the case, but, perhaps a BJJ instructor won't take something like this into account. - he'll teach some guy, that will use the knowledge to go around picking fights. - but to reduce the possibility of that, many systems of KF used to put their students through a "test" phase to judge their character (sometimes for years).

how bad would it be if your local school bully was well versed in techniques meant to maim and kill? - that would suck. - e.g. i can show someone how to snap someones neck, and that requires very little skill or strength. - a person with little skill can do it against another of little skill. but, in a case of a regular HS school yard fight, wouldn't it be better if neither knew how?

when you put out that kind of information for anyone to see, (just like you can learn how to make bombs off of the internet.) you can potentially ever now and again end up with situations like that of columbine HS. (i am perhaps giving an extreme example, but hopefully you get the idea.)

what about the issue of responsibility

Master Po
11-19-2000, 09:03 PM
I have issue with two points.

One: Typicly BJJ has a reputation of drawing skinny people who saw Royce beat large opponents. Larger muscle bound people are steriotypicly wresters. Of couse these are sterio types and not always true but BJJers dont have the reputaion of being large people.

Two: I feel that advanced levels of BJJ (not MMA or NHB) are more technical and percise then most kung fu. Again this is my opinion and you dont have to agree. Even at the black belt level (about 8-10 years)BJJ becomes a matter of inches with matches won or lost due to leverage one inch or less different. This is one of the things that makes BJJ great for older people. Its good to start young though.

I totally respect kung fu and all martial arts but this disrespect you guys give to other arts is sad and really shows a lack of training and expirence. Does your sifu know you act like that??? Are you still in your "testing" phase?? /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Just kidding with that last line

MaFuYee
11-19-2000, 09:20 PM
i dunno about that. - none of my BJJ friends are 'skinny' - quite the opposite. - and why would someone who is 'skinny' want to wrestle with a larger guy?

as far as disrespecting BJJ - i gave my Opinion, which i am entitled to. - i did not say that it is without merit.

* and, it's not like we haven't heard BJJ's side of the argument. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

GinSueDog
11-19-2000, 09:31 PM
Personally, I don't see how always training and sparring with little guys all the time is going to help you out in a street fight against that drunk guy built like Tank Abbott. I perfer to train and spar with guys that are more physically built along the same lines as someone I may have to fight for real. Otherwise what's the point? So if big guys like to train in BJJ, all the better as I see it. I don't think that any system should take longer then a few years at most to allow me to use it to defend myself, again otherwise what is the point, I am not looking at it as a career, only as a means to allow me to defend myself against a attacker, whether bigger or smaller. I really think the problem with Kung Fu is with the training methods used, it just shouldn't take ten years to be able to use it to defend yourself, and alot of the Kung Fu guys I've seen locally still would not be able to stop a smaller first year Muay Thai or BJJ student from working them. Isn't there less then a dozen schools that field San Shou teams, and isn't one of the best San Shou fighters and trainers a TKD guy? At least that is what I got off of Chung Le's website. The says alot, almost every BJJ school I've seen has its own team or holds a open tournment, something else to think about. It is the training that makes the fighter, it really doesn't matter what techniques BJJ gives away if the person facing it isn't trained at the same or higher intensity they are going to lose no matter how many terms they know. One of the other differences with BJJ and Kung Fu nowadays is the fact that most BJJ schools compare there level against other BJJ schools openly, something I just don't see Kung Fu ever doing.-ED

P.S.-Max and Paul, great posts guys. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

"The grappling arts imply most fights end up on the ground...take them there. The striking arts imply all fights start standing up...keep them there. The mixed martial arts imply any fight can go anywhere...be ready and able to go everywhere."-a mix martial artist

GinSueDog
11-19-2000, 09:35 PM
BTW, I totally agree the biggest guys I've trained with on average weren't Thai Boxers or guys in JKD but were BJJ guys. It does seem to attract some big dudes.-ED

"The grappling arts imply most fights end up on the ground...take them there. The striking arts imply all fights start standing up...keep them there. The mixed martial arts imply any fight can go anywhere...be ready and able to go everywhere."-a mix martial artist

MaFuYee
11-19-2000, 10:05 PM
ginsu,
i think people should always assume your opponent is going to be bigger, stronger, and faster than yourself. - what i was saying about the skinny guy, is that if a 'skinny' little guy is going to fight a bigger guy, then perhaps WRESTLING wouldn't be his best bet. - in training, always go against the bigger guy, but in a real fight... pick up a broken bottle...

if you feel that an art shouldn't take a long time to gain proficiency in, then, it's a good thing you study BJJ. - may i also suggest escrima - i found it to be excellent for weapons work. - i also like dan inosanto's silat - probably the closest art to "kung fu" that i know of.

from what i have seen, KF takes a long time, and lots of dedication. - more so than BJJ.

the closest thing to a 'fast learning' kung fu system would probably be wing chun.

* i do see MA as a 'career' thing, - not that i plan on making my living doing it, but rather, it is just something that i'll do until i can't do it no more. (like if i am in a box, 6 ft under.)

GhostDog
11-20-2000, 01:47 AM
MaFuYee you seem to be making all these claims about BJJ, but have you actually trained in it ? It sure doesn't sound like it. A few points:
"thanks for your replies...but, i still think that in general, KF is more refined than BJJ at it's higher levels. - but, granted, there aren't many that are able to reach those levels; probably myself included. "
Why do you think this ? Have you ever trained in BJJ ? How could you know unless you had trained in both ? I see a lot of martial artists' (CMA's included) faces light up when they see just how technical and deep BJJ really is. It's like a whole new world has opened up for them - it was certainly like that for me.

"but, in the street, rarely is a confrontation 1 on 1, and you just can't afford to take a fight to the ground .... in a fight, the last place that i would want to be is on the ground. - if i was trying to deal with one person, while rolling around on asphalt and broken glass"

In my BJJ class at least, I teach to take the guy out standing first before going to ground. Most of the people who train with me already have background arts in stand-up styles anyway. Where do you get all this stuff about confrontations always being multiple attackers, or there always being broken glass over the asphalt ?
Let's be a bit realistic here, if all you get out of a streetfight is skinned knees, then I think you've come out of it okay, and NO art can guarantee that you will survive a multiple attack. From my own experience from watching a lot of fights and being in some of them whilst working as a bouncer, most fights only last a few seconds and if they go any longer then they will usually end up on the ground anyway. This is also the opinion of Geoff Thompson who has been in over 300 fights. So whether you want to fight on the ground is irrelevant since it's most probably going to go there anyway. Regarding the use of weapons, if you have ever trained with a skilled BJJ'er, then you'll find that once he is on top of you he will be so tight that you won't be able to move your arms unless he lets you so he can armlock you, and unless you're a superior wrestler he's going to be the guy on top in a fight.

"BJJ IMO seems to attract big, muscle bound guys that are into 'fighting', and want to 'fight'. - like they have something to prove. "
Not true, you'll find that most of the guy are less than 75kg. Look at a BJJ tournament and you'll find most of the guys in the middle to lighter weight ranges, with a lot less guys over 90kg. So what if they are into "fighting" anyway, that is what martial arts are about right ?

"from what i have seen, KF takes a long time, and lots of dedication. - more so than BJJ. "
Kung Fu might take longer to become proficient at it, but as to the dedication, I doubt it. Every BJJ class you train in will be a blow to your ego, as you will be tapping out a lot. Every class will involve hard work and sweat, getting squashed, and crushed, having someone drive their shoulder into your jaw, having someone knee-riding your stomach or chest or face. To stay and to thrive in this condition takes a lot of hard work and a hell of a lot of dedication. Here's an Ad for a Jiujitsu school in Sao Paulo, Brazil that best explains it:

All the hours spent watching TV will be replaced by training. Instead of your good smelling girlfriend, you will be rolling around with bad smelling, sweaty men.Your ears will become deformed until they look like cauliflowers. Your fingers will become callous and your joints will hurt, your knees and ankles will never be the same again.* Yet, you will be able to practice JiuJitsu and you WILL love it!

rogue
11-20-2000, 04:37 AM
"All the hours spent watching TV will be replaced by training. Instead of your good smelling girlfriend, you will be rolling around with bad smelling, sweaty men.Your ears will become deformed until they look like cauliflowers. Your fingers will become callous and your joints will hurt, your knees and ankles will never be the same again. Yet, you will be able to practice JiuJitsu and you WILL love it!"

Yahoo! Sign me up!!! If I act now can I get a good swift kick to the nuts thrown in too!!! That's just too funny, but hey I guess they'll be some good smelling gals available down San Paulo way!

I used to be daga

reemul
11-20-2000, 01:20 PM
With regard to Shaolin animal systems, They have been guarded for centuries and are less prevalent
then the yellow pages portray. This is also why BJJ and the like have misconceptions about such practioners, because in truth they have most likely never faced one. This is evident in the belief that they are "stand up" fighters. Shaolin practioners are fighters in general. The purpose of guarded material is to keep *******es from becoming deadly *******es, keeping the system strong by extending its lineage(not franchising schools across the globe).

CMA's and BJJ practioners posses contrasting philisophical beliefs. BJJ practioners have a tendency to want to prove themselves or prove their art, whereas CMA's practioners seek to improve themselves through their art. Which is why Shaolin and other CMA's do not generally fight
in such base tournaments as UFC/NHB, for there is nothing of worth to gain.

I would imagine the BJJ'ers will continue to call out CMA's to prove themselves, and it is certain these challenges will continue to be ignored.

jojitsu27
11-20-2000, 03:53 PM
>>>>CMA's and BJJ practioners posses contrasting philisophical beliefs. BJJ practioners have a tendency to want to prove themselves or prove their art, whereas CMA's practioners seek to improve themselves through their art. Which is why Shaolin and other CMA's do not generally fight
in such base tournaments as UFC/NHB, for there is nothing of worth to gain.

LOL!!!
I think the truth is that BJJ practitioners have the ABILITY to prove themselves and their art in public fights like NHB, and thus do so. Kung Fu practitioners, who study martial arts more as a martial ART and less as a MARTIAL art are more concerned with how good they get their leaping down in Northern Shaolin set #3, or how good they have their energy flowing in ChiGong set#4.
The reason Kung Fu fighters are more introspective with their art, is because the way Kung Fu is practiced today it is more suited towards providing someone with an introspective hobby that provides health, balance, self-defense skills, spiritual and physical balance. The reason BJJ people are more prone to actaually participating in a realistic fighting sport like NHB and MMA is because BJJ simply provides what a good martial art should......hardcore fighting ability in the range of combat that most fights go to....the ground!
-jojitsu27

MaFuYee
11-20-2000, 03:55 PM
sounds good, rogue (used to be daga), lets go to san paulo - i love brazillian chicks! - you can grapple with bad smelling sweaty men if you like, ghost dog... /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif hahaha!

reemul: that post was wayyyy too intelligent for this message board... get thee a beer! quick!

MaFuYee
11-20-2000, 05:03 PM
RE: LOL!!!
>I think the truth is that BJJ practitioners have the ABILITY to prove themselves and their art in public fights like NHB, and thus do so.

* and the EGO, to feel the need to. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

>Kung Fu practitioners, who study martial arts more as a martial ART and less as a MARTIAL art are more concerned with how good they get their leaping down in Northern Shaolin set #3, or how good they have their energy flowing in ChiGong set#4.

* i agree that it has both Yin and Yang; but what's wrong with that? - isn't that just as valid? - afterall, how often do KF guys get into fights? - i haven't gotten into one in many many years. - in fact, none, since i started studying KF. - maybe i'd be getting into fights everyday, if i studied BJJ /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif - since i'd always feel the need to prove myself. :P

>The reason Kung Fu fighters are more introspective with their art, is because the way Kung Fu is practiced today it is more suited towards providing someone with an introspective hobby that provides health, balance, self-defense skills, spiritual and physical balance. The reason BJJ people are more prone to actaually participating in a realistic fighting sport like NHB and MMA is because BJJ simply provides what a good martial art should......hardcore fighting ability in the range of combat that most fights go to....the ground!
-jojitsu27

* you make it sound like there is something wrong with being 'civilised'. /infopop/emoticons/icon_confused.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

re: 'most fights go to the ground' - yeah, most people don't know how to fight; so they just end up rolling around like dogs, in the dirt. HAHAHAHAA!!!!!! (*dodging the tomatoes*) /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_mad.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

GinSueDog
11-20-2000, 06:21 PM
Come on now, the way Kung Fu students and Sifu's of late bag on TKD and Wushu and whatever else. Don't tell me Kung Fu students and Sifu's don't have an ego. The difference is BJJ students and instructors are open about there ability, they are willing to roll or spar anytime and if they lose, they lose and attempt to learn from there mistake, Kung Fu in general and this does not apply to everyone, perfer to rely on the pass to prove there ability and to keep there inability hidden. Otherwise why are Kung Fu guys always posting excuses? I have met more then a few Kung Fu students and sadly instructors who fall into this category. I must say a number of individuals here have changed my mind and impressed me more then a few times about there training and style of Kung Fu, not to mention there open minds. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

"The grappling arts imply most fights end up on the ground...take them there. The striking arts imply all fights start standing up...keep them there. The mixed martial arts imply any fight can go anywhere...be ready and able to go everywhere."-a mix martial artist

Paul DiMarino
11-20-2000, 07:15 PM
Shhhh, Ed. You're ruining their cover!

GinSueDog
11-20-2000, 07:31 PM
Oops...I just can't seem to keep a secret, **** it;)

ED

"The grappling arts imply most fights end up on the ground...take them there. The striking arts imply all fights start standing up...keep them there. The mixed martial arts imply any fight can go anywhere...be ready and able to go everywhere."-a mix martial artist

MaFuYee
11-20-2000, 08:18 PM
i'll grant you, everyone has an ego to some extent or another. - you'll find no agrument from me there. - i'll also volunteer that when it comes to "kung fu schools", you'll find they run the gammut, from lousy, to phenomenal, and everything in between. - (in a pyramid structure, with lousy schools being the most common to really good schools being next to non-existant.)

but, to lump all kung fu schools, students, and instructors into the same generic pigeon hole, is a bit unfair. - perhaps your experiences have left you with a less than favorable impression, but, please don't let that limit you to exclude kung fu in general, in your search for martial arts greatness. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif (i've seen my fair share of kung fu schools that left me with less than a stellar impression. - but i still know that good instruction can still be had, if you are lucky enough, and if you search hard enough. - and yes, manytimes, the yellowpages just doesn't cut it.)

but, again, the initial purpose of the post was not to argue which was better, but rather to discuss the issue of openly sharing a style, vs. a more closed attitutde.

e.g. i study tai chi, and almost 10 out of 10 people i ask, (who study tai chi) don't know crap about the martial applications, even if their school professes to teach the martial side.

now, this can work as an argument in your favor, as in, 'see, that is why there should be a free sharing of knowledge...' but, on the other hand, why should i even care, the less people that know, the more 'valuable' the real knowledge is.

e.g. nuclear bombs - if you are the only possesor of this technology, - it makes it more of an assest, than if everyone had the technology. (right?) - what would be my motivation to share this information? - granted, those countries without the capabilities might b*tch and moan, 'hey, that's not fair...' and they may try to steal that technology... but, would it have 'strengthened' the U.S. to have shared it with everyone, back in 1942?!? - no, that would have weakened their position - and that is my argument, that BJJ has 'weakened' their art by making their knowledge public domain. - how much of an easier time would BJJ'ers have had in the UFC if they didn't so freely share their system(?) - (meaning muay thai, tkd, karate guys, etc. would have had to discover how to beat their strategy through trial and error. - good luck.)

* before chang tung shens death, many of his students tried to prod him into sharing more of the system with them, arguing that if he didn't, the art might 'die out'... to which he replied, if it dies out, then, it dies out in my family name. - that was his attitude, whether it was right or wrong, is only a matter of opinion. - better to keep it 'pure' and at a high level, than to let the art's reputation fall into the hands of less than capable students who would only drive the art into the dirt anyway.

perhaps the problem is that you are trying to understand an eastern viewpoint from a western mindset. - maybe instead of trying to make it fit into the western 'mold' - try to understand the eastern rationale instead. - perhaps you'll find it is not so 'backwards and outdated' as you may have once presumed

GinSueDog
11-20-2000, 08:31 PM
Just wanted to point out that because the Russians were able to steal the secret of how to make an Atomic bomb. It forced the United States to improve our own Atomic bomb, advancing that technology and throwing us into the space age. I think the same goes for BJJ or Muay Thai or whatever style that is open, you can only improve it if you maintain the same standard but allow others access to test it. The Gracies can now claim that yes they aren't on top anymore but every stylist that has beaten them has had to learn BJJ first to one degree or another and that says something I think.-ED

BTW, I am aware of how to think asian I think since I am Thai, unless that doesn't count anymore?

"The grappling arts imply most fights end up on the ground...take them there. The striking arts imply all fights start standing up...keep them there. The mixed martial arts imply any fight can go anywhere...be ready and able to go everywhere."-a mix martial artist

MaFuYee
11-20-2000, 09:16 PM
the graices say that they are no longer on top of the proverbial food chain?!?! - HA! it must be a cold day in hell. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

but, then you just proved my point - they have weakened their art. - now that everyone knows it, they can kick their arses! /infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

let's just say, much of the world has yet to see what some CMA's can do. (and perhaps they never will.) (afterall, it's not just anyone that can reach the high levels of any CMA. - and the ones that have the disposition to reach those levels, are usually above the NHB type of stuff, it seems.)

if you will recall, they tried that whole KF fighting tournament in china and taiwan, back in the early to mid 1900's (my memory ain't what it used to be.) - the problem is that they had to stop them, as too many people were getting seriously hurt, and even dying; and china was losing some of their best martial artists.

yes, many people still use that "my art is too deadly", excuse to "hide their inability", but the fact of the matter is, that the stuff is not designed to 'submit' the other person, it is meant to maim and kill as quickly as possible, with as little effort as possible.

yes, i think a skilled KF person should have no problem winning a UFC (i have yet to see a 'skilled' KF guy enter one.) - but, the question remains, would this skilled person have no qualms about using 90% of his techniques? - arm breaks, neck breaks, dim mak, etc. (many dim mak techniques are easier than you might think.) being that it is not a life and death situation.

would you have no problem doing those things to some guy you don't even know, or really have anything against... just to prove a point? - one may argue, that if his skill is high enough, he should be able to stop his opponent without hurting him. - true, but, it would be more difficult, and that would cause him to 'lose face' were he to lose, because he was trying to be 'kind' to his 'enemy'. - so it is almost a 'lose - lose' situation.

** and i believe that man's limit for fighting ability has already been reached, by the likes of some of the 'old masters' - the last living one, having been chang tung shen. - once the invention of the gun came along, there was little reason for anyone to work that hard to acquire the skills, so the focus changed to more the artistic aspects.

perhaps if these UFC's go on for another few hundred years, they may one day 're-discover' "kung fu". till then, 'stone tied to stick' it is.

/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

*** as for being thai... do you drink tabasco sauce to cool down in the summer ;

reemul
11-21-2000, 12:02 PM
I am a Northern Shaolin animal practioner. At our school we fight. Our general rule is don't purposely end anyones carreer.

I also have friends who do BJJ, JKD and we spar, fight, test skills, what ever you want to call it. 90 percent of the time the advantage is mine.

So tell me once again, how we don't train to fight, or perhaps explain to my friends why the leap in section #4 has no bearing my success.

There is a fundamental difference in philosophy
between East and West and you, Jojitsu have demonstrated the misconception of most westerners
in attempting to apply western thinking to eastern
philosophy

>I think the truth is that BJJ practitioners have the ABILITY to prove themselves and their art in public fights like NHB, and thus do so. Kung Fu practitioners, who study martial arts more as a martial ART and less as a MARTIAL art are more concerned with how good they get their leaping down in Northern Shaolin set #3, or how good they have their energy flowing in ChiGong set#4.

The previous statement shows your lack of understanding of Eastern philosophy. How can you understand CMA's without the basic principles of there meaning, the philosphy behind it.

Paul DiMarino
11-21-2000, 03:21 PM
Okay, all you holier than thou types. I think you need a history lesson on the origins of kung fu as well as all the challenge matches that were fought in kung fu's heyday in China. No false styles were tolerated because they'd be whiped out in challenge combat. The same masters that you so revere did exactly what the BJJ, JKD, MMA type guys are doing now. Training hard and testing their art in combat. The day an art stops evolving, it is dead. Plain and simple.

jojitsu27
11-21-2000, 04:11 PM
Paul said it.....The day an art stops evolving it is dead!
That's all I want from Kung Fu practitioners....to start testing their art again like their forefathers did, like the people who developed the styles did, and thus make the art alive again!
NHB is the perfect realm for Kung Fu practitioners to do so! There are enough techniques allowed in NHB that any Kung Fu man should be able to go in and try out 98% of his main arsenal. All kicks, punches, grappling moves, blocks are legal! You just have to watch the eye gouging and biting, and I'm sure that that stuff is only a small part of most of your styles as it is mine.
>>>>The previous statement shows your lack of understanding of Eastern philosophy. How can you understand CMA's without the basic principles of there meaning, the philosphy behind it.

Is that what you would've said to the Wing Chun master in ancient China who traveled all over asia challenging other martial arts to duels? That he didn't have an understanding of eastern philosophy because he was trying to better himself and his art through actual physical combat?

-jojitsu27

Master Po
11-21-2000, 04:20 PM
Paul, stop making sence ****it!! You might lock up the board. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Anyway I have always felt being able to "submit" or control someone without having to kill or permanantly hurt them was one of the strong points of jiu-jitsu. (or judo, aikido, aiki-jitsu, ect.) Thats not to say there arn't deadly techniques in all these arts but you have the option of choosing how much damage to do to an opponent. I think this is a very civilized outlook on martial arts. I suppose when kung fu catches up to jiu-jitsu and becomes more technical they may become more civilized and incorperate more control techniques. Untill then kung fu will remain an uncivilzed and unrefined rock on a stick. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Sarcasm Alert!

Tigerstyle
11-21-2000, 06:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>...yes, many people still use that "my art is too deadly", excuse to "hide their inability", but the fact of the matter is, that the stuff is not designed to 'submit' the other person, it is meant to maim and kill as quickly as possible, with as little effort as possible.[/quote]
"Submissions" in BJJ are "maiming" and "killing" moves applied short of maiming and killing. You don't even need to alter the move to activate the "deadly" effects, just apply a little more/explosive force.

Ex. A short armbar (BTW: What's the long armbar /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ) isn't just a lock that causes pain and inconvenience to the opponent. It is designed to break/separate the elbow (or shoulder).

Ex. Chokes aren't just for causing nap time. They restrict the flow of blood/oxygen to the brain. The effects occur within seconds (3-5 for unconsiousness, not much longer for death/permenent damage). When was that no longer considered deadly?

BTW: I see some really good points from all sides on this thread, but I tend to agree with the open sharing of knowledge thing because it forces you to raise the bar for your skill level. Nothing wrong with that. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

DragonzRage
11-21-2000, 09:25 PM
"I tend to agree with the open sharing of knowledge thing because it forces you to raise the bar for your skill level. Nothing wrong with that."

Very well put! Precisely what I was thinking.

There is only one martial art.

LEGEND
11-21-2000, 09:50 PM
One of the statements that trip me out from being here was "I rather believe in a system that work 10000 years ago than what I see on TV"! Okkkkkkkkkkkkkkk...my problem is...what exactly happen 10000 years ago??? Didn't many great martial artists or uhhhhhhhhh dreamy believe that they were sooooooo good that they could defeat the ENGLISH...BOXER REVOLUTION...buying into the myth caused many CHINESE to get SHOT!!! Try it...don't buy it!

A

kull
11-22-2000, 07:34 AM
legend, what myth are u talking about? English and the foriegn invaders defeated the boxers b/c they have guns, not b/c they have better martial artist. That is bad example.

Unless you refer to how the boxers lured men into the rebellion with such statements like, "heaven is on our side, bullets can't penetrate our good fortune." Yes i have read about them. But these statements are in principle no diff. than how your country(USA)? lured tens of thousands of your young men to a crusade against "communism the evil empire" that ultimately was non-consequential. But that is how gov't mobilise people to sacrifice for war. It has nothing to do with skill in martial arts.

reemul
11-22-2000, 01:32 PM
The Shaolin have never openly challenged or accepted challeges unless forced. This goes against Buddhist teachings. Shaolin however are not blind to what goes on in the world (i.e. other styles) and to be honest the styles of BJJ and the like are nothing new. Now as I said I have friends who study other systems and we do test our skills, but I am not so base as to go to a school and throwdown challenges or wast my time entering tournaments the likes of UFC or NHB, which serve no purpose other than to feed your ego, and if I sought financial gain, hell, I would go into Boxing, there is a hell of a lot more money there
and you have less matches. I have better things to do with my time than worry about how many people I can beat up or to prove to others that I can fight. Some of you talk alot about CMA, but you know very little about them. There is a wide degree of ability and effectiveness throughout the spectrum of CMA and it seems your speculation is based on the most inadequate examples

reemul
11-22-2000, 01:56 PM
I don't believe that anyone eluded to BJJ not haveing any "kill moves" or not being effective.
The problem is the realm in which the contest is waged.

Submission techniques can be altered to produce
deadly results, but in a "contest" (ufc/nhb) these techniques are "pulled" or "held back" so as not to reder death. These techniques although "pulled" are enough to incapcitate your opponent. That is why the term "submission technique" is used.

The crushing of the lyrnax through striking does not offer such a comfort zone. IF you "pull" it, it will not incompacitate your opponent. If you don't, it could kill him.

As for kungfu not being civilized, I can only speak for the few "True Shaolin" when I say: We are not the ones bashing each others teeth out in a ring to make a buck and be cool for a day.

Shaolin kungfu was forged from War for War not ego triping in an octagon.

Buddha Bless you

shawn28
11-22-2000, 04:33 PM
IMHO its not the style but
the individual. I think
if you put time and effort
into your style, you will
be amazed what you will find
out in your forms and techniques..