Kung Fu?

[Knife Hand Man]

Kung Fu has always interested me and i wondered if someone could tell me a little bit about it

[Andy Murray]

Hi Knife Hand Man, welcome to MAP.

You've asked a huge question there.

There are certainly hundreds, possibly thousands of different styles of Kung fu, with perhaps four main sub-divisions.

Northern, Southern, Internal and External systems.

Northern systems tend to have high kicks, Southern systems tend to use lower stances and may sometimes resemble Karate.

Internal systems such as Tai Chi Chuan are largely concerned with health, where the External systems promote the removal of it. :D

There are countless specious arguements to be found regarding the origins/effectiveness of the various Kung Fu systems, so don't believe everything you read about it.

There's enough material in this forum alone to keep you busy for a while!

Njoy. :D

[shoushuer]

http://www.shaolin.com/page.asp?content_id=973

[Hakko-Ryu]

"Northern systems tend to have high kicks, Southern systems tend to use lower stances and may sometimes resemble Karate."

I just recently read that that statement is a misconception Andy! Thought it was true also...
from the phrase "nan-quan, bei tui (southern fist, northern legs)"....I guess the misconception came from back in the days when so called kung-fu "masters" who weren't that highly educated translated the phrase to literally mean, south fist, northern legs..
Nan quan bei tui is a "hu wen zhu yi" idiomatic form which meant the meanings are interchangeable or can be read in different ways....for ex it could mean "nan tui, bei quan" . The classification and generalization of CMA into "Northern" and "Southern" was just a way for people to simplify the many hundreds of styles that existed. to prove this point for ex. Hun gar and Choy lay fut both southern styles, has many kicks involved in the system and Hsing-i, a northern style, emphasise on narrower stances and less to very little kicking. Baji quan, also a northern style, can very much resemble the strengths and explosiveness in some Karate katas.
I got all this from reading Adam Hsu's book "The Sword Polisher's Record: The way of Kung-fu". I HIGHLY HIGHLY HIGHLY HIGHLY recommend this book whether you've just started Chinese Martial Arts or a veteran of it. I guarantee you will learn something from it. So knife hand man...In my opinion, getting your hands on this book would be a very good place to start if you're interested in Chinese Martial Arts. His book explains how to get you started in searching for the right teachers, how to discern THE MANY MANY fake so called "masters" and tell from a real genuine authentic master, and goes through the basic training you need to aquire which is necessary for your development in Kung-fu...try amazon.com...it's only like 7 or 8 bucks US. again, I can't emphasise enough how much this book has opened my eyes even more to the treasures and beauty behind the now often time misconceived and dying (In my opinion) art of Kung-fu.

[keef]

I totally agree with Hakko-Ryu of the misconceptions between Northern & Southern Styles and also HIGHLY recommend the book "The Sword Polisher's Record: The way of Kung-fu", which is the best Martial related book I have read to date. My Sifu advised me to get a copy and it was the best money I have spent on a book and reinformed my choices within the Kung Fu and Martial Art world and carmed my mind, ie. Have I choosen the right style for me etc etc etc that alot of us all go through!

Keef

[Andy Murray]

Through my own extensive research on Kung Fu styles and systems, I stand by my original comment.
It's not a misconception, merely an oversimplification.

Take a look at Okinawan Karate, Shori Te etc, and tell me you can't see the similarities however.

[David]

Sword Polisher's Record was the first MA book I bought. Not sure I want to read it again, though.

"Southern styles have low stances": mine has a high stance :)

Kungfu big subject. Find out what schools there are in your area and then get to discussing the merits/appropriateness of each.

Rgds,
David

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by Andy Murray

This is what I said;
Southern systems tend to use lower stances

Wing Chun is a Southern system, yet it's stance would be considered high .

[Hakko-Ryu]

Originally posted by David
Sword Polisher's Record was the first MA book I bought. Not sure I want to read it again, though.

what's your take on the book David??

[David]

(Andy, I'd say it the same as you!)

Hakko-R, Sword Polisher's Record: -
What it is: Adam Hsu's magazine articles collected into a book. Well written, easy to read, random, style-biased.

Great for what it is, and like many magazine articles, I read a number of the chapters over and again, enjoying them. Where I'm coming from, critically, is that it's about as biased and diluted as any magazine article you could find. Nicely written but too general on one hand and too style specific on the other. If I was one of his students, I'd be hanging on his every word but there's only so much in it for general consumption

The thing with magazine articles is that their destiny is to be recycled...

Rgds,
David

[jmd161]

Well to give a little more depth to what has been written.

Northern China styles of kung fu tend to have more longrange techniques.The northern chinese ppl tend to be a little larger than the southern chinese people.In that i meant they tend to be taller than their southern counterparts.Also the northern landscape is a little more flat than the southern.So the northern styles tend to have more kicks than the southern styles.

Southern China styles of kung fu prefer inclose fighting.The southern chinese ppl tend to be shorter than their northern counterparts.The southern china landscape was more rocky and uneven so the southern styles focused on a solid stance and more fist techniques.

Not all northern and southern styles adhere to this school of thought though.You have some southern styles that have alot of kicks and you have some northern styles that use alot of fist techniques.I've trained in two southern styles and one northern style.All have used alot of kicks the difference is that in the southern styles we tend to keep the kicks below that waist.

The thing that alot of ppl don't understand is that with the northern style techniques they work just as well inclose as they do at longrange.The idea is still to fully extend the technique to drive thru your opponent.

I hope this kinda helps to answer your question?

If you have anymore just ask and i'll try to answer as many as i can for you.


jeff:)

[shunyadragon]

K(G)ung fu is skills and knowledge acquired through training and practice and not an Art of the Way (Martial Art). What is called Gung fu today is best called Chuan Fa or the modern term Wushu.

[David]

Originally posted by shunyadragon
K(G)ung fu is skills and knowledge acquired through training and practice and not an Art of the Way (Martial Art). What is called Gung fu today is best called Chuan Fa or the modern term Wushu.

A committee couldn't have said it better... but surely you could have used the word 'paradigm' somewhere :D

;)
Rgds,
David

[jmd161]

Originally posted by shunyadragon
K(G)ung fu is skills and knowledge acquired through training and practice and not an Art of the Way (Martial Art). What is called Gung fu today is best called Chuan Fa or the modern term Wushu.

shunyadragon,

That is true what you've posted.But why add to the already big enough problem of people misunderstanding what the word kung fu means? Without explaining what Chaun Fa or Wu Shu actually means?

Kung Fu is a term that people still don't fully grasp.So to add Chaun Fa or Wu Shu to the mix only helps to cause more misunderstanding.I understand you are trying to be technical.But in some cases simple serves better.

Do not take this as a knock against you it's not!

It just that alot of times when you correct things with the proper termonolgy.It futher adds to the problem.Because now what you're going to have is ppl wanting to know what does Chaun Fa mean? And also asking the question of is'nt Wu Shu more of a dance than a martial art?

Those might be the proper terms,but kung fu is the more reconised word the world over.Most ppl outside of martial arts don't know the difference between karate,judo,or taekwondo.
So they could never understand what chaun fa or wu shu is or much less mean.

You have ppl within the martial arts world that don't know that wu shu = war art.They've seen modern wu shu and to them anything with wu shu in it is dance or chinese opera.

So there is nothing wrong with using the proper terms.But if you're going to point out the proper terms? You should also point out why they are the proper terms so that ppl that don't know what chaun fa or wu shu means also have an understanding.


jeff:)

[Ninestep]

Andy, I, for one, think your 'oversimplification' post was a good guide for the uninitiated.
It’s so easy to fall into the trap of 'this style does this and that one does that' as you are no doubt aware.
Novices to training, simply put, must go and look at classes until they find one they like the look of and get on with it.
I have found through the years that it is frankly a waste of time trying to explain anything at all in any detail to prospective students, even those with training under their belts (pun intended). There just are too many questions to answer.
I always tell people who come to look at my class to go and look at several others before they decide, I even tell them where and when and whom to go and see.
If they come back then that’s all well and good and if they don't ditto.
To state with a full stop that so called Northern or Southern does this or that is foolish at best. For example, Cheung- Lai-Chuen of the 'southern' style Pak Mei was a very tall and wiry man, quite the contrary to the fabled 'way' of the style, and on the flip side most of the Korean Hapkido masters are short stocky guys, the opposite of what ought to be required for the jumping kicking ways prevalent in that style, Wing Chun, often termed the 'centreline theory' style, twists and turns and uses bong sau, and so on and so forth ad infinitum.
From my experience, instructors like to embellish their styles particular 'ways' in an attempt to make them stand aside and apart form other styles in order to attract students, which, in commercial terms, is fair enough, but in real terms is usually hype.

Of course then we come to the rub of the student blindly believing everything and anything told to them, which in the case of a novice student without the experience of 'real' fighting is mostly unavoidable, and here, for my money is when the real journey begins, of finding the truth. This doesn't usually happen with those with experience of 'real' fighting, or with experience of combat sports however, as they should have enough idea already if what they are looking at is waving hands at clouds (no disrespect to taiji people intended) or not

[Andy Murray]

Thanks Ninestep.

I had cause to sit down and do some serious thinking about 5 years ago.

I'd been pursuing primarily one CMA system for around 12 years at this point, though I was also doing Kick Boxing and an MMA as well.

No one form of practice was giving me what I wanted, yet in teaching, I felt bound to instruct in the manner I had been taught.

I've more or less come round full circle now.

My own personal interpretation of Kung Fu is not to be bound by any one style or label, but to honour it as a generic term.

So if I take up BJJ, Karate and Eskrima, they will still be part of my Kung Fu.

Should I then at some point decide to start teaching again, I won't be limited by styles etc, only by what I know!

Hope that makes sense.

[Ninestep]

It does make sense, I have this deja vu that I have been where you were/are and have come to that point some years ago, whereby what I teach now is indeed what all I have learn't and not just as I was taught.

[Andy Murray]

Indeed,
if all everyone does is teach what they are taught, then dilution is inevitable, as noone picks up everything.

In order for TMA's and CMA's to survive, they need to evolve. IMHO

That's not to say drop it all and head for the nearest Lycra clad 'fashion of today' Martial Art.

Just ensure that everything taught is understood and placed in the right context.

Everyones needs in development are different, so the more strings on your guitar........................... ;)

[jmd161]

Andy,

I understand what you are saying.

But if those other arts become part of your kung fu?

If/When you decide to teach again? What will you label the style that you are teaching?

If you added all those arts to your kung fu you can't really say you're teaching kung fu.Mixed Martial Arts would be a better title to label you school under.

There is nothing wrong with doing that in any case.I understand also that styles need to evolve. But who's to say that everything you add or take away from what you're teaching is going to work for others?

That's where i think problems come in when ppl think about traditional martial arts.I'm a disciple of black tiger a very rare and traditional style.But ppl think because it's traditional that we don't evolve.

But we do all the time.

The thing is we teach the old school way that has been passed down over the yrs.But we also teach what others have added over the yrs that worked best for them.So we are staying traditional but you have choices.Plus you can always add or subtract any technique you like.We just teach all the different techniques instead of trying to determine what works best for everyone.

Anywho i was just interrested in those questions i asked.



jeff:)

[YODA]

Originally posted by Andy Murray
the nearest Lycra clad 'fashion of today' Martial Art.




{{{Delurk...}}}

HEY! I resemble that remark!

{{{Lurk}}}

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by jmd161


If/When you decide to teach again? What will you label the style that you are teaching?



Kung Fu! Or more specifically, 'Three Dragons Kung Fu'. The titles already set up, and there are three of us studying different areas of MA.



If you added all those arts to your kung fu you can't really say you're teaching kung fu.Mixed Martial Arts would be a better title to label you school under.

MMA is an approach to training, not a style. You mean to tell me that Kung Fu systems didn't evolve originally by nicking bits and peices from other places. Am I likely to offend some god or other? :D



But who's to say that everything you add or take away from what you're teaching is going to work for others?

I'd take away nothing, the choices are up to the students. I would hope I would be able to help them make informed choices, which is what I meant earlier by 'context'.

Never offended by a question well intended, as they further help me clarify the meanderings of me old grey mush. ;)

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by YODA
{{{Delurk...}}}

HEY! I resemble that remark!

{{{Lurk}}}

Merely holding the mirror. The choice to look is yours. :D

[jmd161]

Originally posted by Andy Murray
Kung Fu! Or more specifically, 'Three Dragons Kung Fu'. The titles already set up, and there are three of us studying different areas of MA.

That sounds fair.

But if you're adding let's say BJJ, Karate and Eskrima to your Wing Chun.Then calling it kung fu. Are'nt you helping to add to the misunderstanding ppl have about kung fu?

I ask this because you have many ppl claiming to teach kung fu but what they're teaching is not kung fu.I know ppl will say kung fu breaks down to skill attained in,but most of the world knows kung fu as chinese martial arts.I say this because we have a school here that is a mix of Taekwondo and Shotokan Karate and they claim it's kung fu.That's misleading the public and trying to cash in on the wave of kung fu to me.



Originally posted by Andy Murray
MMA is an approach to training, not a style. You mean to tell me that Kung Fu systems didn't evolve originally by nicking bits and peices from other places. Am I likely to offend some god or other? :D

Well you won't offend any gods:D

But the thing most ppl don't understand about kung fu is this.Even though a cma style may share techniques from another style the flavor and faght are the same.Like Hung Gar for example it shares techniques from White Crane but they carry the Hung Gar faght. It's not done with the same faght or flavor as a White Crane stylist would do.But they are both southern china styles.

How do you do BJJ, Karate and Eskrima with a Wing Chun flavor or Faght? Not only are they different styles,but they are from different regions and cultures as well.


Originally posted by Andy Murray
I'd take away nothing, the choices are up to the students. I would hope I would be able to help them make informed choices, which is what I meant earlier by 'context'.

Never offended by a question well intended, as they further help me clarify the meanderings of me old grey mush. ;)

Well i'm glad you understand that i'm not trying to cause problems just asking questions.I admit as a traditional martial artist of chinese martial arts.I do have a problem with mixed arts of different regions some that don't contain any CMA calling themselves kung fu!

The reason being.

Not saying that your school would do this.But some schools really give kung fu a bad name around the world.So when they tick off students and others ppl don't usually say well that school suxs! They tend to say kung fu suxs ,and that's a hard thing to live down for real kung fu schools.Many kenpo/kempo schools claim that they teach kung fu but kenpo/kempo is not kung fu.

It's kenpo/kempo and need to be labeled as such so people don't confuse things anymore than they already are.


jeff :)

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by jmd161


But if you're adding let's say BJJ, Karate and Eskrima to your Wing Chun.Then calling it kung fu. Are'nt you helping to add to the misunderstanding ppl have about kung fu?



Maybe I'd be helping people understand what 'Kung Fu/Gung Fu' actually means?



That's misleading the public and trying to cash in on the wave of kung fu to me.

I think that wave broke on the shore some time ago.

How do you do BJJ, Karate and Eskrima with a Wing Chun flavor or Faght? Not only are they different styles,but they are from different regions and cultures as well.

There are more similarities than differences. Offering a 'complete' syllabus allows students to see where everything fits, rather than letting their imaginations run riot.

Not saying that your school would do this.But some schools really give kung fu a bad name around the world.

More than some. I'd say 'most' from what I've seen. Though I've been fortunate enough to see some very good ones too.



Many kenpo/kempo schools claim that they teach kung fu but kenpo/kempo is not kung fu.

I don't know the specifics of this, but if they are working hard (etc), then by my definition, they are doing Kung Fu.

The confusion lies in the labelling.

It's all hypothetical anyway, as I'm a long ways off from putting it all together with any great purpose.

[Sub zero]

I think that ur ideas are very interesting Andy. But why not leave the student to cross train for themselves and only add certain parts of each art that u wish to encompass into "kung fu". Not the enirety of each art.

Or was that what u were intending?

[jmd161]

Originally posted by Andy Murray
There are more similarities than differences. Offering a 'complete' syllabus allows students to see where everything fits, rather than letting their imaginations run riot.

You kinda lost me with that one.

What are the similarities between Bjj and Wing Chun? Or between the others that you mentioned.I could say yeah between Wing Chun and Karate but that's about it.

But that still goes towards what i was saying.You can't do BJJ with Wing Chun's faght.You can't do Wing Chun with BJJ's faght!

I understand that you want to add what you've learned but not all styles match up well.The techniques are different the flavor is different they use different types of power.All those things make for ppl having problems applying techniques.Just because someone knows ahead of time what they are going to learn.Does'nt make learning it any easier than not knowing ahead of time.

This is just a discussion so don't take any of this the wrong way please!




jeff:)

[Ninestep]

jmd161 posts : "Like Hung Gar for example it shares techniques from White Crane but they carry the Hung Gar faght. It's not done with the same faght or flavor as a White Crane stylist would do.But they are both southern china styles"

I think that here, you are qualifying by the above, exactly the problems inherent with stating such as the above!, by which I mean, I could say, do you allude to Fujian Bai He Quan or Pak Hok or Lions Roar Tibetan Lama Pai when you say White Crane? Too many questions again.
Thus, a technique, in my opinion is a technique, either its the same or its not at all the same. Flavour has nothing to do with it, doing it effectively, or if you like traditonally and correctly is all that matters.
To qualify, what I teach is called Crane, Tiger & Dragon Kung Fu, but it certainly includes techniques from Kali and Judo, and Jujitsu, and boxing, and so I make sure to tell people that it is a mixed system and not a traditonal, lineage based Chinese martial art.

[Ninestep]

jmd161 :

1)"What are the similarities between Bjj and Wing Chun? Or between the others that you mentioned"

2)"I could say yeah between Wing Chun and Karate but that's about it."


Sorry to stick my 'awe' in again but.....

1)Sticking, sensitivity, flow, yielding for advantage, and thats just for starters.

2)Wing Chun (unless practiced very badly indeed) could not resemble karate less, with the possible exception to the eye, of some bunkai within some Okinawan kata.

What is 'faght' ?

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by jmd161
What are the similarities between Bjj and Wing Chun? Or between the others that you mentioned.I could say yeah between Wing Chun and Karate but that's about it.


Wing Chun theory and principles can be applied in BJJ.

I understand that you want to add what you've learned but not all styles match up well.The techniques are different the flavor is different they use different types of power.All those things make for ppl having problems applying techniques.

Seeing the differences is what leads to a greater depth of understanding.

Not offended at all. It's an interesting discussion.

What does 'faght' mean?

[jmd161]

Originally posted by Ninestep
Thus, a technique, in my opinion is a technique, either its the same or its not at all the same. Flavour has nothing to do with it, doing it effectively, or if you like traditonally and correctly is all that matters.

To qualify, what I teach is called Crane, Tiger & Dragon Kung Fu, but it certainly includes techniques from Kali and Judo, and Jujitsu, and boxing, and so I make sure to tell people that it is a mixed system and not a traditonal, lineage based Chinese martial art.


Ninestep,

Flavor has alot to do with applying techniques.You can't expect ppl to go from a deep Hung Gar or Black Tiger stance transition into a Capoeira type technique can you? It's easy to say well i'll mix this technique with this one or this style with that one.But it's not that easy.

Some techniques just don't jive well together.Like me trying to do black tiger from a boxers stance or with a boxers frame of thought.Then you take into account that many teachers/styles add techniques to the mix but don't teach the students how to apply these techniques.

That's the problem i have with so many blending of techniques or styles.Then alot of time the ppl doing the blending are not masters or even sifu/sensei level in many of the styles.You have ppl that take a few yrs here and there and think they know it all.

I'm being general so please no one take offense to the general terms.


jeff:)

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by jmd161

That's the problem i have with so many blending of techniques or styles.Then alot of time the ppl doing the blending are not masters or even sifu/sensei level in many of the styles.You have ppl that take a few yrs here and there and think they know it all.



If it works, it's good?

[jmd161]

Originally posted by Andy Murray
Wing Chun theory and principles can be applied in BJJ.

Well i don't know much about Wing Chun but how do you fit the centerline theory in with BJJ's theories and principles ?

Originally posted by Andy Murray
Seeing the differences is what leads to a greater depth of understanding..

That's fine and dandy for you or i we have experience in martial arts.But How does a newbie see the difference and understand this?.

Originally posted by Andy Murray
Not offended at all. It's an interesting discussion.

What does 'faght' mean?

If it works, it's good?


I agree i'm enjoying this discussion.:D

faht/faght means power but more than just power.It means the type of power internal or soft or hard power.Like Black Tiger and Hung Gar are sister styles.But Hung Gar's faht is totally different from ours.We have the same techniques in some cases but to do Hung Gar with Black Tiger faht is to not understand the principles of Hung Gar thus you would be doing the technique wrong not getting the full effect.

If it works it's good?

Not really!

A blindly thrown punch can work but is that something you want to always do?



jeff:)

[Matt_Bernius]

Originally posted by jmd161
Flavor has alot to do with applying techniques.You can't expect ppl to go from a deep Hung Gar or Black Tiger stance transition into a Capoeira type technique can you? It's easy to say well i'll mix this technique with this one or this style with that one.But it's not that easy. Ironically I did that two nights ago. Now in my case I had dropped into deep stance came out of it with a punch kick combination and the moved into a jenga, threw a wheel kick and then was out of jenga. (First of all I won't say that I did any of that well... but it was what happened to come out at that moment).

Personally I agree with Andy, I think all TMA need to continue to evolve in a sensible way. You shouldn't throw the baby out the with bath water, but as long as your staying true to the principles and tenants of the arts it doesn't matter what techniques you are using. That's the idea that has fueled family styles from the beginning.

Let's face it, most TMA's had stayed stable becuase of cultural and sociological reasons. 100 years ago the chances of a Kung Fu master encountering a Capoerista were next to none. Now we're in one big melting pot. For the most part there are not secrets left. So we all need to learn and adapt to each other.

The Filipino arts are great in that respect (probably because a lot of them are still being used in Combat). I've seen people do exerpts of a "Gun Form" that Grand Tuhon Gaje has worked out for the Pekiti System applying the concepts of Pekiti to drawing and firing pistols in one motion.

That being said, Jeff, your also right in that certain things don't necessarily flow together. And you need a qualified martial artist to understand that. If they don't flow together, then guess what? That person is going to be beaten down trying to use them and the art won't survive it's creator. Even if the hybred is effective, you then need a good instructor to be able to create a syllabus and teaching doctrine that makes it possible to communicate the art to others. And that's even more difficult. But if you can manage those two things, then you've helped play a part in the evolution and propigation of the arts. That's not a bad goal to strive for in one's lifetime.

- Matt

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by jmd161
Well i don't know much about Wing Chun but how do you fit the centerline theory in with BJJ's theories and principles ?


Principles of control, pressure, sensitivity/adaption and aggression.



That's fine and dandy for you or i we have experience in martial arts.But How does a newbie see the difference and understand this?.

They either will, or they won't. People tend to gravitate to the sorts of training that suit them. Some like forms, some like sparring, others seek self defence or self development. There's little point offering all this without a little explanation along the way.





"If it works it's good?"

Not really!

A blindly thrown punch can work but is that something you want to always do?


Not something I'd ever want to do, except in deperation.

I was referring to your comment about people taking a few years at things and coming up with Mumbo Jumbo Fu. I agree with you on this, but it's not what we're discussing.

[jmd161]

Matt,

You are a wise man my friend!

Not because you agreed with me but.............

Oh who am i trying to kid that is why you're a wise man.;)


Just joking that was a great post bro!


Originally posted by Andy Murray
Not something I'd ever want to do, except in deperation.

I was referring to your comment about people taking a few years at things and coming up with Mumbo Jumbo Fu. I agree with you on this, but it's not what we're discussing.




Awwww you're no fun!:D



jeff:)

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by Matt_Bernius
Even if the hybred is effective, you then need a good instructor to be able to create a syllabus and teaching doctrine that makes it possible to communicate the art to others. And that's even more difficult. But if you can manage those two things, then you've helped play a part in the evolution and propigation of the arts. That's not a bad goal to strive for in one's lifetime.

- Matt

I think some people reach a moment in time where they either go for it, quit, or just accept things indefinitely.

Was it Malcolm X who said?

"I have a dream!"

Imagine a CMA where weapons are not only taught in forms, but pressure tested against live opponents.

Every technique and principle can be tested in the same manner.

Internal as well as external fully explained and justified.

Where the labels and history are respected, but not restrictive to practice, or indeed the sole reason thereof.

Where all the sweets in the shop are on offer, and not only can you choose which ones you like, you'll be shown the delights of all!

Someone wake me. :D

[jmd161]

I hear ya bro!


That is indeed a dream.

There is too much politics in Hung Gar,Wing Chun,and Choy Lay fut for that to happen anytime soon.


But hey all it takes is one person to get the wheels moving.



jeff:)

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by Sub zero
I think that ur ideas are very interesting Andy. But why not leave the student to cross train for themselves and only add certain parts of each art that u wish to encompass into "kung fu". Not the enirety of each art.

Or was that what u were intending?

Sorry Sub zero, I missed this post in the stampede of responses.

I'd be happy for any student to crosstrain. All I can offer is what I know, no more and no less. Others might be better suited to them.

I didn't say I'd be offering other arts in their entirety, good god man, I'd need a brain several times the size of my current peanut.

Hopefully later posts have clarified it somewhat.

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by jmd161
I hear ya bro!


That is indeed a dream.

There is too much politics in Hung Gar,Wing Chun,and Choy Lay fut for that to happen anytime soon.


But hey all it takes is one person to get the wheels moving.



jeff:)

So they do it, others follow it, wanna do it themselves,do it themselves, fall out with each other, split into subsections, give it yet another label, make money, diss others, start chat start forum discussions about it etc....................See a pattern? :D

Stop bickering and marketing and get out there and do something you sad sods! :D

[SoKKlab]

Originally posted by Andy Murray
Was it Malcolm X who said?

"I have a dream!"


No it was Martin Luther King (and then they shot him..)

Malcolm X said 'By any means Neccessary' (And then they shot him..)

Great Discussion, but stop posting so much, I'm having ahard time slacking off work and keeping up with the posts!

[Matt_Bernius]

Originally posted by Andy Murray
Was it Malcolm X who said?

"I have a dream!"

Imagine a CMA where weapons are not only taught in forms, but pressure tested against live opponents.

Every technique and principle can be tested in the same manner.

Internal as well as external fully explained and justified.

Where the labels and history are respected, but not restrictive to practice, or indeed the sole reason thereof.
Acutally it was Martin Luther King Jr. But either way, I'm with you 100%. It's the only way to live and train IMHO.

Organizations that propigate arts like Hung Gar are (not unlike unions and other large scale organizations) the best and worst things that can happen to an Art. Change almost always starts from outside and is slowly accepted within for them.

- Matt

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by Matt_Bernius
Acutally it was Martin Luther King Jr.

Dang! I knew that! :rolleyes:

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by SoKKlab

Great Discussion, but stop posting so much, I'm having a hard time slacking off work and keeping up with the posts!

Slackers should be shot! :D

[Sub zero]

Yeh i got that Andy thanks.

Originally posted by Matt_Bernius
Acutally it was Martin Luther King Jr.

Organizations that propigate arts like Hung Gar are (not unlike unions and other large scale organizations) the best and worst things that can happen to an Art. Change almost always starts from outside and is slowly accepted within for them.

- Matt


Got there b4 me with the Jr. thing dam.

I don't quite understand what ur post means (the bit about hung gar etc) could u maybe explain?

[Matt_Bernius]

Originally posted by Sub zero
I don't quite understand what ur post means (the bit about hung gar etc) could u maybe explain? No prob. Basically, Jeff wrote:
There is too much politics in Hung Gar,Wing Chun,and Choy Lay fut for that to happen anytime soon. I was agreing with that. Basically those arts have an number of different organizations whose responisbility is to help protect and popigate the art. And that's a good thing when these organizations are working to help set and maintain high standards and ensure that people are representing the art in a good light. However, often these organization can become very dogmatic and overprotective of the Art (or at least the power they control). And that can be very limiting and detrimental as well. From my experience it takes individuals (often outside the group) to demonstrate that change works and then the organization begins to accept that change.

Basically organization become very good at protecting large groups of people. But by that very nature, it's difficult for them to turn on the edge of a dime. Especially when you consider that it's often a small number of people who are initally trying to invoke those changes. So in that respect an organization isn't necessarily good at meeting the needs of a single unqiue individual.

- Matt

[Sub zero]

ah right.

Personally i think a style should be passed on purely as possible but offcourse alot of changes will take place. If it is discovered that something just doesn't work then take it out or adapt it.

Along with this purity should also be what the persons instructors own interpretations ar and then it should be lef tto the stiudent to make his/ her own mind up.

BUt i still think that along side this the style should be passe don fairly pure.

[Shaolin Dragon]

The problem with keeping a style pure is that even if the instructor can pass on 99% of what he knows and the student can learn 99% of what he is taught (which I find unlikely - after all, we are only human) you are still losing something of the art with each retelling. By adding to our martial arts, we are helping to keep them complete.

[shunyadragon]

Purity is a myth in reality and an unfortunate dead end to any Arts of the Way disapline or style. The Arts of the Way have evolved and changed for over 4000 years at least.

Of course not everyone should change a form at whim, but the evolution and change of the Arts is 'Way' life. Rivers always change their course of time. When we don't change we will go the way of dinosaurs.

The RP of China government has instituted a policy of standardization and purity of form and style in most of the different Arts of the Way in China which is a point of controversy among many people I practice with. There is one of the 'official' Yang Shi Tai Qi forms that varies from the older forms. Some refuse to do that form. They take a break and continue with the sword forms after the official 40 step form.

[Ninestep]

jmd161 : "Flavor has alot to do with applying techniques.You can't expect ppl to go from a deep Hung Gar or Black Tiger stance transition into a Capoeira type technique can you? It's easy to say well i'll mix this technique with this one or this style with that one.But it's not that easy."

I couldn't disagree more. Within the martial arts this sort of thing is easy to do, but hey perhaps I'm just a superstar :-)

"Like me trying to do black tiger from a boxers stance or with a boxers frame of thought"

Clearly boxing is not mechanically or mentally similar to your Black Tiger, (never seen it but educated guess is good enough), however, why? Well if you are ready to be upset for a moment, I will tell you. Boxing is a combat sport proven in the arena and on the street over and over and over again, and Black Tiger Kung Fu, is an art and is not proven on those areas, over and over again.
Thats why they don't mix well,per se. however, adding some of your techniques to boxing would almost certainly make the boxing more rounded if not better (as long as the testing of application remainded within the practical boxing methods).

"Some techniques just don't jive well together"

All techniques that actually work in live or realistic pressure test combat situations, 'jive' well together.

"Then you take into account that many teachers/styles add techniques to the mix but don't teach the students how to apply these techniques."

These people then are not teachers but charlatans, pure and simple.

"That's the problem i have with so many blending of techniques or styles.Then alot of time the ppl doing the blending are not masters or even sifu/sensei level in many of the styles.You have ppl that take a few yrs here and there and think they know it all."

If they are good and their stuff works then so what?
If you took a student and taught him (properly) jab, cross and hook, osoto-gari, rear naked choke, thai leg kicking and thats all, and he was pressure tested constantly on these, what have you got in a fairly short space of time? A fighter who can take out most martial artists without thinking to hard about it. If this student then teaches what has he got? No belts, no sashes, no certificates no sensei or sifu titles.

Perhaps you posts are alluding to 'kung fu know-it-alls' who teach several different traditional systems but in fact know none that well?

[Shortfuse]

how did u all find this informaion in the first place?

[Shortfuse]

wait though isnt one of the points of MA is for self defense? if you find an art that is ineffective in real life situations then isnt it still faulty?

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by Shortfuse
if you find an art that is ineffective in real life situations then isnt it still faulty?

Why do you feel it has to be the art that's at fault, rather than the people who practice it, and/or how they do so?

[Shaolin Dragon]

Not everyone trains for self-defence, either. Many do it for fitness, spirituality and - gasp - fun!
Why should a MA have to fit criteria set by people who aren't practicing it?

[Sub zero]

To shuny dragon:

I sugest u read my post again with more attention to words and phrases including "purely as possible " and .........well the whole post.

What i was trying to say ws that othcourse arts will.adapt. However this should not stop older ways of doing things being taught (altho maby not as much emphisis on aplication). These older ways such as say................ a rear scoop throw in JJ, something that i would never use out on the street but it gives me greater insights into other techniques. And i have been told of people doing throws and tehcniques in street situations that i would never do. (or think i wouldn't).

The bit i wrote about instructors aswell. Think about it. a good practiconer should beable to devise tehcniques or adapt them to their own "faght" (had to use it after that other discussion:D) So the art is growing and changing with over time.

This does not recquire cross training (altho i like to).

As for the standerdisation thing i think that's wrong. Perhaps both should be taught? If the practiconers disagree so stringly wiht the intent of the newer form (remebering that they they don't want to teach both) then they should practice independantly.

Unless teh corections made to me for example from my dunfermilne club and dundee club kung fu ( i originally went to the dunfermline one) i would not chnage it in m head (but maybe for practice purposes for grading etc. and i'm sire my instrucor would not mind this. I will teach the difference but show the aplication of both differing...........aplications of the techniques.

[Sub zero]

Originally posted by Andy Murray
Why do you feel it has to be the art that's at fault, rather than the people who practice it, and/or how they do so?

Completly agree. altho i fitted into TKD i decidd it wan't for me. There are so mnay people i know who didn't like one MA then tried another and absoloutly loved it.

[Shaolin Dragon]

The problem with having non-standardised CMA is that a grading you take with one club will mean nothing in another club. No one likes to think that all their hard work has been for nothing (OK obvious benefits aside, if you move house and end up starting again from scratch).

[shunyadragon]

Your emphasis on "pure as possible" is what I disaggree with.

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by Shaolin Dragon
The problem with having non-standardised CMA is that a grading you take with one club will mean nothing in another club. No one likes to think that all their hard work has been for nothing (OK obvious benefits aside, if you move house and end up starting again from scratch).

When, how and by whom did Kung Fu become standardised?

When, how and by whom were grading systems introduced into Kung Fu?

There's only one person who knows how hard you have worked, and that's you!

[Shaolin Dragon]

I personally do not feel that standardisation is the right way to go for all martial arts. The point I was trying to make is that if you study with an independant class, your knowledge is not worth much should you join a new class, even one of the same style.

[SoKKlab]

Originally posted by Shaolin Dragon
I personally do not feel that standardisation is the right way to go for all martial arts. The point I was trying to make is that if you study with an independant class, your knowledge is not worth much should you join a new class, even one of the same style.

Well, your knowledge may not be worth much in terms of recognised and substantiated 'gradings' and 'testings', but it will be worth a hellofalot to YOU.

[Matt_Bernius]

There does need to be some structure and standardization when it comes to teaching the fundimentals of an art (or concept). Good Martial Artists are not necessarily good teachers. Nor are good teachers necessarily the best Martial Artist. But a good teacher can understand how to break apart concepts and best convey the basics. And all students of the arts need to have rock solid basics in order to continue forward.

I think it's silly to expect that every teacher should have to (or need to) restructure the basics for every generation of students. There will always be revisions. But through standardization there is a guarantee that, in theory, that all the students of a particular school or style, will all have the same tools.

- Matt

[Shaolin Dragon]

Originally posted by SoKKlab
Well, your knowledge may not be worth much in terms of recognised and substantiated 'gradings' and 'testings', but it will be worth a hellofalot to YOU.

I agree, but my point was that it is not necassarily a good thing to keep starting MA from scratch. On the other hand, styles which are standardised on a large scale can have a tendency to stagnate.

[Sub zero]

Originally posted by shunyadragon
Your emphasis on "pure as possible" is what I disaggree with.

The vry core and basics of teh style yes. Other than that whatever (but i don't belive this that stringently my own Kung fu Organisation has changed it's basic stances slightly,some of them, and basic blocks etc

But the core pricnciples stayed the same which is what is important.