When your opponent moves in and tries to knock your head off, a - MMA guy may use low roundhouse kick to interrupt the forward attack. - CMA guy may use foot sweep to interrupt the forward attack. - MMA guy may use left/right hook punches to interrupt the forward attack. - CMA guy may use left/right hay-makers to interrupt the forward attack. - MMA guy may use boxing guard to protect his head. - CMA guy may use rhino guard to protect his head. The difference may not be that much, but it's there.
The experts can explain it better than me. Im pretty sure anyone wanting to know more in this day and age could find out. Then any disagreements can be taken up with them haha.
Are you saying you don't think CMA people use low roundhouse kicks to interrupt a forward attack? Are you saying you don't see MMA guys use "hay-makers." I disagree. We are taught to use roundhouse's at all levels and in all sorts of situations. And I see MMA fights with lots of what you call hay-makers thrown by MMA people. Naw, I think you are drawing distinctions that are not accurate. Although I will agree that I haven't seen a lot of MMA foot sweeps that I can recall.
You said... Yet when we ask about the point being made you can't provide an answer. This isn't meant to come across as a personal attack, but really...
Theories are what they are.... Serge Gracovetsky spoke at length on the idea of the spinal engine back in the day http://wdced.com/2015/12/body-physics-the-spinal-engine/ But it's a bit of a reach to extrapolate that the theory explains movement accurately and that this is an accepted idea in all circles... LFD
OMG. People on MA related Facebook pages are so worked up about this fight! Like really personally invested in the outcome. That is both MMA and TCC people. I am not interested in a Traditional vs MMA discussion myself. I did see a clip on Facebook of the TCC guy doing some form. I wish it was posted on youtube so I could post it here.But it was just on Facebook. I think anyone on Facebook can see it as I am not subscribed to the page. https://www.facebook.com/tinsiki/videos/673236902861223/?hc_ref=NEWSFEED I am trying to think of a way to say this nicely. I am not impressed. (I want to say some Hannibal like things, but I will refrain.) He arches his back back way too far often in the clip. Which is a big no no the way I am trained. His elbows are out and not down. And at other times his arms are up way to high and disconnected from his body. There is a lack of extension in his "strikes." His knee is too far back in his attempts at a TCC bow stance. At least I think that is what he is doing - a TCC bow stance? His fingers are all splayed out, which is saying one isn't thinking about it being a real strike as that would weaken the strike and probably break your own fingers. He isn't thinking about what part of his hand he is striking with. And that weird wiggling he is doing? I suppose it is supposed to be silk reeling,but it just doesn't look like the silk reeling I have watched before. Granted, I am no expert in the Chen style silk reeling stuff I see as I don't train Chen style. We are taught that some of the way TCC is done is by people who do not train the martial aspects of TCC. For us, the high stepping is one of those things. For a martial oriented TCC, you don't want to step up that high. You want to step close to the ground. And you don't want to retreat in moves like a lot of TCC practitioners do- pulling the arms all the way back. It can be pretty, but it is disconnected and one puts oneself in a position to be knocked back doing it that way. If people want to use this fight to label all TCC ineffective, that is fine. Doesn't bother me. Personally, I have to say that his form alone would have told me he couldn't win a match. He is breaking so many fundamentals the way I am taught. Honestly, I don't even think this guy would be very successful in a push hands match, let alone any real fight. It bothers me more that this guy is said to be representative of good TCC in general.Being called a Master and all. (Although none of this is keeping me up at night ) Edit- I missed the earlier posts until now. He invented his own "Thunder style"?????? Well, that explains a lot.
I'm all into evidence based practice, but what you're doing comes across as chucking out a few sciency-sounding phrases to distract from the fact you don't actually have an evidence-based case for your pet theory about "natural movement". Saying that gravity plays a part in movement is so facile as to be pretty useless for your case. Tri-Planar movement is a system of differentiation in order to describe movement; it is not a way of moving. So this has nothing to do with your argument, except that you could use it to describe to us this natural movement you are talking about. That would be very useful and interesting! As for the spinal engine theory - just mentioning it tells us nothing. How does the spinal engine theory support your case? Please explain how this is the case. For instance, are heel striking and striking on the ball of the foot identical in biomechanics terms? Is a person who places their centre of gravity forward in a falling step moving in the same fundamental way as someone who keeps their head between their feet when walking? If you could explain the difference between "technique", "style" and "fundamental movement", then it would make your arguments a lot clearer.
I don't have a Facebook account and I could watch it, so I guess anyone can. I don't know anything about Tai Chi, but I noticed a lot of the general points about bad form that you mention. I presumed that the "wiggling" was him attempting to send a spiral motion up his spine... and failing. He really does look self-taught (@Matt - self-taught should be more "natural", no? ).
LOL, I feel you! That tai chi guy in Redondo Beach I hung out with for awhile, the one who can actually fight very well, had a saying that makes a whole lot of sense to me. Me: I can't tell what you're doing. Him: Good! But do you want to stand in front of me? Me: No. Him: Good! When I watch someone practicing, and there is no energy, I know he's not good. But when I can't tell what he's doing, but I can see him generating so much energy that I do not want to stand in front of him -- then I know he's good. From that day on my test for all martial arts is, "Do I want to stand in front of him when he's doing that?" For this guy on the Facebook video the answer is, "Yes. He is not generating any energy. He is harmless." :dunno:
My CLF instructor says something that comes down to the same idea. I will do a form, and she will say "convince me you would hurt me with that move." 'I am not convinced I would hurt by that." And like you, I now use that as the main standard when watching a form " would I want to get hit/ kicked etc. by that?" Listen, there are people that do great forms that can't fight. But if you can't even do a move convincingly in a form, then you can pretty much figure out they can't fight either. This guy and his "thunder style" is not someone I would pick to represent TCC in anything - not a forms competition, not a push hands match, much less a MMA fight. That said, TCC has the same weakness of other styles. While there are moves to get someone to the ground, there isn't groundfighting like BJJ or wrestling. So any pure TCC person would probably lose a TCC vs MMA match if it went to the ground for sure. Same as many other valid styles with a lot to offer.
Who in CMA uses your rhino guard besides yourself/your students?It's certainly not a "trad" guard,Mr. W. The only Thunder style I know of is the Chen variant taught by Adam Hsu.As far as I know no one else in his generation learned this and this guy sure ain't doin' it.
Mind you, I am not talking about crane stances, or moves coming down from a crane stance like "strike the ear with double fists" after craning from a kick - but stepping forward super high. I am curious what stepping really high accomplishes. What sort of application does it have? It looks to me like one can be easily knocked off balance and takes more energy and time to move. What advantage is there to doing that over keeping the moving leg close to the ground? I'm more than willing to learn how others approach things differently. I am looking for the diagrams by Yang Cheng Fu, but I seem to have misplaced my TCC books ................. and google isn't much help so far.
Wait you went back and added this later. In addition to my previous questions about this post. Just what are the origins of your Rhino guard and what styles use it? I have never seen this rhino guard except from you, so I am most curious. I am not aware of this being a CMA thing,but there are tons of styles I don't know. Thanks.
No-0ne uses the rhino guard because it wouldn't work against anyone who knew how to throw combinations high and low with tenacity.
I am not a fan of it personally, but I am giving him a chance to explain/ clarify his claim that it is a CMA move.
Yea, he convincingly showed a man with no legs or arms from the waist up "walking". It wasn't until the camera panned down that you could see he has no legs and was on stumps. From the waist to the head he was using the same fundamentals as someone with arms and legs, hence the theory that that the spine is very important. That plus all his other research and years he spent says a lot to anyone who thinks we don't use the spine,as humans,fundamentally the same when moving about our environments naturally. The Human with no legs or arms still uses gravity, and triplanar movement ...the body he has moves as a whole, each joint contributing across all planes at once. Just like any other human moving naturally through his environment. Hence anyone enhancing what they naturally do will always fair better in their environment than someone who doesn't be it climbing, running, fighting etc. Sports and competition as an enhancement of the fundamental movements a person wants to get better at is aways better than overthinking forced movement. Moving to be effective Vs moving to look good. The confusion with different technique or style,as in say, usain bolt differing from another sprinter, is that he is enhancing his personal god given traits to fit him. He does not differ to the point that anyone could seriously say he doesn't use gravity like other humans and he doesn't use triplanar movement like humans nor the spine ( or whatever theory anyone takes as true). And being wrong is no bad thing. It's great to be wrong. Over time lots of theory's by the greatest thinkers of their age have been proven, later on to be wrong. Wrong? So what. The thing is even if that is wrong and there are other theory's.....which ever theory is accepted or proven would still be universal across humans, because we are all on the same planet with the same make up of joints, muscles etc etc.
If someone said water was wet I get the feeling you'd find an argument as to why it's not haha. You just seem that way inclined. And your also making it personal, although possibly not intentional, because any issues you have, you need to take up with the experts who spent their careers finding things out. Do some work. Or don't. No skin of my nose.Find out the top guys tell them what you think . Let me know how you get on haha . I don't claim any theory's or have pet theory's or a case or whatever to prove. It's all out their already done and on going.
