Is Shaolin-Do for real?

[Baqualin]

My anecdote regarding EM Smith and his seminar on Short Kata #1 (and yes, it was SK1... I checked) was merely to point out the depth of material that SD might be missing in its emphasis on hundreds of forms.

My mistake...he also did a seminar on sparring tech. #1....which he has, mastered.
Yes we have all these forms, why not teach them, what's the big deal, that's how I found out I love the internal, also by studing the external for all those years gave me the foundation I needed for Pakua & Hsing I....I know by research the old Pakua Masters required their students to take a couple of years of Shaolin type arts before they would teach them Pakua.... now I know what I want and can focus on this part of SD for the rest of my life.:)
BQ

[brucereiter]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8x6er4aobuc

for anyone interested here is a clip of me practicing beng chuan form as i understand it. this is another example of a part of shaolin do "on video".

best,

bruce

[Judge Pen]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8x6er4aobuc

for anyone interested here is a clip of me practicing beng chuan form as i understand it. this is another example of a part of shaolin do "on video".

best,

bruce


I always like seeing your videos. Thanks for sharing.

It's a bit different from the way that I do it (as is your linkage set), but good stuff nonetheless. Different doesn't mean better, btw. It would be interesting to compare the two one day.

[brucereiter]

I always like seeing your videos. Thanks for sharing.

It's a bit different from the way that I do it (as is your linkage set), but good stuff nonetheless. Different doesn't mean better, btw. It would be interesting to compare the two one day.

thanks jp ...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=-JuMkgpKJwE
check this one out too ... my monkey ...

i would like to see more of what other sd people do and how they express their internal stuff. one of these days i will get to knoxville ...

regarding "different" put 100 tai chi (or what ever) people in a room and tell the to show you tai ch chuan and you will likely see 101 different things and all of them could be "correct"

best,

bruce

[Mas Judt]

"This is just an example of 21 forms. Guess how many forms these people had to learn to achieve their level? Let me tell you right now the answer will blow your mind. 5th Degree Black Belt Associate Masters learn over 200 of these forms. By the time one reaches Elder Master 8th Degree Black Belt, they have mastered over 400 forms!

Long live Shaolin-Do! The only system in the world with all this knowledge and materials"


Well isn't that Ker-Snappy. Check out www.shaolingrandmaster.com and you can discover what the SD preaches. Check out the clip of the 'grandmaster' performing praying mantis.

This is really weird, man.

[Mas Judt]

I quote ffrom Sin The's biography:

"I am also the only person in 1500 years to be honored with two monuments at Shaolin Temples in China."

Then goes on to make it sound like the abbot honored him rather than his students donating money to the temple and getting a stele as a thank you.

I completely take back any rationale I might have applied to this liar to justify his fraud. Either he is dumb as a brick or is a willing liar.

My guess is the later.

Yikes.

[Erasmus Mingatt]

shaolindoiscool,

It's ok. A few observations if I may:

1.) Hsing-I/Shying-Yi is done slower
2.) There is more sinking with the hips before the explosion of the movement
3.) Sinking and rising with the strike should be done more in unison.

All in all..not bad.

[brucereiter]

I completely take back any rationale I might have applied to this liar to justify his fraud. Either he is dumb as a brick or is a willing liar.

My guess is the later.

Yikes.

you can have your opinion and express it how ever you like but i would remind everyone who posts on forums to "type" as if you were face to face with the person you are speaking about.

if you would say that to the mans face i suppose you are ok to say things like that.

to my knowledge of all of the many people who say negative things like that not one has said anything to him in person. why is that?

best,

bruce

[brucereiter]

shaolindoiscool,

It's ok. A few observations if I may:

please and thank you.


1.) Hsing-I/Shying-Yi is done slower



i think i disagree.
a) i do practice it at several speeds depending on what i am working on.
b) some groups do beng much faster than i can and showed in my clip
c)why?
d) how slow?


2.) There is more sinking with the hips before the explosion of the movement



ok .. i will see how it feels.


3.) Sinking and rising with the strike should be done more in unison.



true ... i will play with that idea


All in all..not bad.

thanks.

[Leto]

No one has authority to say what another person's style should or shouldn't look like or "feel" like. Once you learn something, it's yours and it changes because of you. No matter how much we want to believe we are preserving ancient methods of somebody's ancestors intact, it is changing and growing. The "basic principles that should guide everything" are reinterpreted from generation to generation.
It's a little stuck up, and naive, to think that the style anyone, anywhere is practicing today is the same as it was a thousand years ago, or one hundred years ago, or even fifty years ago. This goes for Chinese martial arts of all brands as well as everything else in the world.

So give the "tai chi must be like this", "mantis must be like that" arguments a rest. If you don't like the way something looks, that's fine. "I don't like the way your style looks, feels, flows" whatever. But it's silly to say "my style is right and your style is wrong." or "mine is real and yours is not". It exists and people practice it and fight with it. It's real, no matter what it's name is.
No one can comment on whether anything is effective until they've crossed hands with it and experienced it...so comments about how it looks or feels based on videos or a demonstration are just subjective opinion (that everyone is entitled to).

If two people have the same teacher, there could be a conversation like "teacher told us to do it like this, and you're doing it like that."
But if you're from a different school, a different style, a different teacher, you have no basis to comment on whether something is "correct" or not.

"Yours is different from mine, I do it like this, and this is why.." would be a more constructive comment.

[Erasmus Mingatt]

) "some groups do beng much faster than i can and showed in my clip"

True. There is more than one school of Hsing-Yi. As such there is some variance to what speed each prefers. My suggestion was based on your statement(in the clip) that you are "learning". Internal arts as a general rule recommend going very slow for a good ammount of time because in doing so..the development of chi is fostered. People always talk about "chi-gung".."chi-gung" as if it is the be all and end all. But before one can talk about circulating chi..one must first develop chi. As such..it is not so much a development per se as it is learning to avoid activities which deplete chi(as is often the case in todays world).


"c)why?"

Which of my comments are you asking why about?


"d) how slow?"

again this varies.


Leto,

"No one has authority to say what another person's style should or shouldn't look like or "feel" like."


When you are learning under a particular instructor..they certainly DO have the "authority" to say what said style should or should not "look like". Hence..they are the sifu and you are the student.





"Once you learn something, it's yours and it changes because of you."

The degree of "change" is also individual. There is "change" because of individual differences between students(ie: taller vs. shorter stature, speed of the student in performing individual techniques,etc.) and then there is "change" insofar as modifying of changing the sets completely. When this is done..it's not really the same thing anymore and becomes something else.




"The "basic principles that should guide everything" are reinterpreted from generation to generation."

Not always. Look at Ying Jow Pai. The same basic principles: Jow Da, Cum Na, Fun Gun, Chaw Quat--108 locking techniques of General Ngok Fei,etc. are still the same now as they were hundreds of years ago.


"It's a little stuck up, and naive, to think that the style anyone, anywhere is practicing today is the same as it was a thousand years ago, or one hundred years ago, or even fifty years ago."


And unless you were alive a thousand years ago..it's equally naive to assume that it's not the same. Nuff said.

"This goes for Chinese martial arts of all brands as well as everything else in the world."

Brands?



"So give the "tai chi must be like this", "mantis must be like that" arguments a rest."

Unless you study an actual style of tai chi(not Shaolin-Do) but either: Yang, Wu, Chen, Sun,etc. style from beginning to end..you cannot say this with authority. FYI..there ARE certain characteristics of certain styles which ARE the signature of that style. Even the fastest style of tai-chi is still ALOT slower than most external arts. If you do Yang style tai chi at Choy Li Fut speed..you have missed the point..regardless of what configurations your arms and legs are in. Similarly..if you do a Leopard fist and use Leopard fist philosophies and techniques..you can't say "Yeah..it's praying mantis"..at least not with praying mantis stylists laughing their a-ses off.

[brucereiter]

hi Erasmus Mingatt,

thanks for taking the time to reply. i do not mind someone respectfully disagreeing with me and often times debate leads to mutual benefit.

you answered my "why" in your last post.

i must disagree with most of what you have said though.

for example you say: <<Even the fastest style of tai-chi is still ALOT slower than most external arts. If you do Yang style tai chi at Choy Li Fut speed..you have missed the point.>>

how do you figure that to be true? take fair lady works shuttles as the yang tai chi chuan example and what ever external method is a similar block/punch type of movement.

are you implying that a "tai chi" person should apply the movement slower than as you said a choy li fut person? (i might be misunderstanding you)

i think speed is important to all martial arts.

delivering the max mass at the highest rate ... ... ...

are you implying that i do not practice yang tai chi chuan? i say that i do.

her is an example. http://youtube.com/watch?v=9nJ3vwcR1EQ
<<Unless you study an actual style of tai chi(not Shaolin-Do) but either: Yang, Wu, Chen, Sun,etc. style from beginning to end... ... ... ... ... ... >>

let me ask this:

do you feel a tai chi chuan person should be fast and powerful?

best,

bruce

[cho]

No one has authority to say what another person's style should or shouldn't look like or "feel" like. Once you learn something, it's yours and it changes because of you. . . . .

Then define mastery.

Can everyone learn the movements from a book and make it their own?

There becomes a point when it becomes something completely different than what it once was.

[Golden Tiger]

My anecdote regarding EM Smith and his seminar on Short Kata #1 (and yes, it was SK1... I checked) was merely to point out the depth of material that SD might be missing in its emphasis on hundreds of forms.


Funny story actually....He was invited to ATL to review and teach a class on short forms 1-30 but only made it through # 1 in 1:30. When he left, he told them to let him know when they would be ready to go over # 2.:D

As for the statement of SD missing the depth because of the numbers, well, He (Master Smith) knows all the forms that have been taught also so the volume couldn't be the problem. The difference, I think, is that he took the time to break down everything he was shown, and study it, not just practice the motions. There are actually quite a few of the masters that have done that. A good way to tell is ask a question about a simple move and sit back and listen to an eye opening in depth response.

To me, that, and not the number of forms learned, defines mastery of an art.

[Mas Judt]

I assure you that I would say the same thing to the man's face. Not being a member of your cult, he just looks silly to me, so you won't find me hiding.

It seems highly dubious to me that NO ONE ever brought this up to him, particularly out of any implied reason such as fear or that Sin The' is the 'one.' COME ON.

More likely, most people are polite. But this is simply dishonest BS.

Grow up.

[brucereiter]

I assure you that I would say the same thing to the man's face. Not being a member of your cult, he just looks silly to me, so you won't find me hiding.

It seems highly dubious to me that NO ONE ever brought this up to him, particularly out of any implied reason such as fear or that Sin The' is the 'one.' COME ON.

More likely, most people are polite. But this is simply dishonest BS.

Grow up.


my observation was that people like your self who are not in the system and publicly say negative things about the system, sin kwang the', and the students in the system; to my knowledge have never said these things face to face.

if you know of any who has i would like to hear about it.

i have "been around" and "touched hands" with many people from all over the world from many arts, styles and skill levels. some have had more skill than me and some have had less skill than me but none have said insulting things to my face
(except one but thats another story ... lol ...)

please do not try to twist the meaning of my comments. as you know it can be difficult to communicate via message boards.

i have only tried to share some of the material presented to me as i learn shaolin do.
i am interested in discussing the content of shaolin do.
i am really not interested in bickering back and forth about you dis-liking sin kwang the'.

i am not a member of any cult. that is a silly statement that sound like a intended insult.

please avoid ad hominem attacks. i dont think they are useful to the debate at hand.

ad ho·mi·nem
Pronunciation: (')ad-'hä-m&-"nem, -n&m
Function: adjective
Etymology: New Latin, literally, to the person
1 : appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect
2 : marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made

best,

bruce

p.s. i am a 37 year old man. i am grown up :-)

[Leto]

Mastery is a tricky thing to define. Some say you've got it when you know everything your teacher knew. Maybe you have it when you're able to defeat everyone you meet in a fight ;) Maybe it's something internal, that no one outside can really measure.
The point is, we don't really know where Sin The learned all his stuff. As far as we know, his only teacher was Ie Chang Ming. We don't know anyone else who also was a student of Ie Chang Ming, and we don't really know who Ie's teacher or teachers were. So as far as anyone knows or can prove, Sin The is the "master" of the style he is teaching. It's his own brand of hsing i, bagua, mantis, tiger, crane, drunken, etc. He's not claiming to teach the hsing i of someone else's lineage, he's not claiming to teach the seven star mantis of whatever lineage...it's all his own lineage. Maybe he learned all the stuff from books that he's collected over the years, but no one can prove that. There may be teachers of other styles who learned things from books, too...no one will ever know for sure unless they admit it.

I'm not saying that shaolin do is better, or worse, or just as good as any other style. It has nothing to do with quality of instruction, or depth of material or understanding. It's just that, as far as we know, everything that comes from Sin The is "correct" for his lineage and his style. It's just not the same as other lineages with similar techniques and styles. Maybe you feel it's lacking something, that's ok. But you don't know that it isn't exactly how Sin's teacher taught him, and how the teacher's teacher taught it.

If anyone knows for sure that Sin The learned a form or a style from a book, then show us the book and show us the proof that he learned it from the book, and then you can say "Sin The is doing it wrong, because the writer of the book does it this way".
Until we have proof, it's just speculation, no matter how likely it seems. It's Chinese martial arts because it comes from a Chinese lineage, as far as anyone can prove. Not because it's the same as other Chinese styles.

[Chain Whip]

Posted by Erasmus Mingatt --- And unless you were alive a thousand years ago..it's equally naive to assume that it's not the same. Nuff said.

Also posted by Erasmus Mingatt (same post) --- Not always. Look at Ying Jow Pai. The same basic principles: Jow Da, Cum Na, Fun Gun, Chaw Quat--108 locking techniques of General Ngok Fei,etc. are still the same now as they were hundreds of years ago.

Did anyone else note the contradiction?

[Mas Judt]

Well, I took it as I read it. Honestly, I've encountered SD directly - and always been honest about what I saw.

This is not style vs. style - I could care less about your school. I do care about a pattern of deceit and misrepresentation that continues to this day.

Look, John Wang always tells the story of a guy who practiced different ways of hitting a coconut on a string - and won a big Lei Tei match with no formal training. So who knows, SD coulld produce some Ker-Snappy skilled guys. But to claim everything you claim insofar as being the 'original, pure' methods and the 'true Shaolin' while disparaging todays Shaolin as 'just wushu' is silly.

Someone earlier in this thread did the math on how much time it would take Sin The' to 'master' 900 forms by his teens. Simple logic disproves much of the nonsense. Observation of Sin The' doing his mantis makes things very clear.

I'm done. Go rationalize. Think I'm some kind of troll. Whatever. Just keep drinking the Kool-Aid, and I guess you'll be happy - and your life will be chocked full of deceit as you continue to spread a tradition of lies.

[kwaichang]

There is right and wrong you my friend are RUDE thats all. You are not all knowing or all seeing and very opinionated. I dont se how you learn anything you are so closed minded. KC

[brucereiter]

Well, I took it as I read it. Honestly, I've encountered SD directly - and always been honest about what I saw.

This is not style vs. style - I could care less about your school. I do care about a pattern of deceit and misrepresentation that continues to this day.

Look, John Wang always tells the story of a guy who practiced different ways of hitting a coconut on a string - and won a big Lei Tei match with no formal training. So who knows, SD coulld produce some Ker-Snappy skilled guys. But to claim everything you claim insofar as being the 'original, pure' methods and the 'true Shaolin' while disparaging todays Shaolin as 'just wushu' is silly.

Someone earlier in this thread did the math on how much time it would take Sin The' to 'master' 900 forms by his teens. Simple logic disproves much of the nonsense. Observation of Sin The' doing his mantis makes things very clear.

I'm done. Go rationalize. Think I'm some kind of troll. Whatever. Just keep drinking the Kool-Aid, and I guess you'll be happy - and your life will be chocked full of deceit as you continue to spread a tradition of lies.

which "you" are you speaking about?

if it is me you are speaking about. what lies have i spread? i have never said anything disparaging about another martial art or artist on any forum.

i have never claimed "my" methods to be the best, or the original or pure.
i do not think you are a troll but i do think you are misinformed on the subject at hand.

best,

bruce

p.s. this is silly to go back and forth. like i said before i would rather discuss the material presented and discuss how others express and apply the material they have learned.

[Leto]

I don't believe anyone has "mastered" 900 forms. I don't like that the history and origins of the forms we do know are obscured. I don't even like the way a lot of the material is initially taught. But there is something there, wherever it came from. It's not worth bothering about if you've got your own teacher and your own so-called "legitimate" style to practice. But for people who have already invested time and effort into this, and possibly don't have any other options for training besides generic karate or tae kwon do...it is important. We know that there is something useful here...and I don't think anyone who knows about Chinese history, martial arts, and the Shaolin temple actually believes that Sin The is the master inheritor of every style of kung fu ever to come from Shaolin.
If it's just a mix-match personal style invented by Sin The, or his teacher, or whoever, so be it. But it is a "real" style, that has some good techniques and forms. Someone who trains the right way, and has developed insight, will have just as good "kung fu" as someone who trains in any "authentic" style, with masters from Hong Kong or Taiwan or Shanghai.

I am disappointed that the style's history has been based on tall tales, and disappointed that the long time teachers perpetuate the mythology as truth. I want to know where it all really came from, and what traditions/lineages to look at as "ancestors" of the style. But I know that such answers are not coming from anyone who really knows anytime soon. Should I just stop practicing, and forget all the things I know? I could just go back to my Okinawan karate style exclusively, which has a traceable lineage back to the 18th century (that means it must be better, right?). But I tell you, what I learned at the CSC was valuable. Whether it's really "shaolin" or not...I don't care. It doesn't mean I won't accept other avenues of training, but I will not forget or discard the things I have learned. Whether what I was taught as "hsing i" is really hsing i...I don't care. Maybe it's not as "effective" as "real" hsing i...I know it teaches a method of power generation for short range attacks which is quite effective. It probably is different than what the shanxi and heibei lineages call hsing i. Oh well.
I was taught two very common tai chi forms, but maybe the way they are practiced is not common. Doing straight punches from a horse stance is also a common method, however almost everyone has some variation and their own preference for what is "right". One teacher says the chamber must be as high as it can go...another says the chamber should be near the hip, or the ribs, or wherever. One teacher says vertical punches are more effective than horizontal punches, another says horizontal has more power, and a third says it doesn't matter. One says the knees must be out, another says the knees must be in. One says you squeeze the ground with your toes, another says you must be totally relaxed. Balance near the balls of the feet, or balance near the heels, or on the blade. One says the torso should not move perceivably, another says you should twist as you punch , or sink, or whatever. The only thing which is the same is the actual act of punching. Every one says their way is the "right" way, and those other guys are wrong and aren't as good as we are.
How is this different than what is happening here with SD?

If you put aside all the lineages, the folklore, the coutries of origin, the politics and pride, and just look at what's actually there...what basis does anyone have for saying one way is wrong and the other way is right? It's subjective and personal. You can't judge effectiveness in fighting unless you constantly fight with people. Aesthetics of performance is subjective according to your tastes. You may be able to see whether someone's spine is straight, and posture correct to allow correct qi flow, but you can't (usually) see their mentality, what they are visualizing, or whether their mindset is "correct".

[Judge Pen]

I don't believe anyone has "mastered" 900 forms. I don't like that the history and origins of the forms we do know are obscured. I don't even like the way a lot of the material is initially taught. But there is something there, wherever it came from. It's not worth bothering about if you've got your own teacher and your own so-called "legitimate" style to practice. But for people who have already invested time and effort into this, and possibly don't have any other options for training besides generic karate or tae kwon do...it is important. We know that there is something useful here...and I don't think anyone who knows about Chinese history, martial arts, and the Shaolin temple actually believes that Sin The is the master inheritor of every style of kung fu ever to come from Shaolin.
If it's just a mix-match personal style invented by Sin The, or his teacher, or whoever, so be it. But it is a "real" style, that has some good techniques and forms. Someone who trains the right way, and has developed insight, will have just as good "kung fu" as someone who trains in any "authentic" style, with masters from Hong Kong or Taiwan or Shanghai.

I am disappointed that the style's history has been based on tall tales, and disappointed that the long time teachers perpetuate the mythology as truth. I want to know where it all really came from, and what traditions/lineages to look at as "ancestors" of the style. But I know that such answers are not coming from anyone who really knows anytime soon. Should I just stop practicing, and forget all the things I know? I could just go back to my Okinawan karate style exclusively, which has a traceable lineage back to the 18th century (that means it must be better, right?). But I tell you, what I learned at the CSC was valuable. Whether it's really "shaolin" or not...I don't care. It doesn't mean I won't accept other avenues of training, but I will not forget or discard the things I have learned. Whether what I was taught as "hsing i" is really hsing i...I don't care. Maybe it's not as "effective" as "real" hsing i...I know it teaches a method of power generation for short range attacks which is quite effective. It probably is different than what the shanxi and heibei lineages call hsing i. Oh well.
I was taught two very common tai chi forms, but maybe the way they are practiced is not common. Doing straight punches from a horse stance is also a common method, however almost everyone has some variation and their own preference for what is "right". One teacher says the chamber must be as high as it can go...another says the chamber should be near the hip, or the ribs, or wherever. One teacher says vertical punches are more effective than horizontal punches, another says horizontal has more power, and a third says it doesn't matter. One says the knees must be out, another says the knees must be in. One says you squeeze the ground with your toes, another says you must be totally relaxed. Balance near the balls of the feet, or balance near the heels, or on the blade. One says the torso should not move perceivably, another says you should twist as you punch , or sink, or whatever. The only thing which is the same is the actual act of punching. Every one says their way is the "right" way, and those other guys are wrong and aren't as good as we are.
How is this different than what is happening here with SD?

If you put aside all the lineages, the folklore, the coutries of origin, the politics and pride, and just look at what's actually there...what basis does anyone have for saying one way is wrong and the other way is right? It's subjective and personal. You can't judge effectiveness in fighting unless you constantly fight with people. Aesthetics of performance is subjective according to your tastes. You may be able to see whether someone's spine is straight, and posture correct to allow correct qi flow, but you can't (usually) see their mentality, what they are visualizing, or whether their mindset is "correct".

Bravo Leto. Well said.

[Judge Pen]

I assure you that I would say the same thing to the man's face. Not being a member of your cult, he just looks silly to me, so you won't find me hiding.

It seems highly dubious to me that NO ONE ever brought this up to him, particularly out of any implied reason such as fear or that Sin The' is the 'one.' COME ON.

More likely, most people are polite. But this is simply dishonest BS.

Grow up.

I'm surprised by this post. Frankly with your reputation and knowledge you didn't have to resort to this type of attack to make your points. Really Joe this was uncalled for.

SD is many things. Leto made some very fine points. You can debate the "right and wrong" of its forms, what they are called, and the dubious lineage. But SD is not a cult. That is patently unfair.

If you want to know about martial arts cults, then read "Hearding the Moo" written by a "Joe Smith". I'm sure that you know all about Chung Moo Doe (a style I'm sure you've had experience with with your roots in Chicago). I have never been told what to think. I've never been asked for money or told to change my life based upon any silly superstitions. I've never been yelled at or demeaned or asked to worship anyone. My teachers and Sin The do not have any degree of control over me outside of the time I give to them in training. They have never tried to exert it. I hear stories about history and I take it in and keep punching and kicking. I respect them because they take the time to teach me something that is useful.

Bruce was asking some legitimate questions in order to explore your criticism. He has done a thorough job documenting, with video examples, different forms and styles and wondering how they compare to how he practices his art. Since you comand so musch respect on this board he was taking the time to have an objective dialogue with someone who says they know. I comend him for not sticking his head in the sand and comparing other arts. He wanted your opinion on the technique--not the history or lineage.

You could have taken the time to look and comment. Or you could have not taken the time at all. This is an internet forum--who really cares what happens here? Its the proverbial tempest in a teapot so I can't blame you for not putting at least the same amount of time Bruce did into his posts. This thread is like a tv, you don't like what's being said, you can just turn it off. But there's no excuse for being rude to him and everyone else who practices SD with an objective and open mind.

Its been some of your insights that have helped me look at my own art from different perspectives. You know how the Indonesan martial culture loves the tall tale and the fantastic element. You know how this is tempered with a brutal practicality. In our discussions on these forums and by e-mail you have always been polite and respectful even while being honest. Bruce did not do anything to not deserve the same treatment.

[Shaolin Wookie]

In answer to someone's question as to the likeness between the forms, here goes:

As in Tai Chi, the Crane form works best when there is little to no tension in any of the shoulders, wrists, or elbows. Before any martial arts practice, I always loosen up my joints, even before stretching.

After the initial opening and down strike into a bow stance, there's a flurry of three attacks/blocks. The body position isn't too unlike the "fair lady and shuttle" movements of tai chi. Only, in this crane form, you can think of the strikes as useful in three ways. One, the outside hand is clearing an incoming arm, and the inside arm is striking. Two, the twisting of the torso clears the attack, and both hands strike the neck. Three, the torso clears the punch, and both hands strike at the arm (hitting bicep and forearm press. points, like in blue belt technique # 7), providing the opportunity to move for a sweep, etc. In terms of applicability, I'd probably do these motions in reverse, after taking a step back at an angle. I also make sure to twist the torso and hips, to avoid the punch, so that I can apply this in advancing. (This same basic motion is present in the ippons at yellow belt, just dressed a little differently and stepping at an angle).

My favorite movement: after the right side hand movement forward/crane beak to back, the left arm rises in a semi-circle (ending overhead) as the right hand shoots across the chest in a clear, and the feet move into a cat stance. This is the most important and useful technique in the entire form, IMO, and one not a lot of people consider (as is evidenced by their looks of confusion and roboto body mechanics). The left hand should move first, providing for a strong block to the side--reinforced by the body's movement into a cat stance (but the arm begins the motion by building momentum and whipping strength). The right hand clears across the body, for protection, once hte body's in motion. I've been experimenting a little with some dudes to work it against a jab and straight combo, and it works just fine, using the right hand clear as a slap block (works well if you direct the punch up and across his body)---and it doesn't require a body twist. You can do it quick with a small pivot, if you bring the left hand up quick in a diagonal, or even a smaller semi-circle, making sure to clear in front of the face. But since the left is such a strong block, it's a little unnecessary, unless you're trying to get a big opening (and considering the way the form fucntions, you're trying to get a big opening, to open the way for a slap to the abdomen.) PErsonally, I see it as a crane defense against a mid-high range round kick, or a haymaker, where you need good strong blocks--and this arm doesn't just block with the enitre arm...it blocks with the entire body moving behind it---and it can be performed successfully by just pivoting from a sparring stance (more like the beginning of 3rd Crane). And the hand that clears across the torso: could just as easily strike with a side hand if the clear is unneccessary. The motion is dressed differently, but it reminds me of the ridge-hand strike at the beginning of Yang section 2. Bit of a stretch, I suppose, but it does remind me of it.

3 crane slaps (side hands): Incorporates movement of the hips and floppy (relaxed arms), generating power through whipping strength. Same principle as single whip, although the second set, performed with dead hand slaps, is more directly reminiscent of it. Single whip movements occurs in many SD techs: In several chin-na's, almost every crane (excepting only 2nd Crane).

The most tai chi oriented movement: The circle clear and push. The forward foot chambers into a high crane stance as the hands pull into a small circle; then, the body pushes back out into a bow stance, accompanied by a push.

Ward off, roll back, and push are all present (maybe even a press, as well).

Some people incorporate the motions of the hands more than I, but I generally keep them in front of my shoulders (close enough to the body to be able to close in front of the face), and make it a point to get waist and torso rotation, more than arm rotation. When I perform it, I don't even move the hands (for several reasons). The hands are in position to ward off a punch across the body, then extend into a full-body push (just like tai chi). In a more yang way, they can simply provide cover by being there in case something swings towards the head (just like the beginning one-legged stance blocks performed in short forms 27 & 28--may differ for SD folks than CSC). The foot that comes in chambers into a crane stance. This can be used as protection against a roundkick, catching it with the shin; also, as evasion or retreat against a sweep or low kick from outside). During such a movement, you'd want the hands high, elbows low across the midsection, to protect the upper body against a roundkick/punch combination. It also puts you in good position for extension into a strike.

As I push out, I keep my hands chambered until the last second, when my torso begins to turn up and into the opponent, making a point to gather all the momentum I need through the chambered leg and extension into a bow stance. When helping classmates with this one, I demonstrate first by using my arms in a big circle, then using no circle (keeping them chambered). I can push someone harder and with more force with the latter every time, much harder than a bigger and heavier person can throw me using only his arms). This motion is very tai chi-ish.

These are just a few. Note: when I practice any crane, I try to keep as relaxed, calm, and fluid as possible, utilizing snap and whip power. It feels more internal than external. And sometimes I run through it very slow, to consider the movements in their smallest increments. It's about as internal as I enjoy; and I can and do utilize the more unorthodox movements some people tend to gloss over.

[brucereiter]

thanks jp ... well said ...

[brucereiter]

keep up the hard work wookie ...

receiving lessons + practice + perseverance + research + patience + practice + experimentation + sharing knowledge + testing theory + more practice! = path to skill

[Shaolin Wookie]

Basically, in any form you have some snap kicks, roundhouses, straight punches, reverse fist punches, thrust kicks, hook kicks(rarely), side kicks, and varying hand forms.

I have something like 20 forms, and all of them use these striking techniques (weapons included). They're not especially difficult. The hardest and most important thing to learn is the delivery system--getting the body into and out of position, moving, balancing, and rotating. I can learn 20 forms, no problem. I can show you a technique for almost any movement, and it doesn't take great intuition to figure them out--just a bit of reflection and creativity. I haven't had all of them given to me by a teacher; and I kind of like it that way, sometimes. Basically, an athletic person can learn any martial art and make it work (capoiera, for instance). But I prefer one you have to reflect about and analyze from several angles. Some of the techniques I was spoon-fed do not work well for me. But I can use the same movements in another way that is infinitely more effective, IMO. I don't really need to be "shown all the techniques". I've been shown them in other material, within that system. Seriously, if I can't figure out why I'm clearing and punching, then I'm a retard. Or if I can't figure out why I'm standing on one leg, with the other chambered(for a defensive block, or an offensive kick), then I'm not very imaginative. I have been shown sparring techs, ippons, and street fighting techs, and chin-na in other SD training material (most of which was learned before any forms whatsoever)---guess what? They're almost all present in the forms, sometimes directly, sometimes dressed up a little differently. If you understand the principle, you can genrally apply it pretty broadly. Its up to you to do that, however. Relying on a teacher to show all the apps is a bit lazy, and kind of demonstrative of a student's lack of intuition. When I ask a teacher a question, it's generally a structural one. But I guarantee that someone who's watched me perform a form one week, will generally see something different in the way I do it the next week. It's generally because of the insights into the movements I get by reflecting on them, and then getting a feel for what feels good, and what doesn't feel good structurally. When I move up a rank, I don't lose any material I've learned up to that point. I just expand on it. I'm still punching, kicking, hopping, sweeping, etc. I just deliver it differently.....and even then, it's not that wild and exotic. Thanks to the stuff I learned at brown belt, my lower belt material is 1000X better. I'm sure that doesn't end. I've seen third degrees perform lower belt forms and barely get through them; and then I've seen other third degrees perform them and totally blow my mind.:cool:

Note: the dude Bruce was doing push hands with in his first posted vid----he showed me Jin Gung Fu Hu Chien once, and it was hands down the best I've ever seen it done.

[brucereiter]

Note: the dude Bruce was doing push hands with in his first posted vid----he showed me Jin Gung Fu Hu Chien once, and it was hands down the best I've ever seen it done.

that "dude" :-) is one of my training brothers and is a inspiration to me for his work ethic.
he trains very hard and works even harder to apply what he has learned and keeps a very humble attitude.

he is one of the few people i know who can do all 49 postures of our version of ie chin ching and do them well. there are many postures i can not do and may never do ... lol ...

[Mas Judt]

Eh, I can't read all of this as I am rather busy, but my response was to what I read. If I inferred something wrong, I apologize, but I do not apologize for my statements.

It comes down to veracity. It is obvious that SD reveres it's founder and beleives him over any objective work or the fact that nobody of consequence takes him seriously.* If it wasn't for the silly claims, there would be no disagreement. However it looks like there may not be an SD either without the melange of stuff.

While you guys are NOT Chung Moo Quan - and I wager you have SOMETHING buried in that melange of misunderstanding, being party to a line of BS and spreading that lie purposely just rubs me the wrong way. Heck, I'm used the being lied to, but the scale of this, the relentlessness of it, it just got to me.

So enjoy it. You can have it. Can't really explain other than you can only take so much dishonesty before felling the need to say 'excuse me, your emperor over there is missing his pants.'




*Because of his issues with honesty.

[Mas Judt]

Some of the private communication I receive gives one hope - there are some decent folks in the SD world - and understand I do not attack you as people, but I do question the ethics of passing on things that are just plain lies.

It is one thing to pass on a questionable oral history. It is another to openly manipulate facts to try and support it (such as the Stele's at the Shaolin temple) or to claim to practice systems in a more complete or accurate fashion than the folks that actually do those original systems.

It's just absurd.

And with today's overwhelming amount of data available it is easier to toss information around gleaned from media - but not learned completely. Heck, even I do that, but at least give credit where credit is due. So, a good analysis of the system would have to be based on SD itself - Sin The' or his brother Hiang.

Based upon the video of NPM by Sin, I hope to god he isn't claiming NPM.

Now I'm done.

And for those of you that shared information on misinformation - thank you. You guys are Kun Tao brothers in some way, even if you don't know it. But remember, just knowing the truth isn't enough, you must live it.

[Leto]

I would love for nothing more than to compare and contrast and talk about the various styles that I have learned and seen. I tried to start such a conversation at an earlier point in the thread, and there was another thread devoted to this which petered out when no one had any more contributions.
The fact of the matter is, I haven't found videos of any crane style which is quite close enough to our crane and bird forms to say that there's a link. I haven't found anything like our black tiger forms anywhere, the shantung black tiger book that is in circulation looks nothing like our hei hu forms. Our brown belt "tiger family" forms, while sharing names with those from some other styles, don't equate. The closest was Lian Wu Zhang, which we talked about for several posts. Not to mention the Lohan short forms, which don't really match up with any other style exactly. Even if not the case with anything else, at least these forms make up a core "style" which is unique from any other. It is evidence, in my eyes, that this wasn't all learned from books or videos. Some part of it, at least, seems to have come from a unique community/family style. A collaboration of various martial artists in the Chinese community of Bandung? Something similar to the jing wu school on the mainland? We can only speculate.

As always, I am more than anxious to see anyone's examples of styles which have an equivalent in SD/CSC, to compare to.

[Mas Judt]

Leto, your going to force me back into this...

The stuff you can't identify is either a.) 'original SD material' or b.) your actual core system. Kung Fu methods get all mixed up in Indonesia - even the Karate influence is not surprising to me... it is the syncretic way of things there.

Any links to these sets or their training methods? This is way more interesting than the SD 'be everything' line.

[Leto]

I haven't found videos of them online anywhere, yet. Believe me, I've looked. There is one video of a couple beginner brown belts joking around, and performing one of the tiger forms very poorly.
Another thing which makes me believe these forms may be unique is the dialect/language used to represent them. I wish I knew what the actual Chinese characters were, to have someone translate them using more common mandarin dialect. It's possible that it may be fujian/min dialect, but I'm not sure.

In mandarin, crane is pronounced "hur", romanized pinyin as "he", right?
Our crane forms are called "hao". Bai hao chuan se, bai hao huan se, bai hao huan jiao. likewise, many of our forms use the romanization "chien" for fist. I know pinyin romanization is "quan", though the actual pronounciation does sound very close to "chien", at least I've heard it spoken that way before.
Chie Chien, and ching kong fu hu chien.
I don't know if the language element means anything, but it may provide a clue to the origins of some of these forms, or at least the people who passed them on to the The family. With the actual characters for these names, we could find out for sure if the "official" translations are correct. I know I saw a list of forms, at one point, with characters and translations hand written. Maybe some of the guys from the east have a copy of it.

If I had a video camera and a space to do it, I'd think about putting up videos of myself doing some of these forms. I would love to hear what outside people have to say about them, if they recognize them or any elements of them.
I keep contemplating using my digital camera, which can make short videos, to do it, but the quality might be poor, and I'd need help from my wife to make sure it keeps me in frame :)

[Mas Judt]

I'd never pick on someone for posting thier practice - although with an 'unknown art' some explanation would be good for the parts you think 'rough.'

[kwaichang]

I have a copy what do you need ?? KC

[Leto]

kwaichang! If the handwritten chinese characters are decipherable, it would be cool to get someone who knows mandarin or cantonese to take a look at them and see how they translate it, and compare to what we've been told the translations are. I know that the Chinese written language can be tricky to translate.

Especially interested in Se Men Tao Lien, Tai Peng Sin Kun, and the brown belt forms. I guess the first step would just be scanning the document, or part of it, so the rest of us can look at it to see if the characters are legible. The next step would be finding the aforementioned Chinese readers, which might be the hard part. :) It might be possible to go through dictionaries looking for the equivalents, too, based on what we think the translation is, but that method is really hit or miss. I've done this already, but without knowing what the actual characters are, I can only guess on what the correct words are.

I'm not really worried about being picked on if I put up a video. (even though I look funny, and people might laugh) I just want to make sure my whole body is in frame, with enough light and at a good camera angle to see everything pretty clearly. And enough open space so that I don't have to modify any steps of the form. Having a school to train in, we take these things for granted sometimes ;)

[kwaichang]

I will try to photograph it and scan it and post it for all to see. KC

[Leto]

thanks, that would be awesome!

I know the language thing may not really be all that important, but it has just bugged me ever since I started CSC. As an assistant instructor, folks would ask me questions when our head instructor would move on to the next group. Anything I didn't know the answer to, I'd say "let's ask teacher when he comes back"...but I know for a fact he doesn't know any more than I do about what the name really means. "reversibly facing four directions"? Just do it. *lol* I like to have more concrete answers for people, even on non-technical issues relating to what I'm teaching.

[kwaichang]

I hope this works and you can read them KC I think they exceed the limit. cant fig how to upload w/o exceed limit.

[NJM]

I hope this works and you can read them KC I think they exceed the limit. cant fig how to upload w/o exceed limit.

Oh, Kwai, go to http://www.imageshack.us and upload your image there. Just paste the image's URL that you get into a forum post so we can view it that way.

[Leto]

That's a better idea than my plan. *lol*, thanks for reminding us of imageshack. photobucket.com works, too.

[kungfujunky]

i have heard Se Men Tao Lien called four doorway break as well



the thing i have noticed with sd/csc is that from white to first/second black we are taught a very truly kun tao/karate like style.

once we get into black belt though the forms and styles truly become more cma in flavor and substance but the translation of the forms into movement is probably different than what others would call cma.

with our early training in snap and power,rooting ,stance work and the drills we do we develop an almost hard like edge to our movements.

although we balance this with our tai chi/chi kung (which truth be told not very many people do well with that i have seen which is really frustrating) there is still our root focus on power generation and defining movements. these principles tend to slow down our forms and make them look choppy or unlike what the true principles of the system would dictate for the style. like tiger crane or pa kua or drunken. these styles take on a flavor that is not theirs but is so ingrained in the way we train we cant really stop it without truly delving into the meanings of each individual style. and since so many of us train for fun and fitness that is why what is posted on the net looks so wrong to some.


if we were to post a pa kua form for instance(or perhaps just 1 kua) and post it i would bet it would look different to most. but if we got constructive advice on how to do it the generally accepted way we could alter a few little things and bam! traditional cma


its not that we dont train in traditional cma. we just train it differently from most. we focus on application, power generation, snap, stances and rooting and the overall well being the training brings us. i.e. health and longevity.



sd/csc has a wealth of kung fu knowledge in it. you just have to get to it through the layers of change that the style has taken to get here.

mas judt just out of curiosity where are you located?

[brucereiter]

if we were to post a pa kua form for instance(or perhaps just 1 kua) and post it i would bet it would look different to most. but if we got constructive advice on how to do it the generally accepted way we could alter a few little things and bam! traditional cma



http://youtube.com/watch?v=eI3mMhNMbLU

[NJM]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=eI3mMhNMbLU

I can't tell in the video, but are you stable enough in your stance that I could press hard on your lead hand and you wouldn't fall?

[kwaichang]

I agree are you following the rules of PaKua ? sitting like a tiger etc. KC

[Leto]

i have heard Se Men Tao Lien called four doorway break as well

the thing i have noticed with sd/csc is that from white to first/second black we are taught a very truly kun tao/karate like style.

once we get into black belt though the forms and styles truly become more cma in flavor and substance but the translation of the forms into movement is probably different than what others would call cma.

I have heard it called that, as well. Si (Se) Men is definately four door. But I haven't been able to identify that word "lien" or "lian" as "break" or anything like that. Dao could possibly really be "da", which is strike or hit...but I still can't find a good meaning for "lian" that makes sense in this context. I just don't know enough about the language. With the actual characters we could put this to rest, I hope it's legible! :)

I disagree that we teach a karate like style...maybe kuntao like, but kuntao is supposed to be the Indonesian word for Chinese martial arts, right? The most karate-like part are the one step sparring and techniques at yellow and blue, and the nunchaku spinning, I guess. The forms, right from the beginning, are definately nothing like any Okinawan or Japanese karate kata. The basic staff spins and form are not Okinawan in any way. They maybe taught and practiced in a way that doesn't "flow" really well, but their content is not karate at all. Even the Lohan short forms, while we pratice them in a way that you might see in a karate school, moving from one side of the school to the other, they are not at all like karate basics (and I believe other Chinese arts have drills like this, too, like tan tui).
The only thing that makes people think it looks like karate is the halting manner in which it is performed sometimes (and the fact that we're usually wearing a gi).
If the basic and brown belt forms were performed with the right "flavor", they'd look like "real cma" as well, I believe. I'll test out that theory with my videos, if I ever manage to make them.

I'm sure you're right, the way we are taught early on affects the way we perform the more recognizeable "cma" forms later on, like the drunken style and the hua fist, and the hsing i.

[Mas Judt]

Um, while Karate has influenced some Kun Tao, I would not group the two together. There is a world of difference between most Kun Tao and Karate. You guys do Karate probably because Sin The' learned Karate or elements of it.

[kwaichang]

Yeah right, well the 1-30 are taught one at a time in theory they should be performed as 1 long form with fluidity and flow . The power emphasis at times changes the mechanics/ performance of the tech. I am still trying to figure this uploead thing out. KC:)

[Golden Tiger]

KC, email it to me and i can reduce it using photo editing software I have.

goldentiger2112(at)yahoo.com

[kwaichang]

URL=http://img243.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cam3984yz0.jpg]http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/9936/cam3984yz0.th.jpg[/URL]
Is this right ?? KC let me know I will post another KC

[brucereiter]

I can't tell in the video, but are you stable enough in your stance that I could press hard on your lead hand and you wouldn't fall?

A loaded question????
I can assure you I am. I may not represent "forms" to your liking but I am very rooted in my stance and transitions. Strenght through structure is. Concept I pay close attention to because the next thing people say when they can't knock me over is it was because I am 6' 2" and 280 lbs ...
They only way for you to really know would be to press hard on my lead hand and see if I fell ... Lol ...

Do you have a video of your self doing some pakua that might show the attributes you are looking for? I would like to see.

Best

Bruce

[NJM]

http://img243.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cam3984yz0.jpg
http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/9936/cam3984yz0.th.jpg


Fixed

A loaded question????
I can assure you I am. I may not represent "forms" to your liking but I am very rooted in my stance and transitions. Strenght through structure is. Concept I pay close attention to because the next thing people say when they can't knock me over is it was because I am 6' 2" and 280 lbs ...
They only way for you to really know would be to press hard on my lead hand and see if I fell ... Lol ...

Do you have a video of your self doing some pakua that might show the attributes you are looking for? I would like to see.

Best

Bruce

I assure you my question isn't loaded ,and I never said anything about you doing forms to my liking. It's hard to tell from a video whether or not the stance is correct, and the pressing on the lead hand has always been a way to test the stance's correctness, so I asked, assuming that your teacher had tested you that way at some point. Sheesh.

[unkokusai]

........................cat fight!

[Leto]

the first one is larger than the second, we'll see what we can see. :)

It looks like the lian in lian wu chang may be "linked" or "joined"

comparing the handwriting to the examples here...

http://www.mandarintools.com/cgi-bin/wordlook.pl?word=lian&searchtype=pinyin&where=whole&audio=on

The symbol for "lotus" is very close to the symbol for "linked", and that would be a cool name for a form "five lotus palms" :) . I believe it is "linked five palms" or "connected five palms".

[brucereiter]

Fixed



I assure you my question isn't loaded ,and I never said anything about you doing forms to my liking. It's hard to tell from a video whether or not the stance is correct, and the pressing on the lead hand has always been a way to test the stance's correctness, so I asked, assuming that your teacher had tested you that way at some point. Sheesh.

Sorry about the way that reply sounded I am at lax a baggage claim waiting for my lost bag and I was cranky lol

:-)

[NJM]

Sorry about the way that reply sounded I am at lax a baggage claim waiting for my lost bag and I was cranky lol

:-)

At your request, I did a video of me performing the Ba Gua circle and some basic transitions. Note the skill by which I execute the transitions, and how the hand position reflects how I control the imaginary opponent:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=L7p2h2Lgpqg

[brucereiter]

At your request, I did a video of me performing the Ba Gua circle and some basic transitions. Note the skill by which I execute the transitions, and how the hand position reflects how I control the imaginary opponent:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=L7p2h2Lgpqg

how did you know rick astly is my favorite ... lol

what style of pakua do you practice?

[arinathos.valin]

LOL! And NJM can do the moves while singing too... that's talent!!:)

Bagualin, thanks for the book title and the generous invitation... I don't get down to KY very often, but if I'm in the area I will let you know! Which school do you teach at?


A few clips of Bagua for comparison...

Master Gary Grooms from SD doing some segments of SD's variation of Jiang Bagua. He may be doing the movements more slowly for demonstration purposes, but I have to admit I was more impressed with some of the other taiji video clips he has out there.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=OCJzD7ZSATM


Master Luo JinHua doing the same Jiang style. The music is cheesy, but I love the form...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=icwEuTHsDKM
I actually have this video... he breaks each part down into segments in the later parts, showing some of the fajing inherent in the form. Might look 'wushu'ish from the short video, but it looks like he's got a very good grasp on the principles and applications!

Another good resource for baguazhang on YouTube is BlackTaoist... do a search for him. He also does Jiang style bagua. An unorthodox teacher... but some of the demonstrations he has of the form and applications are extremely impressive...

[NJM]

how did you know rick astly is my favorite ... lol

You've just been rickrolled!

what style of pakua do you practice?

The style of Pakua Sun Jian Yun, daughter of Sun Lu Tang, taught to Sigung Kwong Wing Lam who in turn taught it to me, and my Sifu. I only know the basic circle and a few transitions, because bagua is not my specialization and Wing Lam has not been back to Washington in some time.

[kwaichang]

Was not too impressed by Grooms he did not seem to apply the basic principles even with the placing of the feet and why was he doing a wrist lock takedown already on the ground ? any students of M Grooms out there ? KC

[tattooedmonk]

Was not too impressed by Grooms he did not seem to apply the basic principles even with the placing of the feet and why was he doing a wrist lock takedown already on the ground ? any students of M Grooms out there ? KC
Agreed.

The bat falls to the ground (P'ien Luo Hu Ti ) (wrist lock, take down)is done on the way down into the cross legged stance, as I remember it, not once you are in it.

I know Master Grooms is quite knowledgeable in the arts( in general ), however, I heard recently that he got the idea in his head that he was the foremost authority on internal in SD.:rolleyes:

We all know who has that position.;):D
I noticed that you did not refer to him as Master Grooms . Just curious as to why that is!?!:D

[kwaichang]

Just a slip though i would expect more of a televised/computerized demo BY A Senior Master. I feel there is too much liberty with form. KC

[Shaolin Wookie]

Let's keep it clean, boys.

[kwaichang]

I have personal opinions but i will not express them here. KC

[tattooedmonk]

I have personal opinions but i will not express them here. KCYou could always PM me.:D I am always interested in peoples opinions.:D You were refering to the bat falls to the ground , correct??

[tattooedmonk]

Let's keep it clean, boys.Yes ma'am.:D

[Judge Pen]

Master Grooms always garners different opinions, but that's because of his 'strong' personality. I will say that his applications are top notch. He can use what he teaches even if he performs some of the forms differently than I have been taught.

[arinathos.valin]

*sigh* Have to admit I'd agree with the assessments on the M. Grooms clip... with the caveat that there is only so much one can glean from just watching a video of someone doing the form...

I'm also analyzing a video series on Jiang Bagua by a guy named Gerald Sharp, who had the adopted daughter of Jiang Rong Qiao as one of his teachers. So far I'm actually more impressed with the Luo Jinhua video (if one can get past the goofy english translation), but that may change as I watch them more.

[boshea]

Master Luo JinHua doing the same Jiang style. The music is cheesy, but I love the form...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=icwEuTHsDKM
I actually have this video... he breaks each part down into segments in the later parts, showing some of the fajing inherent in the form. Might look 'wushu'ish from the short video, but it looks like he's got a very good grasp on the principles and applications!



Nice video clip! But, what do you mean the music is cheesy? I quite like it! :p

[Chain Whip]

We have seen Pa Kua and Tai Chi clips from Master Grooms and Bruce. Both from Atlanta. Can someone in KY post a Pa Kua and/or Tai Chi clip of Master Leonard or Master Price?

[Baqualin]

We have seen Pa Kua and Tai Chi clips from Master Grooms and Bruce. Both from Atlanta. Can someone in KY post a Pa Kua and/or Tai Chi clip of Master Leonard or Master Price?

M. Grooms & Bruce posted their own clips on youtube.......EML has no You Tube clips nor any desire to....also, he could care less about any of this (including the marketing part MK)
BQ

[Chain Whip]

So, is anyone in KY willing to put their Pa Kua and Tai Chi up on YouTube for scrutiny?

[Judge Pen]

So, is anyone in KY willing to put their Pa Kua and Tai Chi up on YouTube for scrutiny?

I'm sure Golden Tiger or Baqualin can't speak for everyone in KY just like I can't speak for anyone in Tennessee other than me and you can't speak for anyone in ATL other than you.

[Baqualin]

So, is anyone in KY willing to put their Pa Kua and Tai Chi up on YouTube for scrutiny?

I do, but I will have to get someone to film me first...when I do no one will know it's me until later....I want non biased opinions.
BQ

[Chain Whip]

I'm sure Golden Tiger or Baqualin can't speak for everyone in KY just like I can't speak for anyone in Tennessee other than me and you can't speak for anyone in ATL other than you.

Sorry - wasn't suggesting that they could or should. Just looking for a KY or a TN or a TX or a CO version.

I do, but I will have to get someone to film me first...when I do no one will know it's me until later....I want non biased opinions.

Good idea, it should be interesting!

When Bruce first invited people at Empty Flower to look at Master Grooms' Tai Chi DVD trailer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPMbU63Y6Gg - no one seemed to know it was a SD guy. Just a skilled guy with frog buttons. Here are some of the comments:

Quote:
Looks pretty good. What is your teacher's name? Some of the apps shown are pretty simple, but I think that is alright cause it be a video. I envy his squatting SW.


Quote:
Those slow kicks were great!

Quote:
Nice looking vide - good to see a video of somebody promoting the 'Quan' of Taijiquan, espcially with all the no-touch nonsense doing the rounds of the video section at the moment. Looked like good solid applications.

Quote:
Your Sifu has excellent skill,and flexiblity...i like his simple and direct application's...
i also like his teaching style relaxed and straight foward...

Quote:
He moves really, really good. Very smooth and he sure knows how to use his structure and balance. Yes, the apps are very direct and simple, but also very basic. (Both advanced and basic methods can of course be direct and simple.) I would like to see more of what you do in class. Maybe you could take down the camera again and show more stuff from your teacher, apps that he think is to advanced to show here?

[Judge Pen]

Shoot, I would be embarrassed of any of my internal stuff aside from the Hsing Ie. Not that its that great, but its better than my pa kua or tai chi....

Nice finds on the quotes. I don't get over to empty flower very often, how did their attitude change after they found out he was SD?

[Chain Whip]

Pretty much ignored it and went on to the next thing. It's funny that Bruce goes all over the world meeting with people in SD or not in SD and everyone seems to respect his skill and knowledge.

[Judge Pen]

Pretty much ignored it and went on to the next thing. It's funny that Bruce goes all over the world meeting with people in SD or not in SD and everyone seems to respect his skill and knowledge.

I've crossed hands with him, and I respect his skill.

[Chain Whip]

It is hard not to. He can really apply what he has learned. Sometimes Bruce does not get the credit he deserves because of his size.

[Leto]

I made a discovery that may be interesting for some

I've been looking over the copies of the handwritten notes than GM The passes out for forms. I dug up my notes from "pick and play fist", to try to decipher the handwritten characters in that title.

We had talked about how our pick and play fist was very similar if not the same as "Zhai Yao" in other mantis styles. Well, the character for "pick", which GM The spells "tze" is spelled "zhai" in pinyin romanization. and the character which he translated as "sua", or shua in pinyin, for play, is extremely close to the character for "yao", or "important, vital".

摘zhai (to borrow, to pick (flowers, fruit); to pluck, to take, to select)
要yao (important, vital, to want, to be going, must) /
耍 shua (play with, to juggle)

because of the way the handwritten character look, it could very easily be either one. and if GM The inherited them this way, handwritten, from his teacher...

This form very well may have originally been called "zhai yao" an "important selection" or summary of mantis techniques.

[sean_stonehart]

What is taught as "Pick & Play" is very similar to the 4th Zhai Yao routine.

[brucereiter]

Shoot, I would be embarrassed of any of my internal stuff aside from the Hsing Ie. Not that its that great, but its better than my pa kua or tai chi....

Nice finds on the quotes. I don't get over to empty flower very often, how did their attitude change after they found out he was SD?

for the most part people accept it for what it is. only a few people had a strong bias against.

[brucereiter]

Was not too impressed by Grooms he did not seem to apply the basic principles even with the placing of the feet and why was he doing a wrist lock takedown already on the ground ? any students of M Grooms out there ? KC


i am a student of sr master grooms.

[brucereiter]

We have seen Pa Kua and Tai Chi clips from Master Grooms and Bruce. Both from Atlanta. Can someone in KY post a Pa Kua and/or Tai Chi clip of Master Leonard or Master Price?

i posted myself to foster conversation and can only speak for myself. if others feel comfortable putting videos of their practice up it would be interesting to see. i do understand some are just not interested.

[Erasmus Mingatt]

Shaolin-Doiscool,

First...I will say this to you...as well as ALL SD students: Any MA which increases in its students a sense of self discipline, respect for oneself/others, balancing of emotions, respect for human life/dignity is..by the very nature of wanting to instill in its students, those qualities..honorable. And I applaud that...not because I am a sifu(I hope to one day however)..but as a human being.

Any critiques of SD I may offer are not related to the above. My criticisms have been based on factual innacuracies. If a historian wrote a book entitled : "World War 1: from 1974-1984"....well..lets just say that most people unless they were under the influence of hallucinogens would say "uh..back up there buddy..WW1 happened before those years"

"thanks for taking the time to reply. i do not mind someone respectfully disagreeing with me and often times debate leads to mutual benefit."

I agree and I also acknowledge that I've been overtly defensive at times..but not because I think SD is the worst art one could study(that honor..may very well belong to "Temple Kungfu")..but I prefer to not have a revisionist history in any area of life..not just kung fu. So when SKT says that he was the "only person ever to have 2 tablets " in honor of him by Shaolin..I just think "aaahh..yeah..and the point is? 2 tablets in honor of what I might add?"


"for example you say: <<Even the fastest style of tai-chi is still ALOT slower than most external arts. If you do Yang style tai chi at Choy Li Fut speed..you have missed the point.>>

how do you figure that to be true? take fair lady works shuttles as the yang tai chi chuan example and what ever external method is a similar block/punch type of movement."



Yes..but you see you are placing emphasis on the MOVEMENT rather than the concept. It is the concept that is key. One could even make the argument that you could take movements from ANY PATTERN of a form of ANY of the kung fu styles known for their external force(I would even include my current style of 8 step preying mantis) and if you slowed it down and modified the intent/breathing/generation of force/mind intent..I could almost create my own form of tai-chi...

"are you implying that a "tai chi" person should apply the movement slower than as you said a choy li fut person? (i might be misunderstanding you)"

Absolutely!!!!

"i think speed is important to all martial arts.

delivering the max mass at the highest rate ... ... ..."



I will defer to Bruce Lee himself when he gave an interview on DVD when he compared the force felt between a "Karate punch" versus a "Kung fu punch". I would enthusuatically recommend picking up a copy..


"are you implying that i do not practice yang tai chi chuan? i say that i do"

I don't study Yang Tai-Chi so I can't say w/ authority. Ask a YTC master/sifu.

[Judge Pen]

but you see you are placing emphasis on the MOVEMENT rather than the concept. It is the concept that is key. One could even make the argument that you could take movements from ANY PATTERN of a form of ANY of the kung fu styles known for their external force(I would even include my current style of 8 step preying mantis) and if you slowed it down and modified the intent/breathing/generation of force/mind intent..I could almost create my own form of tai-chi...

"are you implying that a "tai chi" person should apply the movement slower than as you said a choy li fut person? (i might be misunderstanding you)"

Absolutely!!!!

"i think speed is important to all martial arts.

delivering the max mass at the highest rate ... ... ..."



I will defer to Bruce Lee himself when he gave an interview on DVD when he compared the force felt between a "Karate punch" versus a "Kung fu punch". I would enthusuatically recommend picking up a copy..


"are you implying that i do not practice yang tai chi chuan? i say that i do"

I don't study Yang Tai-Chi so I can't say w/ authority. Ask a YTC master/sifu.


I agree with this concept. I suspect that, based on their applications, so would Master Grooms (the subject of much of this discussion) or my teachers who are not gentle or slow when they teach their applications to tai chi.

Now its an oversimplification to say you can create a tai chi form by slowing down any form or movement to tai chi speed (there's a lot more going on internally than just slowing down the movement to concentrate on the body mechanics behind the movement) but assuming that you observe the tai chi principles of structure and chi cultivation, then I suppose that you would be correct in a sense.

[Erasmus Mingatt]

"or my teachers who are not gentle"

There is this misnomer that just because TC is gentle to the touch that it is somehow not powerful. Power can be manifested in many ways.




"or slow when they teach their applications to tai chi."

Certain styles of TC are faster or slower than others..it depends on the family. It is also a misnomer that(not that I'm saying you are saying this Judge Pen) TC is merely just a health based exercise..in actuality...I would never want to fight a tai chi master..it's just too diverse and unpredictable a fighting art. Like trying to grab "water...

""Now its an oversimplification to say you can create a tai chi form by slowing down"


One could slow something down to where it takes 1 hour to do one complete arm movement and STILL not cultivate any chi...

"any form or movement to tai chi speed (there's a lot more going on internally than just slowing down the movement to concentrate on the body mechanics behind the movement)"


However..and this is not a contractiction to my above statement per se..but there is a certain axiomatic tendency to expend more force and deplete more chi as one goes faster...and faster..


"but assuming that you observe the tai chi principles of structure and chi cultivation, then I suppose that you would be correct in a sense."

If you take the concept of Dim Mak and reverse it insofar as taking the acupuncture meridians..one could take the opinion that Dim Mak is reversing the intent of circulating the chi for health promotion. In actuality..the damage inflicted by a master who truly understands the genesis of internal energy would be far more longer lasting than the Karate sensei who would try to shatter your spine to bits with one blow.(insofar as long term organ damage, disruption of consciousness,etc.)

[brucereiter]

erasmus e,

should a tai chi chuan person be fast and powerful?

[Judge Pen]

EM

I think we are in agreement. Tai chi is a devastating fighting art first and formost. Its techniques are fluid and can be yielding when appropriate, but they are not applied in a slow manner like Yang tai chi. They are fast and powerful when the time comes.

[arinathos.valin]

Shaolin-Doiscool,

First...I will say this to you...as well as ALL SD students: Any MA which increases in its students a sense of self discipline, respect for oneself/others, balancing of emotions, respect for human life/dignity is..by the very nature of wanting to instill in its students, those qualities..honorable. And I applaud that...not because I am a sifu(I hope to one day however)..but as a human being.

Any critiques of SD I may offer are not related to the above. My criticisms have been based on factual innacuracies. If a historian wrote a book entitled : "World War 1: from 1974-1984"....well..lets just say that most people unless they were under the influence of hallucinogens would say "uh..back up there buddy..WW1 happened before those years"

"thanks for taking the time to reply. i do not mind someone respectfully disagreeing with me and often times debate leads to mutual benefit."

I agree and I also acknowledge that I've been overtly defensive at times..but not because I think SD is the worst art one could study(that honor..may very well belong to "Temple Kungfu")..but I prefer to not have a revisionist history in any area of life..not just kung fu. So when SKT says that he was the "only person ever to have 2 tablets " in honor of him by Shaolin..I just think "aaahh..yeah..and the point is? 2 tablets in honor of what I might add?"




I think that was very well put, Erasmus.

[brucereiter]

Just a slip though i would expect more of a televised/computerized demo BY A Senior Master. I feel there is too much liberty with form. KC

do you have a video example of how you feel pakua should look?

what liberties do you feel were taken?

i have visited sd several schools in ky, tn, co, idaho, texas and of coarse atlanta and each person who i have seen teaching it and practicing it have done it very differently even within the same school. are they taking liberties?

[Mas Judt]

I think you will find that even in the non-SD oriented schools...

[kwaichang]

Do you have a copy of the 64 rules of PaKua /? Form stems from the rules and they were not exhibited even with the base , stepping. KC

[Erasmus Mingatt]

"do you have a video example of how you feel pakua should look? "

I realize you didn't address this ? to me..but I thought I may take the initiative a little since in 8 step preying mantis...monkey kung fu footwork you would see in a style such as 7 star preying mantis was replaced with Ba Gua/Hsing-I footwork.(I am still learning so I'll admit..I'm not sure if it was REPLACED with BG/HS-I or if BG-HS-I footwork was ADDED to it). I'll ask sifu.

Anyways..

My sifu made the analogy that the circles in all 3 arts look different but ultimately reach the same goal.

BA GUA--think of a circle.. placed on the ground. Think of someone putting a sombrero(mexican hat) flat on the ground and walking around the circumference. In this..one learns the 8 directions of fighting.

Hsing-I/Shing-Yi-- think of a circle but instead thinking of moving circular but forward..such as if one were mimicking the circle of a bicycle tire moving round and round or a car tire moving circular but forward.

Tai Chi Chuan--think of the electrons/protons(I always get them confused) of an atom cirulating all around the orbit of an atoms in multiple directions at once.

This is not the best analogy..but it's the only one I can think of for now...

[brucereiter]

Do you have a copy of the 64 rules of PaKua /? Form stems from the rules and they were not exhibited even with the base , stepping. KC

hi kc,

yes i do have jiang rong qiao's rules as translated and organized by gm sin the'.

i disagree with your observation that they were "not" exhibited. as many of the concepts were to a certain extent displayed. remember i am a student and am not claiming to do things perfectly or to have a perfect understanding but i do exhibit some of the shen fa (body method) as advised but the "64 rules".

i understand you may have a bias against my teacher/school based on many post from you over the years, there is no need for that i am just one student who is sharing what he understands. take it for what it is or leave it.

can or will you show me how you express the "64 rules" with your form? if you can not i would think you are not in a place to tell me in the absolute terms you used what i am doing or not doing with my form.

best,

bruce

p.s. i am trying to build unity between all of our schools.

[kwaichang]

Form like a Dragon
Expression of a Monkey
Sit like a Tiger
Flip like an Eagle

When stepping forward do not raise them too high do it like you are dragging them in the Mud The center or heart of the foot must be hollow toes and heel must hit at the same time. Just a few of the rules not exhibited. KC

[Chain Whip]

KC

I'm guessing this means you won't be posting a video of your Pa Kua - what a surprise!!

[brucereiter]

Form like a Dragon
Expression of a Monkey
Sit like a Tiger
Flip like an Eagle

When stepping forward do not raise them too high do it like you are dragging them in the Mud The center or heart of the foot must be hollow toes and heel must hit at the same time. Just a few of the rules not exhibited. KC

hi kc,

these are all valid things to pay attention to when practicing pakua.
i think i am doing these things as i said to a certain point.

the way you are making it seem with your comments is that you think i am on the wrong track with my practice. i guess you will not understand unless you can feel what i am doing. i hope we can meet and exchange ideas in the near future. which school do you go to?

there are several ways to walk what is shown in my clip is not mud stepping it is heal toe stepping.

do you have or will you make a video to demonstrate what you are saying is lacking in my practice? i am open for advice but i think you are not giving advice you may be sharing your bias.

like i said, i would like to help all of the schools/students communicate better and share information. we are all students and will always no matter how skilled we become be able to learn more and refine what we already know.

best,

bruce

[tattooedmonk]

hi kc,

these are all valid things to pay attention to when practicing pakua.
i think i am doing these things as i said to a certain point.

the way you are making it seem with your comments is that you think i am on the wrong track with my practice. i guess you will not understand unless you can feel what i am doing. i hope we can meet and exchange ideas in the near future. which school do you go to?

there are several ways to walk what is shown in my clip is not mud stepping it is heal toe stepping.

do you have or will you make a video to demonstrate what you are saying is lacking in my practice? i am open for advice but i think you are not giving advice you may be sharing your bias.

like i said, i would like to help all of the schools/students communicate better and share information. we are all students and will always no matter how skilled we become be able to learn more and refine what we already know.

best,

bruce You can still do heel /toe stepping but you should be doing the mud stepping as well. The rear foot should graze the inside of the front calf as you are stepping forward,( you should be scraping mud off of your rear foot as it passes the calf),( you need to actually touch the calf ), once you place it back down you plant with your heel then with your toe.

reverse if you are stepping backwards.

alot of people think that you should be placing both the heel and toe down at the same time but this will look and feel like you are stomping . It only appears to be landing at the same time. You are still going heel to toe it is just very subtle and unnoticable to the untrained eye.

[kwaichang]

I do not have a vid I will be glad to W/O with you guys though. None the less the rules do not say heel toe it says at the same time. I did not write the rules etc. I am sorry you feel I am bias but I am if the rules as I read them are not followed I dont care who the individual is. The form is of M Grooms and unless that is you I dont feel you should take my comments personally. KC PS if you raise the foot to the height of the calf perhaps that is too high , and in that case it would look like stomping try it ankle height instead. The rules say through the mud not over the mud. KC

[kwaichang]

I will show you what I think and the rules , my vid would not exhibit perfect form of the rules and would misrepresent what I am trying to convey through the rules with form. I am not perfect in form only am trying to get closer to the ideal. KC:)

[Baqualin]

First thanks to Bruce and everyone reaching out from all the schools, that's what it's all about.....we should learn from each other...bottom line... we all have the same teacher GMS

OK, Classical Pakua is very flowing like Tai Chi...never stops or hesitates...strikes are not accented, they flow in the form like water (not in application, just in the form)....stepping is also flowing, kinda like KC said through the mud...by doing this you can place toe & heel at the same time...gliding.....& your pants should brush between the ankle and calf, any higher and you look like your hopping (which is very common with most SD people). You should also see in the form what your attacking, what your attacking with, what your locking up or breaking and so forth.
BQ

Keep in mind That we're talking about Classical only.

[tattooedmonk]

I do not have a vid I will be glad to W/O with you guys though. None the less the rules do not say heel toe it says at the same time. I did not write the rules etc. I am sorry you feel I am bias but I am if the rules as I read them are not followed I dont care who the individual is. The form is of M Grooms and unless that is you I dont feel you should take my comments personally. KC PS if you raise the foot to the height of the calf perhaps that is too high , and in that case it would look like stomping try it ankle height instead. The rules say through the mud not over the mud. KCI was taught more or less the same thing, but following the rules I have found that brushing the arch of the foot along the lower part of the calf is along the line of the rules as the are printed in many publications( including the CSC manual), to create a proper distance between each step. Like I said it has the appearence and the feel of placing it down at one time. It is almost silmutanious, meaning that the heel to toe stepping is more exagerated in Tai Ji quan than in Ba Gua Zhang.


Another reason I say this is becuase if you are walking through mud you have to clean off you shoes as you go so they do not bog you down , which wil eventually happen. and the only way to do this is by taking it out of the mud slightly to scrape it off. I think sometime the rules are taken too literally and other times not enough, if at all .

If you were walking through the mud you would eventually get bogged down and not beable to move because of all the mud right??

I am just thinking realistically that is all.

This is how the weight is distributed evenly from the back leg to the front . It is ever so slight . This also follows proper body mechanics, and use of the kinetic chain from hips, upper legs , knees, lower legs , ankles, and feet.

The heel to to toe thing happens so close to the ground I would say that you almost do place it down at the same time.

I feel this is where the two arts over lap.

Just my experience . Not to say either one is wrong or right , just different , we are SD brothers.:D

I say split the difference.

[JonathanD]

I know Master Grooms is quite knowledgeable in the arts( in general ), however, I heard recently that he got the idea in his head that he was the foremost authority on internal in SD.:rolleyes:


I heard that exact same thing. Quite a bold statement if you ask me.

[JonathanD]

Do you have a copy of the 64 rules of PaKua /? Form stems from the rules and they were not exhibited even with the base , stepping. KC

I do, and it's an intense read.

[Chain Whip]

First thanks to Bruce and everyone reaching out from all the schools, that's what it's all about.....we should learn from each other...bottom line... we all have the same teacher GMS

Might be the best thing any SD person has said on this forum.

[Shaolin Wookie]

Nope. Not even close. Here's the best posts (not SD people, though):


just remember to shave your runway! :eek:

You coming in for a landing?

[kwaichang]

I have been accused of not being a team player as it were in SD and by being critical of M Grooms. I re read the rules slowly so as not to miss anything and looked at the movie of M Grooms. If calling things the way I see them is disrespectful then OK. But if one has the rules and understands them and still does the form different , on purpose, than the rules call for, then that in itself is what makes others question the quality and realness of SD. If we are all students of GMT " those of us that are" and those continue to perform it "wrong" that is sad for what ever the reason. How can 4 different Senior Masters do the same form so different if they all know the rules ?? KC

[synack]

I see this all the time in SD. I know in the CSC, you might have 3 different people show you the same thing. ALL DIFFERENTLY. VERY annoying.

I don't think this is limited to M Grooms. It's a problem with the system. Too much to learn in to short of time.

[Baqualin]

I see this all the time in SD. I know in the CSC, you might have 3 different people show you the same thing. ALL DIFFERENTLY. VERY annoying.

I don't think this is limited to M Grooms. It's a problem with the system. Too much to learn in to short of time.

Your very correct...I see it in all schools including ours...not just SD/CSC....GMS gives us the tools...it's up to us to learn how to use them....he wants us to research & study...as I said before, most people in the system are everyday working people who have a life outside of SD/CSC & don't practice & study outside of their class. My anwser to to much to fast is to SLOW down smell the roses....work you way to Blk belt at you own pace then decide what you like best and focus on that. Regarding the differences in the masters...people are people.....everyone has their take on things and it's hard to over come that when the system has got as large as SD/CSC... the ego differences will not let everyone work as a unit.....GMS has tried to standardize everything, but everybody wants to do their own thing...now look what we have now.....politics!!:D
BQ

I'm really glad to see all the students from both sides trying to get to know each other...that can change things.
BQ

[Chain Whip]

Your very correct...I see it in all schools including ours...not just SD/CSC....GMS gives us the tools...it's up to us to learn how to use them....he wants us to research & study...as I said before, most people in the system are everyday working people who have a life outside of SD/CSC & don't practice & study outside of their class. My anwser to to much to fast is to SLOW down smell the roses....work you way to Blk belt at you own pace then decide what you like best and focus on that. Regarding the differences in the masters...people are people.....everyone has their take on things and it's hard to over come that when the system has got as large as SD/CSC... the ego differences will not let everyone work as a unit.....GMS has tried to standardize everything, but everybody wants to do their own thing...now look what we have now.....politics!!
BQ

I'm really glad to see all the students from both sides trying to get to know each other...that can change things.
BQ

Great post BQ. Very well said. The differences between various people in SD should not create animosity. Obviously, GMT has a different outlook. He signed the Master level certificates for all of the Master’s in our art. The problem stems from teachers saying “this way is right – everyone else is wrong” A great example was a few years back EM Leonard taught a Tai Chi Broadsword Two-Man Set seminar in Atlanta. It was a fair bit different than what SM Grooms was doing – not bad – not wrong – just different. A couple of years later SM Grooms has to teach the same form to people in the Internal Program. To try avoiding any controversy he pulled out the video of him learning the form with EM Mingione as GMT talks them through it. He made sure that what was taught out was exactly what he learned from GMT. If you put the video of EM Leonard teaching Tai Chi Broadsword Two-Man set next to the one of GMT teaching it, they have several significant differences. SM Grooms passed on exactly what he was taught by his teacher. SM Grooms doesn’t think EM Leonard is wrong but he has to pass on what HE was taught.

[kwaichang]

A persons application of a technique may be different but the technique should be based upon what they are taught and the rules . If this is done we should all do the technique the same or close. Much closer than some of the observations I have made. So how do these MAJOR changes come about. ?? I think it is ego everyone wants to do their own thing, they dont call their art SD as GMT calls it they call it something else like Shaolin Kung fu or CSC or Shaolin Tao. Everyone wants to be the big fish. If this offends I appologize but I just call it the way I see it. There is GMT then EM Leonard then EM Smith then the others I am not sure of the total order . Sorry guys but that is the pecking order and that is how it is. It is based on rank and time in the art. PERIOD. Not vague claims. KC As for me and mine I follow that order. I respect them all but show my allegance to GMT and his students based upon their rank and time in the art and their allegance to GMT and SD. KC

[Shaolin Wookie]

I'm not trying to troll you KC, or start up anything, but that's even what GM The' did. His brother split off to teach another program with a different structure, called Chung Yen (apparently the name of the school in Indonesia). GM The' called his Shaolin-do. I'm willing to bet neither is a reproduction of the Indonesian school, and I'm sure the Indonesian school was not a reproduction of the way GGM Ie Chang Ming learned from GGGM Su Kong. Just like I'm sure the CSC isn't verbatim Shaolin-do.

Labeling it ego shouldn't really be pejorative. Ego is I. The person practicing the art is the art in action. It's always going to change according to personal preference, physical ability, and geography. Nobody is the same. Some day GM The' is going to pass on (hopefully far in the future). But definately in our lifetimes. Will SD and CSC remain bonded?

From hints of tensions on this board, and rumors that circulate, I'd speculate they'll just co-exist without any interaction whatsoever outside of private liaisons. I'm not trying to be an @$$hole....it just doesn't seem (from tensions on this board, and various PM's), that there would be an heir to the system that would be as accepting and unifying a force as GM The'.

What will happen then?
What's your opinion? Again...not meant to troll. Just thinking.

[tattooedmonk]

that I am of the same mind as BQ , we all are here for the same reason and have been influenced and taught by GMS, without him we would not know or have what it is that we do. Everyone is going to find differences in their material because of interpretations and perceptions . This does not make one person right and another person wrong, just different .

As long as we follow by the rules and guidlines set out by the ancient masters we could make MMA into a traditional and internal art!!!:eek::p;):D

[kwaichang]

But, if you are taught a straight punch 20 years ago in a form, for example, and the rule says the elbow brushes the side, then why is the punch changed to a hook punch. When a student whatever the level changes what they are taught then something is lost. What I have seen from the upper powers is a MAJOR change for the sake of change. This to me spells disaster for our style as it discredits us all. The changes I am talking about are blatant. I am not talking application. Later KC

[brucereiter]

But, if you are taught a straight punch 20 years ago in a form, for example, and the rule says the elbow brushes the side, then why is the punch changed to a hook punch. When a student whatever the level changes what they are taught then something is lost. What I have seen from the upper powers is a MAJOR change for the sake of change. This to me spells disaster for our style as it discredits us all. The changes I am talking about are blatant. I am not talking application. Later KC

kc,

what do you think some of the "major" changes to forms are with yang/chen tai chi chuan, classical "original" pakua, hsingi?

best,

bruce

p.s. take a look at some more of my practice if you like. some of what is shown is not so good and some of what is shown is ok.

http://youtube.com/profile?user=brucereiter

[kwaichang]

Your form seems OK I think if you used your legs more and dropped your center your deflection would be more effective. Just an opinion . also I feel the changes are more in the Classical pakua and Taichi Yang. I have not seen others Chen so cant judge. Mostly the changes seem to be in the other external stuff 2-5th Black level. KC:cool::D:eek::confused::):mad::p:o:(

[brucereiter]

I have been accused of not being a team player as it were in SD and by being critical of M Grooms. I re read the rules slowly so as not to miss anything and looked at the movie of M Grooms. If calling things the way I see them is disrespectful then OK. But if one has the rules and understands them and still does the form different , on purpose, than the rules call for, then that in itself is what makes others question the quality and realness of SD. If we are all students of GMT " those of us that are" and those continue to perform it "wrong" that is sad for what ever the reason. How can 4 different Senior Masters do the same form so different if they all know the rules ?? KC

hi kc,

here are several examples of jiangs rong qiao "original" form pakua aka "classical pakua"

you will note each person demonstrates different ways of approaching the same style.


starting with my understanding, this is me ... i am no expert as you may see but i am getting better all the time ... lol ...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=tKOjfBuc5TA
http://youtube.com/watch?v=eI3mMhNMbLU

below are a few clips, some are known masters, teachers and some are just plain old students.

Jin Liangchan
http://youtube.com/watch?v=dCn7pOKMW0Y

novell bell
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q5qi5TTCUvU

ben hill
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-UhZ3PYOAt8

m grooms
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4044921926652657971&q=pakua&total=271&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=7

Luo Jinhua
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icwEuTHsDKM

if anyone has any other demonstrations of this style of pakua they can link please do ...

best,

bruce

p.s.

this is just for entertainment ... lol ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIYrIgy5t-I

[brucereiter]

Your form seems OK I think if you used your legs more and dropped your center your deflection would be more effective. Just an opinion . also I feel the changes are more in the Classical pakua and Taichi Yang. I have not seen others Chen so cant judge. Mostly the changes seem to be in the other external stuff 2-5th Black level. KC:cool::D:eek::confused::):mad::p:o:(

true about dropping my center ...

can you explain some of the changes/differences with yang 64 and with classical pakua.

the external stuff i really do not know about ...

best,

bruce

[kwaichang]

When I say changes I mean differences, some train Yang 64 at a 30 minute pace some 20, at times the angle and stance are different some do it with the front and back foot in line and some off line. some have more waist and others do not. These are just observations I have made, also Hsing Ie seems to be the one with the biggest differences. For example the three Body stance seems to have a different meaning in Colorado Tennessee Texas and Atlanta from what I have seen. I try to maintain the triangle of my stance. if it is a short bostance then it does not maintain the definition of the 3 body stance. As I was taught. KC

[brucereiter]

When I say changes I mean differences, some train Yang 64 at a 30 minute pace some 20, at times the angle and stance are different some do it with the front and back foot in line and some off line. some have more waist and others do not. These are just observations I have made, also Hsing Ie seems to be the one with the biggest differences. For example the three Body stance seems to have a different meaning in Colorado Tennessee Texas and Atlanta from what I have seen. I try to maintain the triangle of my stance. if it is a short bostance then it does not maintain the definition of the 3 body stance. As I was taught. KC

i have also seen very different understandings expressed from the various schools i have visited.

i have heard some say they practice the yang 64 for at a pace that takes them 30-50 minutes to complete. i think that is too slow.

i do it 3 basic ways:
"fast" round about 4-5 minutes
"normal" round 10-13 minutes
"long" round about 20 minutes.

in my practice i will do yang 64 back to back several times. sometimes i will go very slow pace and others a bit fast but the important part in my opinion is not how slow i go but how connected my movements are.

i understand your thought on san ti, i have observed many versions of it from all the "groups" you mentioned. i think the height of the "bo stance" is not as important as the body alignment. but you should do it as you are taught and also as you discover from practicing what you were taught.

another question i will repeat is do you think gmt could have taught (lets use yang 64 as the example) differently to the various masters/teachers/students that he has taught one on one or in a class setting.

best

bruce

[Golden Tiger]

another question i will repeat is do you think gmt could have taught (lets use yang 64 as the example) differently to the various masters/teachers/students that he has taught one on one or in a class setting.


Move for move, yes. Master Sin has never been a big stickler for "this hand must go right here " everytime as opposed to Master Hiang who was. And there will always be some variation when someone learns and does a form. Personally, I think spending a lot of time on it is missing the forest for the trees.

But having said that, I can see a lot of differences in the forms from when they were first taught (yes, I was there for most of them) and drilled and drilled and drilled and some of the versions today. I think what happened is a dilution effect. Some popped up to the Sports Center, learned something once, took notes (this was in the days of 200lb camcorders mind you) then never took the time to soilidify the foundation of what the particular form had to offer.

So it comes as no suprise that when some of us see obvious additions, subtractions and just plain wrong stuff being done, we do stop and just shake our heads at it.

[Baqualin]

Move for move, yes. Master Sin has never been a big stickler for "this hand must go right here " everytime as opposed to Master Hiang who was. And there will always be some variation when someone learns and does a form. Personally, I think spending a lot of time on it is missing the forest for the trees.

But having said that, I can see a lot of differences in the forms from when they were first taught (yes, I was there for most of them) and drilled and drilled and drilled and some of the versions today. I think what happened is a dilution effect. Some popped up to the Sports Center, learned something once, took notes (this was in the days of 200lb camcorders mind you) then never took the time to soilidify the foundation of what the particular form had to offer.

So it comes as no suprise that when some of us see obvious additions, subtractions and just plain wrong stuff being done, we do stop and just shake our heads at it.

You always pop in just to show how smart you are.;)

[Daniel09]

I wish I could learn this stuff properly, but I don't have anyone or anything to learn by. Everything I can find only explains the concept and I can't afford to go anywhere.

On a happier note, I've figured out how to fall properly (aka without hurting myself). :D

[kwaichang]

I originally stated SD in 1981 at that time the first 6 of 1-30 were taught in 6 months. Maybe the speed it is taught attributes to the differences. Not the amount of material KC:D

[Leto]

yes KC, I think you are right. Now they try to teach over 20 long forms in less than 2 years, not to mention all the other beginning material. It's too much. I really wish there could have been more time spent on drills and conditioning for the various styles and weapons. The way it's taught in the west, it's like "here's this month's form, hurry up and learn it. we're spending four weeks learning this martial arts style, next month it's something different. So you better come to every class if you don't want to miss something!". I spent three years doing it that way, and stopped. Now I've backtracked to spend the last two years on my own, internalizing the stuff I learned, mostly the material through first black, and some forms I learned from GM The. I don't plan on re-entering the "system" any time soon...I have enough material to keep me occupied for a long time.
There is a wealth of awesome application just in the black tiger forms, which takes a lot of practice to master. There is no way one month can get you anywhere close to knowing it all. (I realize that the forms are revisited every year at the same time, but doing 20 things once a year is a very slow and inefficient way to learn. It would take you at least ten years doing it that way to become as proficient as if you spent one solid year practicing it. )

The average student would be a lot more solid if they had the opportunity to train the way you guys did "back in the day". Someone should do something about that ;)

[tattooedmonk]

yes KC, I think you are right. Now they try to teach over 20 long forms in less than 2 years, not to mention all the other beginning material. It's too much. I really wish there could have been more time spent on drills and conditioning for the various styles and weapons. The way it's taught in the west, it's like "here's this month's form, hurry up and learn it. we're spending four weeks learning this martial arts style, next month it's something different. So you better come to every class if you don't want to miss something!". I spent three years doing it that way, and stopped. Now I've backtracked to spend the last two years on my own, internalizing the stuff I learned, mostly the material through first black, and some forms I learned from GM The. I don't plan on re-entering the "system" any time soon...I have enough material to keep me occupied for a long time.
There is a wealth of awesome application just in the black tiger forms, which takes a lot of practice to master. There is no way one month can get you anywhere close to knowing it all. (I realize that the forms are revisited every year at the same time, but doing 20 things once a year is a very slow and inefficient way to learn. It would take you at least ten years doing it that way to become as proficient as if you spent one solid year practicing it. )

The average student would be a lot more solid if they had the opportunity to train the way you guys did "back in the day". Someone should do something about that ;)BINGO!!!:D;):cool:

[kwaichang]

When I learned the 1-30 I tried to do each one 500 times then the next etc. I feel 1st BB should take 5 years so as to promote a good foundation. Many years ago I had a teacher that made you do the forms you had learned for the previous belt before learning the next , we didnt even get to see the next form until we had done that . KC

[Daniel09]

What are the 1-30? And can they be explained in text so that I could try it?

[kungfujunky]

number 1 block punch block down step

got it?

[Daniel09]

I think so. What's a down step and what kind of block? I'm not knowledgable of what the names for different activities are.

[tattooedmonk]

I think so. What's a down step and what kind of block? I'm not knowledgable of what the names for different activities are.This might help a little more than that. # 1. Step forward into a bow and arrow stance ( gong bu). If the right leg is forward then the left arm should be out in front doing a horizontal fist punch ( shoulder height) and the right hand should be pulled into your hip (Do not rest it on your hip), next, the left arm is going to horizontally block high, above your head at a right angle as the right arm thrusts forward into a horizontal fist punch( where the previous fist was) then you are going to block down with both of your forearms about waist height and at a 45 degree angle, then step forward............ Make sure your hips , shoulders ,and feet are square and in alignment. Meaning that you should be able to draw a line from your right foot , hip, and shoulder. Same for the other side. Get it??

[Golden Tiger]

If the right leg is forward then the left arm should be out in front doing a horizontal fist punch ( shoulder height) and the right hand should be pulled into your hip (Do not rest it on your hip), next, the left arm is going to horizontally block high, above your head at a right angle The blocking hand should stop at the temple, palm out, knuckles aligned slighty behind the corner of the eyeas the right arm thrusts forward into a horizontal fist punch( where the previous fist was)while rotating the shoulders from a perpindicular line of the hips to a straight line, beginning the drive from the left foot, through the hips, finally to the shoulders (serial linkage) then you are going to block down with both of your forearms about waist height the left hand should make an arcing path from the head to rest near the left hip, the right also making an arc to the outside in, snapping the fist to palm up to snap the forearm just prior to the stop, stopping in line with the body, elbow pinky to thumb length from the bottom rib, bent at a 45 deg. angle, fist slightly below the line of sightand at a 45 degree angle, then step forward............ Make sure your hips , shoulders ,and feet are square and in alignment. Meaning that you should be able to draw a line from your right foot , hip, and shoulder. Same for the other side. Get it??


See, same form, taught a million times, practiced even more, with subtle differences....go figure

[Chain Whip]

When I learned the 1-30 I tried to do each one 500 times then the next etc. I feel 1st BB should take 5 years so as to promote a good foundation. Many years ago I had a teacher that made you do the forms you had learned for the previous belt before learning the next , we didnt even get to see the next form until we had done that . KC

Building a solid foundation with 1-30 is critical for development in our art. We don't care much about time in the art as much as what you have done since your first class. An athletically gifted student who works very hard should progress a lot faster than an average athlete who doesn't practice hard at all. (GMT went from white belt to 10th black in 18 years. So, traditionally advancement must have been merit based and not seniority based. Our current time frames say it is a minimum of 56 years to reach 10th Black - 16 years minimum to get to 5th Black)

Doing each short form 500 times is a great idea - as is actually doing all 49 I Chin Ching every week. We have always required that a person be able to do all the previous material. To test for 5th Black for instance, the evaluation covers all the test material for every earlier rank. You never know what order you will have to perform it in. You might do a couple of tiger forms followed by brown belt weapons and then have to do 1-30 out of sequence - something like odd numbers only ascending and then do the even numbers descending - and still get done in 3 minutes. You might have to start in the middle of a couple of forms. You have to do all 5 levels of Classical Pa Kua training, know all the I Chin Ching from memory. So, you essentially have to do all of your previous tests with additional twists to make it more difficult. GMT will only test on the material in that rank when he comes to town (be a really long test otherwise) But the person standing in front of GMT is capable of doing any and every earlier rank test - but better than when they initially tested . We pride ourselves on having all this material, but if you aren't still doing the things you learned 10 years ago then you really don't have that much material anyway. One of the best quotes about our system - I think it comes from EM Smith, is: "The best thing about our system is we have all this material. The worst thing about our system is we have all this material."

[Daniel09]

If the right leg is forward then the left arm should be out in front doing a horizontal fist punch ( shoulder height) and the right hand should be pulled into your hip (Do not rest it on your hip), next, the left arm is going to horizontally block high, above your head at a right angle The blocking hand should stop at the temple, palm out, knuckles aligned slighty behind the corner of the eyeas the right arm thrusts forward into a horizontal fist punch( where the previous fist was)while rotating the shoulders from a perpindicular line of the hips to a straight line, beginning the drive from the left foot, through the hips, finally to the shoulders (serial linkage) then you are going to block down with both of your forearms about waist height the left hand should make an arcing path from the head to rest near the left hip, the right also making an arc to the outside in, snapping the fist to palm up to snap the forearm just prior to the stop, stopping in line with the body, elbow pinky to thumb length from the bottom rib, bent at a 45 deg. angle, fist slightly below the line of sightand at a 45 degree angle, then step forward............ Make sure your hips , shoulders ,and feet are square and in alignment. Meaning that you should be able to draw a line from your right foot , hip, and shoulder. Same for the other side. Get it??


See, same form, taught a million times, practiced even more, with subtle differences....go figure

Thanks! That makes sense and I'll make sure to practice it to the point where a line can be drawn from my foot to hip to shoulder. This'll take me awhile to get somewhat correct so I'll probably inquire step two in a few weeks or possibly a month or two.

[tattooedmonk]

If the right leg is forward then the left arm should be out in front doing a horizontal fist punch ( shoulder height) and the right hand should be pulled into your hip (Do not rest it on your hip), next, the left arm is going to horizontally block high, above your head at a right angle The blocking hand should stop at the temple, palm out, knuckles aligned slighty behind the corner of the eyeas the right arm thrusts forward into a horizontal fist punch( where the previous fist was)while rotating the shoulders from a perpindicular line of the hips to a straight line, beginning the drive from the left foot, through the hips, finally to the shoulders (serial linkage) then you are going to block down with both of your forearms about waist height the left hand should make an arcing path from the head to rest near the left hip, the right also making an arc to the outside in, snapping the fist to palm up to snap the forearm just prior to the stop, stopping in line with the body, elbow pinky to thumb length from the bottom rib, bent at a 45 deg. angle, fist slightly below the line of sightand at a 45 degree angle, then step forward............ Make sure your hips , shoulders ,and feet are square and in alignment. Meaning that you should be able to draw a line from your right foot , hip, and shoulder. Same for the other side. Get it??


See, same form, taught a million times, practiced even more, with subtle differences....go figureThanks for your help!:D:cool:

[Shaolin Wookie]

Ouch!!!! I kicked the friggin' corner of my bed this morning when I was stumbling around, getting ready for work! I'm limping like a war vet with shrapnel in his foot.

Them dar beds is lethal weapons, ya' here!:mad:

Why do they have to be made of that super-metal adamantium bone-shattering alloy?

Right on the top of the foot, too. Not a usual stubbed toe. Not a good morning at all.

[John Dufresne]

OK GUYS I GUESS YOU HAVE ABOUT SAID IT ALL. I JUST WISH I HAD THE TIME WASTED BY US ALL TO TRAIN EVEN MORE IN SD. BUT ALAS I DO NOT AND I TOO HAVE CAST MY PEARLS BEFORE SWINE. YOU ALL SAY THAT SD IS NOT THE REAL DEAL BUT ALL YOU DO IS OFFER HERESAY AND A SMIDGEN A VERY SMALL SMIDGEN OF TRUTH AT BEST. SO SINCE YOU CANT PROVE OR DISPROVE ANYTHING LET ME SAY YOU ARE JUST JEALOUS.
I HAVE FOUND IN LIFE THAT PEOPLE WHO ARE ENVIOUS OF SOMETHING TYPICALLY TRY TO MAKE IT INTO A LIE OR SAY BAD OR UNTRUE THINGS, IT IS HUMAN NATURE. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AN ITEMIZED LIST OF FALSEHOODS OF THE SD SYSTEM NUMBERED SO WE CAN DEBATE THEM 1 BY 1.
HOW ABOUT IT TWS I KNOW YOU BEST AND WHY YOU ARE SO DETERMINED TO SAY SD IS NOT FROM THE SHAO-LIN TEMPLES IS BEYOND ME YOU ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE AN EGO . SO HERE IS ALL YOU GUYS CHANCE TO ITEMIZE AND PROVE YOUR WAY OF THINKING ONCE AND FOR ALL. THIS IS A CHALLENGE TO ALL WHO FEEL SD IS NOT SHAOLIN. KC:o

Hehehehe

Should we begin at 1?
Shaolin---------Chinese
Karate Do-----Japanese
or 2?
From Indonesia; neither place
or 3?
I was there!!
Oh Im sorry 1 more small bit of trivia- I spent the last 20 years travelling to and from China and I have been to North Shaolin as well as Putian (Southern Shaolin) I was the coach of the US Team to the first Nan Shaolin Competition in 1994; FYI no one knows him or SD or anything that resembles the forms they do.

I remember first hand being in Beijing while working out with the Beijing team when he brough a group from Lexington to china to errect a monument at the Shaolin Temple that was paid for by the students who traveled with them. Not because of some liniage to the Temple- anyone can buy a monument there-- they were trying to collect funds for restorations to the temple at that time. Many american schools have monuments there. But it was said to those students that the whole reason to traveled there was in honor of the rising of this monument in the name of SD. Some what decieving dont you think?I spoke with Chen Guan Shi (Monk at North Shaolin Hunan) he told me personally "they laughed when SD students demonstrated their forms" while they visited there.

Anyway sorry why am I even typing? What is the truth something that is said but not done or something done but not said? Everyone knows the truth- if we refuse to hear the truth its only because we have listed to lie's to long, we loose the ability to hear the truth.

[kwaichang]

How can we debate this and I guess you should be believed ?? Your point is ???? KC

[John Dufresne]

How can we debate this and I guess you should be believed ?? Your point is ???? KC

How can "we" debate? Well you cant- you were not there---I was -I dont have to prove or disprove!
"it is what it is"!
Are you a student? be one listen and be silent

[John Dufresne]

How can "we" debate? Well you cant- you were not there---I was -I dont have to prove or disprove!
"it is what it is"!
Are you a student? be one listen and be silent

Oh and one more thing you can debate all you want with other of this forum about what was or what might have happened. But you are talking to me- I refuse to hear lies by someone who has NOT A CLUE! who was not there- and dont tell me that you heard from someone who heard it from someone who taught someone else.
I am giving it to you straight--- If you choose to live in a fantasy go right ahead- the people of this forum were obviously trying to help you not hurt. Sometimes truth can be painful the further away we go.

[tattooedmonk]

So what ?? I mean people laugh and poke fun at just about anyone and/or anything. Some people will say it is real and some people will say it is made up, etc. But just because you come here all of a sudden and say things that many people before you have said , are we are just suppose to say"oh now we know SD is not real chinese martial arts ,etc.because this guy says so, case closed."???

Give it a rest already and get over yourself.:rolleyes:

I admire the skill that it takes to master wushu but I would laugh right in your face if you said you could use it to fight or defend yourself. At least we know that SD works for this purpose and we have a good time doing it and learning it , which is all that really matters. The stories legends , lineage ,etc. really do not matter in the grand scheme of things all that matters is that it works. :D

[kwaichang]

"Are you a student? be one listen and be silent. "

I am not your student and dont care to be . If you are who you say you are then you should have been taught respect and discipline 1st. You are just rude and arrogant. Not the personality of a true master. Wu Shu well I wont even comment on it not worth my time. KC

[MasterKiller]

Ouch!!!! I kicked the friggin' corner of my bed this morning when I was stumbling around, getting ready for work! I'm limping like a war vet with shrapnel in his foot.

Them dar beds is lethal weapons, ya' here!:mad:

Why do they have to be made of that super-metal adamantium bone-shattering alloy?

Right on the top of the foot, too. Not a usual stubbed toe. Not a good morning at all.

Do you live in a prison? Who the hell sleeps in a metal bed?

[Chain Whip]

I remember first hand being in Beijing while working out with the Beijing team when he brough a group from Lexington to china to errect a monument at the Shaolin Temple that was paid for by the students who traveled with them.

I spoke with Chen Guan Shi (Monk at North Shaolin Hunan) he told me personally "they laughed when SD students demonstrated their forms" while they visited there.

I hope you are better with your other "facts" than this. You are speaking of the 1992 Trip where the Soards - not GMT brought a group primarily from Denver – not Lexington and saw the unveiling of the marker paid for by the Soards -not the people on the trip. The Head Abbott was there and was kind and pleasant. There was no laughing at the demo (however most of it was pretty poor other than one Hua and the Drunken Spear form) it seems you are indicating that these "honorable" monks were so disingenuous as to laugh behind our backs instead of to GMT's face.

[John Dufresne]

I hope you are better with your other "facts" than this. You are speaking of the 1992 Trip where the Soards - not GMT brought a group primarily from Denver – not Lexington and saw the unveiling of the marker paid for by the Soards -not the people on the trip. The Head Abbott was there and was kind and pleasant. There was no laughing at the demo (however most of it was pretty poor other than one Hua and the Drunken Spear form) it seems you are indicating that these "honorable" monks were so disingenuous as to laugh behind our backs instead of to GMT's face.

No Im not "GMT" was there -so was I -were you?
Arogant? I get alittle ****ed off at being called a lier from people that have no clue- I dont know you- find out who your talking with before you make such big claims youself.
I really dont care (consdering the source) what you think of me- You are speaking from the mouth of other people- you dont know the history other than what you have been told. So for that "I forive you" Bt dont continue to argue a point with someone that was there- I NEVER made any claims- everyone else has- a statement was made- I am the proof- that is why I answered. Why is my language so hard for you to understand? The truth is the truth. You can tell me that peaches come from pair tree's till your blue in the face. I judge the by the fruit not what someone is telling me what type of a tree you come from.
By the way sonny- If you think im arogant- look at yourself befor youmake your claim-you are the one arguing with someone that has studied MA for 45 years. Have some respect- By the way who are you anyway? I am on here with my real name

[kwaichang]

You are on here to toot your own horn. The fact that you were there means nothing it just means you were there the Swords gave GMT one stone and Lex the other. So what. That does not disprove anything about Sd and I have laughted at many MA that were legit and I too know real MA. You are just an arrogant self promoting MA if you really are one. The Modern WuShu is nothing more than dance as Funakoshi said MA without the mind of the enemy is only dance. The proof is in the pudding. Can you use it or not does it work or not period I dont give a Rats A$$ where it comes from but SD is the real deal like it or not. KC

[John Dufresne]

You are on here to toot your own horn. The fact that you were there means nothing it just means you were there the Swords gave GMT one stone and Lex the other. So what. That does not disprove anything about Sd and I have laughted at many MA that were legit and I too know real MA. You are just an arrogant self promoting MA if you really are one. The Modern WuShu is nothing more than dance as Funakoshi said MA without the mind of the enemy is only dance. The proof is in the pudding. Can you use it or not does it work or not period I dont give a Rats A$$ where it comes from but SD is the real deal like it or not. KC

WHAT! Promte what----Im not promoting anything- where have I said or made a claim to fame (Frankly I know nothing)
Im just angry at people that mention my name - stop

Let me ask you- to simply put yourself in my shoes- how would you react? Frankly I have sat back and said nothing for YEARS. Enough is enough cut it out stop mentoning me.
Call me on the phone we will talk in person not in a forum- you think I want to self promote- I have nothing to promote.
978-846-7417

[John Dufresne]

WHAT! Promte what----Im not promoting anything- where have I said or made a claim to fame (Frankly I know nothing)
Im just angry at people that mention my name - stop

Let me ask you- to simply put yourself in my shoes- how would you react? Frankly I have sat back and said nothing for YEARS. Enough is enough cut it out stop mentoning me.
Call me on the phone we will talk in person not in a forum- you think I want to self promote- I have nothing to promote.
978-846-7417

Boy you really are ignorant- (Wu-shu) proof in the pudding? where are you? who are you? you definatly dont know me very well do you!!!!!!!!!! I have already proven many many times- I definatly dont need to prove to a ignorant child like you- but if your willing I live in boston- you know my number- quite talkin start walkin.

[kwaichang]

You are the only one that has mentioned your name you came on here spouting off. Why, :cool: are you just a troll. Seems that way. I have no need to meet or call you. I have nothing to prove you are on here to start cra/ so why dont you just go wu and shu somewhere else. KC:(

[Golden Tiger]

Welcome back Johnny, heck, its been what, 3 years or so since you last graced the forum with your insightfulness?:rolleyes:

[Shaolin Wookie]

Now all we have to do is a little net search, and order a dozen or so pizzas..........;)

[kwaichang]

No Wookie that would put you on his level. I dont understand his post?? Who mentioned his name until he showed up I hadnt heard of him.
You know at work I work with 5-6 different disciplines, PT OT Speech MD Nurses CNA etc, everyone feels that what they do is the most important and best thing for the patient. Well we are a team and even though there are members of the team that are self promoting as to what they do we still need to work togethor. I saw a movie once that said basically that until he feels the force of what you do he will not respect you. I feel that is the thing here. We are all brothers in a way even the brother that is the wayward one. So lets just talk technique and quit all the bashing. I personally started on this forum to converse about MA not is this this real or not. I know some of my posts do not reflect that though. I just love MA period and feel strongly about my life in MA KC

[Shaolin Wookie]

'Sall good. Same here. BTW, this dude's a troll, man.

[Mas Judt]

I would love to referee a match between a modern Wushu coach from China and an SD master. I'd be happy to arrange it and video it.

I think you will be very surprised with the result. Just because a good chunk of the training has been modified for performance, it does not mean they are with skill. And thier material is much more in line with CMA principle than Shaolin Do.

now, put that Kool Aid down...

[kwaichang]

Mas You slay me. Ha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. KC

[Mas Judt]

Why is it so funny? I mean, I know why I think it is funny, but I guess you are probably laughing from fear.

I'll be happy to set it up and ref, if you think I am not impartial, I can get an MMA guy to ref. (Just don't wear all those zippy patches on your pajamas, it might influence his decision.)

[kwaichang]

Again you slay me I bet you hoped it would be fought like the ancient Greek olympics didnt ya KC:rolleyes::eek:

[kwaichang]

BTW You dont have to be impartial when one is unconscious. I could care less who refs. KC

[synack]

For those who want to critique. There is a new video up at http://shaolincenter.com/

[Chain Whip]

John Dufresne;780608]No Im not "GMT" was there -so was I -were you?
Arogant? I get alittle ****ed off at being called a lier from people that have no clue- I dont know you- find out who your talking with before you make such big claims youself. I didn't say GMT wasn't there - I said he didn't "bring" the group. Yes, I was there - don't recall you being there. If you were there why don't you tell the story about the firecrackers at the unveiling of the marker?

You are speaking from the mouth of other people- No I'm not.

one arguing with someone that has studied MA for 45 years. Have some respect- Maybe you should do something to earn it. I'm happy for you that you took your first class 45 years ago - I have no idea what you have actually done since then - but I have seen you perform a couple of times - thought you were pretty good actually - just not as good as you think you are.

[BM2]

Do you live in a prison? Who the hell sleeps in a metal bed?

Man I never thought about it before now but I do:o And it's a canopy:o

[BM2]

It is my opinion that the stone is in honor of the ones who purchased it (Soards). For those of have seen it, what is your opinion?

[DPL]

WHAT! Promte what----Im not promoting anything- where have I said or made a claim to fame (Frankly I know nothing)
Im just angry at people that mention my name - stop

Let me ask you- to simply put yourself in my shoes- how would you react? Frankly I have sat back and said nothing for YEARS. Enough is enough cut it out stop mentoning me.
Call me on the phone we will talk in person not in a forum- you think I want to self promote- I have nothing to promote.
978-846-7417

Boy you really are ignorant- (Wu-shu) proof in the pudding? where are you? who are you? you definatly dont know me very well do you!!!!!!!!!! I have already proven many many times- I definatly dont need to prove to a ignorant child like you- but if your willing I live in boston- you know my number- quite talkin start walkin.

Dude, when you quote yourself and post something like this under it, it looks like you're arguing with yourself. Maybe that's a skill you picked up in your '45 years of MA experience', and hopefully you have some good, intelligent, impassioned discussions with yourself, but most people just think it's nuts.

There's almost a rhythm to the flame wars starting up and dying down on this thread. It's like the rising and setting of the sun, or the changing of the tides. Or drinking then throwing up until you dry heave every weekend in college...

[DPL]

Bt dont continue to argue a point with someone that was there- I NEVER made any claims- everyone else has- a statement was made- I am the proof- that is why I answered.

You want the proof? I AM THE PROOF! YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE PROOF!!!

[cjurakpt]

For those who want to critique. There is a new video up at http://shaolincenter.com/

when someone starts a broadsword form with the opposite hand in a sword-finger mudra...sigh

[Mas Judt]

Well, at least you understand you would be knocked out KC.

Man that Kool aid must be tasty.

[tattooedmonk]

when someone starts a broadsword form with the opposite hand in a sword-finger mudra...sighThat is creative expression, the form does not start like that.

[tattooedmonk]

Is this the writer??

[cjurakpt]

That is creative expression, the form does not start like that.

wow, you guys just never quite with your rationalizations and justifications; the SD org should be paying you all an honorarium as Lord High Apologists

I mean, it's always something, right? no matter what inconsistencies get pointed out, they are always "not how it's really done"; amazing how pretty much every public display of SD is incorrect because of the individual doing it - I guess somewhere there is a hidden temple of SD people doing all the forms perfectly that he outside world will never get to see...
so, if it's "creative expression", where did it come from? I'll tell you where - they saw someone do a tai chi straight sword set like that, and thought it would look cool to do with a broadsword, having absolutely NO understanding of why you do that with a a straight sword and not a broadsword; you see lots of "creative expression" in TCMA, but it's within a framework based on certain sets of principles;
so, when he puts the broadsword behind the arm in the ready position after doing the bizzare move across his face from the craddle hold - is that also "creative expression"? is the cr@p that they pass off as a 2-man staff set or their strange version of "tai chi" also just being "creative"? and if he's being creative, why is it being done on a promo vid for a school that is promoting itself as "original" and "authentic"? why be creative if you got the real stuff? answer: 99% of the people seeing it have no clue, so, like all other SD stuff out there, you can have something that looks "kung fuey" that the general public is going to buy, but that actually contains all sorts of errors and inconsistencies that anyone with authentic TCMA experience will pick up; face it - its done like that because that's how it's it's taught, it's basically a cheap rip-off of TCMA, and that's the end of it;

[tattooedmonk]

wow, you guys just never quite with your rationalizations and justifications; the SD org should be paying you all an honorarium as Lord High Apologists

I mean, it's always something, right? no matter what inconsistencies get pointed out, they are always "not how it's really done"; amazing how pretty much every public display of SD is incorrect because of the individual doing it - I guess somewhere there is a hidden temple of SD people doing all the forms perfectly that he outside world will never get to see...

so, if it's "creative expression", where did it come from? you see lots of "creative expression" in TCMA, but certain things don't occur, because they are intrinsic to the thing itself (like doing sword mudra w/broad sword); and when he puts the broadsword behind the arm in the ready position after doing the bizzare move across his face from the craddle hold - is that also "creative expression"? is the cr@p that they pass off as a 2-man staff set or their strange version of "tai chi" also just being "creative"? and if he's being creative, why is it being done on a promo vid for a school that is promoting itself as "original" and "authentic"? why be creative if you got the real stuff? answer: 99% of the people seeing it have no clue, so, like all other SD stuff out there, you can have something that looks "kung fuey" that the general public is going to buy, but that actually contains all sorts of errors and inconsistencies that anyone with authentic TCMA experience will pick up; face it - its done like that because that's how it's it's taught, it's basically a cheap rip-off of TCMA, and that's the end of it;Look ,I just said what I believe it to be . He may have learned it like that, but I did not . I learned it from GMS and was right next to him for the whole seminar.

Yes, most of what is there is creative expression and or forms being done poorly.

Most people do not do them for the same reasons . The only people that look pretty doing them are forms champions or masters, these people do not fall into either of these catagories.

Why not give them a break and compliment them on what they have done that looks good or is done right??

This would be the sign of a true master and not an online critic.

Not everything is as it seems.

[brucereiter]

is that also "creative expression"? is the cr@p that they pass off as a 2-man staff set or their strange version of "tai chi" also just being "creative"? it's basically a cheap rip-off of TCMA, and that's the end of it;

hi cjurakpt,

i would like to address part of the above quote from you.

here is a clip of me practicing my understanding of yang tai chi chuan.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=9nJ3vwcR1EQ

what is "strange" about the way i presented yang tai chi chuan as i have learned it from shaolin do?

how is what i presented a "basically cheap rip off of tcma"?

what is it the end of?

best,

bruce

[kwaichang]

Yes someone would. For once you are right. KC Hey PT some people do change the forms and the intro etc. that does not make the whole system wrong just that person. Some like Bobath some dont but the rehab works . KC

[kwaichang]

The demo tape looks like a compilation of about 5-6 different forms Green Dragon Broadsword , Taichi BSword , Tai chi and others. KC

[DPL]

wow, you guys just never quite with your rationalizations and justifications;

Wow, you guys just never quit with the attacks.

[Golden Tiger]

It is my opinion that the stone is in honor of the ones who purchased it (Soards). For those of have seen it, what is your opinion?


I am with you on this one.......:rolleyes:

[Golden Tiger]

so, if it's "creative expression", where did it come from? I'll tell you where - they saw someone do a tai chi straight sword set like that, and thought it would look cool to do with a broadsword, having absolutely NO understanding of why you do that with a a straight sword and not a broadsword;

I will not apologize. The two finger salute (as aposed to the one finger salute that I usually am know for) is called "immortal points the way" and while generally seen only in jian forms, is present in the opening of the Green Dragon Broadsword form.

While it is used as a balance to the jian in "tai chi sword forms" as you say, it is merely used in this one as an opening move.

so, when he puts the broadsword behind the arm in the ready position after doing the bizzare move across his face from the craddle hold - is that also "creative expression"?

As KC stated, this is several different parts of different forms spliced together.

See, this is another case of commenting on something inwhich you know absolutely nothing about. How about you learn the forms first, then make an "informed "decision.......

[Judge Pen]

John, I don't think anyone has mentioned your name on these forums for quite some time.... not since the go-round I had with Frank regarding the existance (of lack of existance) of that tape.

Having said that, I'm a bit bemused as to the attacking tone. :confused:

[Mas Judt]

I think it should be obvious...

[Judge Pen]

Not from prior posts etc. I thought he was respectful in his disagreement especially considering the personal nature of the comments back then. Now its just the same old merry-go-round of SD arguments. No one was attacking John or discussing him until he came back on here.

Shoot, as much as we've discussed these topics, we should be on autopilot by now. :D

[cjurakpt]

Look ,I just said what I believe it to be . He may have learned it like that, but I did not . I learned it from GMS and was right next to him for the whole seminar.
ok, so you learned it differently - seems to be a lot of variation going on then (see below)...

Yes, most of what is there is creative expression and or forms being done poorly.
again, it always seems to be what is publically available that falls under those categories - interesting coincdence...
seems to be a lot of "creative expression" being encourraged - hey, fine - but is that still "authentic" and "original"? but I can understand why its encouraged, considering there was probably a lot of that at the source...

Most people do not do them for the same reasons . The only people that look pretty doing them are forms champions or masters, these people do not fall into either of these catagories.
I don't care about "pretty" - that's not my point at all - you can do a form "badly" but the intrinsic elements can still be intact...but if they're not there, it doesn't matter how you do it...

Why not give them a break and compliment them on what they have done that looks good or is done right??
when i see some, I'll say it

This would be the sign of a true master and not an online critic.
since I never claimed to be a master of anything, I don't have to worry about living up to some sort of idealized criteria of great equanimity

Not everything is as it seems.
apparantly disproportionately so in the world of SD; but then again, some people think that JFS won against Osiris...

[cjurakpt]

what is "strange" about the way i presented yang tai chi chuan as i have learned it from shaolin do?
well, compared to classical Yang Family set (which I don't do myself), some of the moves are different or missing (e.g. - you do brush knee only 2x and only with the left foot forward, as opposed to 5x; you don't have "raising up the hands" in between dan bin and bak hok leung chi; you do some extra movements with the left hand and don't have the twisting step going into bun lan choih); I wouldn't call it strange per se, but it certainly is not classical Yang

how is what i presented a "basically cheap rip off of tcma"?
what you presented specifically looks like an alteration of the Yang set, which hey, if someone has done tai chi as their primary art for some years and feel that they have the purview to make some well-informed changes, that's cool; tai chi is certainly not one big happy family with everyone doing the same form, that's for sure; so BTW, who changed around the form to the version you do?

[cjurakpt]

Hey PT some people do change the forms and the intro etc. that does not make the whole system wrong just that person. Some like Bobath some dont but the rehab works . KC
you know, the way you seem to really luv addressing me by those initials after my name - I'm guessing you've met one or two PT's in your life that rubbed you the wrong way (get it? get it?), hmmm?

and hey, as for changing forms - I say go for it - do it up! but what is informing those changes? c'mon, be honest...

Bobath? what's that?

[cjurakpt]

I will not apologize.
well that's a relief...BTW, what is it that you aren't sorry about?

The two finger salute (as aposed to the one finger salute that I usually am know for) is called "immortal points the way" and while generally seen only in jian forms, is present in the opening of the Green Dragon Broadsword form.
actually, classically the move "Immortal Points the Way" involves a bit more than just pointing with the fingers...for example, the direction in which you point is kinda important; also, pointing the way to what?...:rolleyes:
and also, so according to you it is present in the opening - looks like you and your training brother have some disagreement over that...
Originally Posted by tattooedmonk:
Look ,I just said what I believe it to be . He may have learned it like that, but I did not . I learned it from GMS and was right next to him for the whole seminar.

so, which is correct? or is it the custum of SD to play fast and loose with the "original" and "authentic" style it is passing down?

While it is used as a balance to the jian in "tai chi sword forms" as you say, it is merely used in this one as an opening move.
so, if it's "merely" used as an opening, what is the reason it was used as an opening? lemme guess - it looks nice...
look, if you want to switch things around, go ahead - go Pollock on the whole system if you want - but spare us the paens about authenticity and traditional Shaolin being taught

As KC stated, this is several different parts of different forms spliced together.
ummm - yeah, I think I got that...

See, this is another case of commenting on something inwhich you know absolutely nothing about. How about you learn the forms first, then make an "informed "decision.......
it seems like there are so many different versions of the forms going around that even you guys can't agree on what's what, so which versions would I have to learn? as for knowing nothing about it - well, after studying TCMA for the last 20+ years with various teachers actually from China, I think I have a little bit of an informed perspective on TCMA...but that's ok, you don't have to believe me...

[cjurakpt]

Wow, you guys just never quit with the attacks.

well, there's just so much material to cover...

[Baqualin]

Not from prior posts etc. I thought he was respectful in his disagreement especially considering the personal nature of the comments back then. Now its just the same old merry-go-round of SD arguments. No one was attacking John or discussing him until he came back on here.

Shoot, as much as we've discussed these topics, we should be on autopilot by now. :D

John Dufresne???
Hey JP, from what I know of John....this is not him.......he's much more respectful........it has to be some troll, trying to stir up more sh!t....these post made no since at all.
BQ

[Chain Whip]

It is my opinion that the stone is in honor of the ones who purchased it (Soards). For those of have seen it, what is your opinion?

It is unquestionably to honor the Soards as is the marker in Putian. GMT is almost an after thought. The marker at Chen Village honors GMT - paid for by the students on the 1998 trip.

[Chain Whip]

I would love to referee a match between a modern Wushu coach from China and an SD master. I'd be happy to arrange it and video it.

I think you will be very surprised with the result. Just because a good chunk of the training has been modified for performance, it does not mean they are with skill. And thier material is much more in line with CMA principle than Shaolin Do.

now, put that Kool Aid down...

Let's say we do this:)

If the SD Master lost you (and others) would cite it as "proof" that we are "fake" or whatever.

If the SD Master won you would not have the opposite reaction. So, what value would there be in doing it? Unless everyone promised to say an SD victory would be the ultimate proof of our validity.

Can we pick any modern wushu coach and can we use any SD Master we wish?:D:D

[Judge Pen]

Let's say we do this:)

If the SD Master lost you (and others) would cite it as "proof" that we are "fake" or whatever.

If the SD Master won you would not have the opposite reaction. So, what value would there be in doing it? Unless everyone promised to say an SD victory would be the ultimate proof of our validity.

Can we pick any modern wushu coach and can we use any SD Master we wish?:D:D


This type of ancedotal evidence is unreliable as so much will depend on the individual. I know people who have told me that they sparred an SD black belt and they were bad, displayed no power or root etc. and all I can say is oh, well I hope that I'm better. I've also heard people say that they've seen an SD black sash fight and that, whatever you say about the history, that student could fight well. Ok, great. Good for the student and his teachers.

Truth is, none of it means much outside of the motivation, skill and will of the two individuals at that precise moment in time. All other things equal, the validity of an art and its training methods should make a difference, but the other intangibles will always get in the way.

[Mas Judt]

JP,
I am offering the match in respone to comments about the superiority compared to Modern Wushu. which demonstrates a deep misunderstanding of who is actually out there and included under that label - guys like Liang shouyu, Pan qing fu or Li tai liang - guys with real skills.

It would be an illuminating experience for SD, as it would not really be a fight. Trust me on this.

[kwaichang]

Hey PT that is what you are right ? You are a PT and dont know the Bobath approach to Spasticity with Stroke TBI pt. ??? OK I guess you know as much about SD. And Mas there are good fighters in SD just like there are good ones else where put the best Wu Shu guy against the worst SD guy and he would lose take your pick on which one that would be . And as far as the form it is not the Immortal points the Way it is a Dragon Hand as the form is Green Dragon Broadsword not Tai Chi Broad Sword or Jian. KC:p

[cjurakpt]

Hey PT that is what you are right ? You are a PT and dont know the Bobath approach to Spasticity with Stroke TBI pt. ???


me PT, but not know Bobath - brain hurts when think about it :rolleyes:

boy, I'll bet you were all a-twitter thinking that I didn't know it (BTW, I was trained in NDT by Lois Bly - you can ask your PT friends who she is)

you know, we can throw out lots of other PT "must know" names: Kendal, Voss, Mitchell, Maitland; the list goes on...and what?

OK I guess you know as much about SD.
actually, I know more than I really want to at this point...but that's ok, I'm done arguing pointlessly with you, well, whoever you are (I'd refer to you by professional initials, but I'm not sure what it is that you actually do...)

And as far as the form it is not the Immortal points the Way it is a Dragon Hand as the form is Green Dragon Broadsword not Tai Chi Broad Sword or Jian. KC:p
looks like you and your training brother Golden Tiger have some discussing to do on that - man, somebody better have a chat with the folks at SD Quality Assurance...
btw, what does the Green Dragon symbolize, just for kicks?

[tattooedmonk]

It is unquestionably to honor the Soards as is the marker in Putian. GMT is almost an after thought.
I have to agree with this.They paid for it themselves.:rolleyes:

They did because they thought it would add credibilty to what they study and teach.

Just like the USSD people.:rolleyes::eek:

[tattooedmonk]

ok, so you learned it differently - seems to be a lot of variation going on then (see below)...


again, it always seems to be what is publically available that falls under those categories - interesting coincdence...
seems to be a lot of "creative expression" being encourraged - hey, fine - but is that still "authentic" and "original"? but I can understand why its encouraged, considering there was probably a lot of that at the source...


I don't care about "pretty" - that's not my point at all - you can do a form "badly" but the intrinsic elements can still be intact...but if they're not there, it doesn't matter how you do it...


when i see some, I'll say it


since I never claimed to be a master of anything, I don't have to worry about living up to some sort of idealized criteria of great equanimity


apparantly disproportionately so in the world of SD; but then again, some people think that JFS won against Osiris...#1 Yes there is.

#2 I believe it is because any of the masters do not care about what people think either way.

#3 Authentic and original forms have been changed and altered by masters in every style to suit their needs , why should SD be any differen? The forms are taught , for the most part , consistently the same way in most of the schools.

#4 So what do see as being the most intrinsic aspects of the forms and /or pieces of the forms that you have seen that are missing from what you have seen in SD ??


#5 So you have seen nothing that was good in SD what so ever?? Material or otherwise.

#6 So what makes you so qualified then to say one way or another as to what is correct or incorrect about what it is that SD does.

I mean it is easy to say from behind a computer, looking at a two dimensional video of forms to say" yeah they do not have this and this is not right, etc. But is it possible that looks my be deceiving ,that if you tried to test your beliefs against any of these people, that the you might be wrong??

[kwaichang]

My fupa PT I am sure you are Out pt, as I was for 11 years. I follow other precepts not a big fan of Maitland, I like Paris and Myo - Fascial met tech , Structural to Soft tissue. mobs. Strain counter strain and Corley / Kelsey tendon cond and Un-loading principles. So having said that what do i do for work. Likewise as you were not familiar with Bobath you may not be familiar with all the nuances of SD. as far as Dragon hand etc I am basing this on my DVD of the form by GMT it looks like a DRagon Hand not Immortal hand. I will look at the notes to be sure/. Mas who do you know in Wu Shu that you could set up a match with and what is their weight class ?? Just Curious. KC

[Chain Whip]

JP,
I am offering the match in respone to comments about the superiority compared to Modern Wushu. which demonstrates a deep misunderstanding of who is actually out there and included under that label - guys like Liang shouyu, Pan qing fu or Li tai liang - guys with real skills.

It would be an illuminating experience for SD, as it would not really be a fight. Trust me on this.

So, answer the question.

Can we pick any modern wushu coach and can we use any SD Master we wish?

[Judge Pen]

JP,
I am offering the match in respone to comments about the superiority compared to Modern Wushu. which demonstrates a deep misunderstanding of who is actually out there and included under that label - guys like Liang shouyu, Pan qing fu or Li tai liang - guys with real skills.

It would be an illuminating experience for SD, as it would not really be a fight. Trust me on this.


Sorry, I don't trust you on this, although I for one have never said that a wu shu person couldn't fight...if they train to. Their atleticism alone means they would be formidable if they have any will and intent and I think that there remains some marital intent in wu shu... it just doesn't have the intent that it did prior to the standardization and competition elements.

Pan qing fu is one of my favorites: "you must first hit with your eyes and then your heart; your hands will follow."

I stand by my statement that its more of an idividual element as opposed to a style vs. style.

[cjurakpt]

My fupa PT I am sure you are Out pt, as I was for 11 years. I follow other precepts not a big fan of Maitland, I like Paris and Myo - Fascial met tech , Structural to Soft tissue. mobs. Strain counter strain and Corley / Kelsey tendon cond and Un-loading principles. So having said that what do i do for work. Likewise as you were not familiar with Bobath you may not be familiar with all the nuances of SD. as far as Dragon hand etc I am basing this on my DVD of the form by GMT it looks like a DRagon Hand not Immortal hand. I will look at the notes to be sure/.

Maitland is a nice system if that's all you use - it is internally consistent to a fault; mixing it with other things diminishes its efficacy, IMHO (to wit, I have worked with a few GDMT's from Oz - they were very effective using it alone); Paris seems to be basically Maitland mixed in with other stuff (Kaltenborn, Grimsby, Roccobado, etc.), from what i understand, but I never took his courses; MFR is ok, but Barnes is a bit culty and somewhat of an Upledger wanna-be; as for Dr. John, don't get me started, I spent a lot (too much?) time with him in my early years, before getting into more classical osteo stuff (Mitchel, Sutherland, Jones - counterstrain is the DEAL - fixes pretty much everything; the rest usually can be nailed with MET and adjustment - yes, I do a good deal of adjust / Gr. V - cuts down on rx. time when used appropriately in a big way!); on the neuro end, picked up PNF from Vicki Johnson, and as for Bobath, again to be clear, I studied NDT but have used it for peds (CP, etc.); never did any in-patient adult neuro, never that interested in it for some reason; and I am not familiar with Corley / Kelsey

as for SD, hey, whatever - I have seen more TCMA in my travels than I care to remember, and quite frankly, I think I can make a pretty good assessment of what is what, and SD just doesn't have the right taste to it - it looks like, in all the examples I have seen, a 4th or 5th generation xerox of TCMA: may have started out as it, but got messed with here and there to the point where it lacks all but a superficial reseamblance to it; but whatever, as I said, that's just my opinion, it won't change things one bit

[cjurakpt]

#1 Yes there is.
what informs that variety?

#2 I believe it is because any of the masters do not care about what people think either way.
obviously they do if they are promoting thir schools as being "authentic" and "original" Shaolin...

#3 Authentic and original forms have been changed and altered by masters in every style to suit their needs , why should SD be any differen? The forms are taught , for the most part , consistently the same way in most of the schools.
again, what informs their decision to change something and the way in which it is changed? there's a big difference between me going in and moving stuff around in Bethoven's Fifth and Leonard Bernstein doing it...

#4 So what do see as being the most intrinsic aspects of the forms and /or pieces of the forms that you have seen that are missing from what you have seen in SD ??
the moves themselves, how they are strung together, the way they are played - all TCMA, despite being comprised of 100's of styles, has a certain flavor to it - SD lacks that, IMO

#5 So you have seen nothing that was good in SD what so ever?? Material or otherwise.
nope

#6 So what makes you so qualified then to say one way or another as to what is correct or incorrect about what it is that SD does.
nothing makes me qualified - I am just giving an opinion based on 20+ years in the world of TCMA; take it or leave it, you obviously choose the latter

I mean it is easy to say from behind a computer, looking at a two dimensional video of forms to say" yeah they do not have this and this is not right, etc. But is it possible that looks my be deceiving ,that if you tried to test your beliefs against any of these people, that the you might be wrong??
why is it that you can look at other TCMA styles who post their vids, and you can see what is going on just fine, but when it comes to SD, that is not the case? why does "defense" of SD always involves complex arguments and justifications? I mean, I can do a CLF form, and someone may tell me I suck, but no one would ever suggest it's not actually CMA - but for some reason, something about SD consistently sets off bells, whistles and red flags for TCMA practitioners - just sayin'

look guys, you believe in your reality, it's obviously done right by you, so I'm just gonna drop it here and let it be, because there's obviously no point in pursuing this any further

[kwaichang]

Corley and Kelsey are a husband / wife PT team with 20 years of research and they are the ones that originated the suni unloading system. It is a de-weighting principle excellent for disc pathology and sports rehab. I worked with Doug F. the inventor of ex-pro program. As far as the SD Green Dragon the opening move is " Fu Pu Liang Chang" " Tiger step spread the palm" not Immortal points the way. The guy just F/U as people do . Please do not judge the style by the man as we are all imperfect. PT I think we could discuss tendon cond tech of C/K if you were open to it. KC:)

[tattooedmonk]

what informs that variety?


obviously they do if they are promoting thir schools as being "authentic" and "original" Shaolin...


again, what informs their decision to change something and the way in which it is changed? there's a big difference between me going in and moving stuff around in Bethoven's Fifth and Leonard Bernstein doing it...


the moves themselves, how they are strung together, the way they are played - all TCMA, despite being comprised of 100's of styles, has a certain flavor to it - SD lacks that, IMO


nope


nothing makes me qualified - I am just giving an opinion based on 20+ years in the world of TCMA; take it or leave it, you obviously choose the latter


why is it that you can look at other TCMA styles who post their vids, and you can see what is going on just fine, but when it comes to SD, that is not the case? why does "defense" of SD always involves complex arguments and justifications? I mean, I can do a CLF form, and someone may tell me I suck, but no one would ever suggest it's not actually CMA - but for some reason, something about SD consistently sets off bells, whistles and red flags for TCMA practitioners - just sayin'

look guys, you believe in your reality, it's obviously done right by you, so I'm just gonna drop it here and let it be, because there's obviously no point in pursuing this any furtherIt could be many things . I believe that this is something you would have to ask each person that does it differently.

So what makes this different than any other schools that teach authentic and original materal , that has variety and different interpretations on the same material??

So what is this flavor you speak of??I mean I have seen this material done with root , power , explosiveness , fluidity, continuity,etc. the same as any other CMA, but what do you see as being the differences??

I would say most likely their perception, their mind set,understanding of the material , and how they would utilize it in application, etc..

I am serious about knowing your opinion . I would like to see you post something that you believe has al the essential elements of CMA( FLAVOR).

[tattooedmonk]

As far as the SD Green Dragon the opening move is " Fu Pu Liang Chang" " Tiger step spread the palm" not Immortal points the way. Correct.:D

[Golden Tiger]

As far as the SD Green Dragon the opening move is " Fu Pu Liang Chang" " Tiger step spread the palm" not Immortal points the way.

Hey, even I have an off day. :D Lesson #233, when in doubt, refer to your notes.

[sunfist]

My god, i actually can feel the abyss staring into me.

[cjurakpt]

I would like to see you post something that you believe has al the essential elements of CMA( FLAVOR).

this is a sample list of things I've seen recently:

Baji:
empty hand:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7563370787562781003&q=Master+Zhou+jingxuan&total=19&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=8
weapons:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGBQvPTGSmQ&mode=related&search=
application:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdqQHUsCXnQ&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQ9QaUwIW58&mode=related&search=

Kunlun
empty hand:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-566194860414964153&q=kunlun&total=60&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-595785909503964460
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7248746862387479722

Choi Lei Faht
empty hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf_snOHmTCg&NR=1
application:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KL108-I-vlA&NR=1
qigong:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZ4Mdzs2jmk&NR=1

Bagua
emptyhand:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=837097191211311101&q=fu+bagua&total=406&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=3
application:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzqFtz7oJfw&mode=related&search=

Taiji
empty hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1yisB38Lws
push hands:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=546144302659221218&q=push+hands+competition&total=114&start=20&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=9

Dragon
empty hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=887Pftw7aDk&mode=related&search=

Tong Bei
empty hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVSWz9XM9NA

[Baqualin]

this is a sample list of things I've seen recently:

Baji:
empty hand:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7563370787562781003&q=Master+Zhou+jingxuan&total=19&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=8
weapons:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGBQvPTGSmQ&mode=related&search=
application:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdqQHUsCXnQ&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQ9QaUwIW58&mode=related&search=

Kunlun
empty hand:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-566194860414964153&q=kunlun&total=60&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-595785909503964460
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7248746862387479722

Choi Lei Faht
empty hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf_snOHmTCg&NR=1
application:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KL108-I-vlA&NR=1
qigong:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZ4Mdzs2jmk&NR=1

Bagua
emptyhand:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=837097191211311101&q=fu+bagua&total=406&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=3
application:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzqFtz7oJfw&mode=related&search=

Taiji
empty hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1yisB38Lws
push hands:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=546144302659221218&q=push+hands+competition&total=114&start=20&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=9

Dragon
empty hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=887Pftw7aDk&mode=related&search=

Tong Bei
empty hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVSWz9XM9NA

I'm sorry cjurakpt I just don't see it.....I saw nothing that I haven't seen in a lot of SD people...except for the fact I don't see the power generation we're taught by GMS.....most of these guys would get killed by a good fighter.
The Kunlun looked like an offshoot of Chen Tai Chi to me.
The Baqua I've seen before (I know the guy is an old master)....not Impressed with the form at all.
Same with the Taiji...nothing to make me go wow, we need to take a look at what we're doing.

My favorite was the Kwan Do.....nice stances, flow and power......see the same in SD

All I can say if I have to look like a pu$$y doing my forms to be like TCMA....then I'll stick with the SD & GMS's way:D

[cjurakpt]

All I can say if I have to look like a pu$$y doing my forms to be like TCMA....then I'll stick with the SD & GMS's way:D
well, good luck with that then

[BentMonk]

Nice vids. IMHO the internal forms posted by SDIC were as good or better than the ones you posted. I liked the kwan dao form. I think JP's stances and over all movement are better than what you posted. I also think the drunken form posted earlier is as good or better than any of the empty hand vids you posted. Anyone can pick any form apart and point out every flaw. The fact that the forms are being performed by human beings and not robots means that there will always be a flaw somewhere, since there are no perfect human beings. TCMA is so buried in legends, lineage debates, and multiple interpretations of the same forms, that to single SD out for it is ridiculous. As many have pointed out, this is the age of information. Anyone beginning their martial arts journey is capable of doing the research needed to make an informed decision. SD, like every other MA has practitioners of assorted skill level. So if SD is so bad, why do we have so many happy students? :D

[Baqualin]

well, good luck with that then

Please don't take that as directed towards you...I like your post & critiques.....you only call it as you see it...just as I.
Best always,
BQ

[cjurakpt]

Nice vids. IMHO the internal forms posted by SDIC were as good or better than the ones you posted. I liked the kwan dao form. I think JP's stances and over all movement are better than what you posted. I also think the drunken form posted earlier is as good or better than any of the empty hand vids you posted. Anyone can pick any form apart and point out every flaw. The fact that the forms are being performed by human beings and not robots means that there will always be a flaw somewhere, since there are no perfect human beings. TCMA is so buried in legends, lineage debates, and multiple interpretations of the same forms, that to single SD out for it is ridiculous. As many have pointed out, this is the age of information. Anyone beginning their martial arts journey is capable of doing the research needed to make an informed decision. SD, like every other MA has practitioners of assorted skill level. So if SD is so bad, why do we have so many happy students? :D
as you and Baqualin seems to have missed the point: I was not asked to post forms that I thought showed someone who was better than the SD vids (and if you read my posts you will never see me say a single thing about anyone's skill level or performance per se - you guys luv to fall back on that claim about not everyone is perfect, there will always be flaws etc. etc. without even realizing it's not the argument being made!); what I was asked to post was what I thought were examples of the appropriate "flavor" of TCMA (go read the post before), meaning the content in terms of the moves themselves, how they were strung together in the macro context of the forms, and to some degree the manner in which the players did them; my contention is and has always been, that I personally do not see any of those qualitites in anything of SD that I have seen and so Kwai Chang asked me for examples of what I thought was indivcative of it; I wasn't trying to bolster my argument, just answering his question; in regards to my perspective, it's obviously pointless to argue it with anyone from SD, because it's not going to get anywhere, and I had stated above that I was no longer trying to do, but KC then asked for examples anyway; so for you guys to argue as if I were continuing to do so really makes no sense...

BTW, the argument "if a lot of people are happy with SD, that must make it right" has no basis in reality: you'd have to look at percentages, in terms of how many people who have EVER studied SD who are happy with it (probably most are not, like anything); as far as large numbers of people supporting something, that doesn't make it intrinsically good - millions of people supported the German government in in the 1930's, and that didn't turn out too well despite the numbers (no, I am NOT comparing SD to Nazi-ism)

[cjurakpt]

Please don't take that as directed towards you...I like your post & critiques.....you only call it as you see it...just as I.
Best always,
BQ

how could I possibly take it as directed to me?

[tattooedmonk]

as you and Baqualin seems to have missed the point: I was not asked to post forms that I thought showed someone who was better than the SD vids (and if you read my posts you will never see me say a single thing about anyone's skill level or performance per se - you guys luv to fall back on that claim about not everyone is perfect, there will always be flaws etc. etc. without even realizing it's not the argument being made!); what I was asked to post was what I thought were examples of the appropriate "flavor" of TCMA (go read the post before), meaning the content in terms of the moves themselves, how they were strung together in the macro context of the forms, and to some degree the manner in which the players did them; my contention is and has always been, that I personally do not see any of those qualitites in anything of SD that I have seen and so Kwai Chang asked me for examples of what I thought was indivcative of it; I wasn't trying to bolster my argument, just answering his question; in regards to my perspective, it's obviously pointless to argue it with anyone from SD, because it's not going to get anywhere, and I had stated above that I was no longer trying to do, but KC then asked for examples anyway; so for you guys to argue as if I were continuing to do so really makes no sense...

BTW, the argument "if a lot of people are happy with SD, that must make it right" has no basis in reality: you'd have to look at percentages, in terms of how many people who have EVER studied SD who are happy with it (probably most are not, like anything); as far as large numbers of people supporting something, that doesn't make it intrinsically good - millions of people supported the German government in in the 1930's, and that didn't turn out too well despite the numbers (no, I am NOT comparing SD to Nazi-ism)
Actually it was me that asked for your examples , but that does not matter.

So, now tell us what you see as being the difference between what you have seen from SD and in these videosa and similarities, if any.

I am truely interested in your perspective and opinion .

I have already seen things that I believe are different, but also similar.

What would you tell an SD practitioner to help them gain this FLAVOR?? Be serious . Do not say take another style.

[John Takeshi]

Brothers! Brethren!! Do you have a form in your repertoire that is a close approximation to this?: (I'm not sure how the punctuation is supposed to go for this kind of a transition from a question, which also sumbits something via what is normally reserved for a colon; but I think I have it right. If I don't, choose which punctuation you prefer.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymQh9rLgQyU

[Baqualin]

as you and Baqualin seems to have missed the point: I was not asked to post forms that I thought showed someone who was better than the SD vids (and if you read my posts you will never see me say a single thing about anyone's skill level or performance per se - you guys luv to fall back on that claim about not everyone is perfect, there will always be flaws etc. etc. without even realizing it's not the argument being made!); what I was asked to post was what I thought were examples of the appropriate "flavor" of TCMA (go read the post before), meaning the content in terms of the moves themselves, how they were strung together in the macro context of the forms, and to some degree the manner in which the players did them; my contention is and has always been, that I personally do not see any of those qualitites in anything of SD that I have seen and so Kwai Chang asked me for examples of what I thought was indivcative of it;

I never used the word better than or skill level......I understand what you mean....I only said I didn't see anything (flavor wise) any different than the way our forms should be performed other than power generation which if not applied properly, the forms will seem too choppy & not have the flow you would normally associate with TCMA
BQ

[BentMonk]

cjurakpt - The point of my post was that SD looks very similar to or better than the forms you posted, IMO. I also agree with Baqualin. If I have to take the power and snap out of my forms to be considered legit TCMA, I'll pass. My "so many happy students" comment was sarcasm, not justification. I think the whole "flavor" thing is like discussing art. Every one's opinion is subjective. I post on this thread for the fun of the debate. SD has given me a great deal. I freely admit that I have difficulty remaining objective in my arguments. That doesn't mean that I am dumb and blind. Some of the criticisms of SD are valid, some aren't.

[Chain Whip]

All I can say if I have to look like a pu$$y doing my forms to be like TCMA....then I'll stick with the SD & GMS's way

Have to agree with BQ here. This may be what some of you call TCMA - and maybe it is "modern" TCMA but you can't seriously believe that people practiced like we see in these two examples that was posted as good TCMA and then stepped on the battlefield the next day.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-595785909503964460

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=837097191211311101&q=fu+bagua&total=406&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=3

Some of the other clips were better - but most of them had the same complete lack of martial intent and power.

[tattooedmonk]

Originally Posted by Baqualin
All I can say if I have to look like a pu$$y doing my forms to be like TCMA....then I'll stick with the SD & GMS's way!!:D

I have to agree as well. I liked a great deal of those videos for what they were, but those videos are the EXACT reason why people think CMA / Kung Fu is not effective in a fight.

All of our training starts with the basics of rooting, balance, stability, strength, etc.

Most of what I see in regards to TCMA now a days the wind could blow them over and their strikes would make us laugh when and if we were hit by them.:D

The modern traditions of CMA are for show and have no martial application, unless you have a very cooperative opponent.:DThe lion dance , the outfits, the rituals ,etc. is sooo far removed from what REAL TCMA is about .

I think more TCMA schools should be looking at SD and borrowing some of the ideas to adapt their styles for modern day usage.:D

[Mas Judt]

Well, I'd say you are delusional, but perhaps you are way past that.

I'd like to know:

Do you believe

That Sin The' is THE Shaolin Grand master?

That Shaolin Do is the original and authentic art?

That the reason kung fu in China is different is because it is a lesser variant of the true original style?

That the reason your stuff looks like Karate is because it is 'for combat.'? (Heard from SD students.)

That the Shaolin monks honored Sin The' by erecting a stele in his honor?

These are things the 'grandmaster' says on his website. Do YOU believe them?

Honestly, you've got to be quite the tool to believe this tripe.

[Mas Judt]

It is near impossible to bring a true believer out of their delusion, so lets focus on the lies of Sin The', the grandhamster of shaolin do.

Do you believe them? Do you repeat them? Do you sell your 'art' by repeating them?

If so, do you sleep at night? How does it feel to be engaged in such bald faced deceit?

[Mas Judt]

FWIW, some will call me rude, but no one has bucked up and addressed the moral implications of fraud to support a martial arts club. It happens a lot, but I sense there are some true believers here. No one has been able to support SD outside of SD. It is obvious The' is a bull****ter. So why do you go along with it?

[Mas Judt]

Oh, tattoedmonk, it is best to be silent and thought of as a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

[tattooedmonk]

Well, I'd say you are delusional, but perhaps you are way past that.

I'd like to know:

1 Do you believe

That Sin The' is THE Shaolin Grand master?

2 That Shaolin Do is the original and authentic art?

3 That the reason kung fu in China is different is because it is a lesser variant of the true original style?

4 That the reason your stuff looks like Karate is because it is 'for combat.'? (Heard from SD students.)

5 That the Shaolin monks honored Sin The' by erecting a stele in his honor?

These are things the 'grandmaster' says on his website. Do YOU believe them?

Honestly, you've got to be quite the tool to believe this tripe. 1 I believe he is the Grandmaster of his system of shaolin.

2 I believe that the material is authentic and original.

3 Yes
4 yes
5 No

These are left up to interpretation. For example, to say that the Shaolin Monks erected a stele in his honor could mean, when the stele was erected they had a ceremony in his honor . ( Not to say this is the way it is or was ,just and example. )

I believe that most of what is written about the art is solid ,but that certain things have been blown out of proportion, kinda like in the game telephone.

[tattooedmonk]

FWIW, some will call me rude, but no one has bucked up and addressed the moral implications of fraud to support a martial arts club. It happens a lot, but I sense there are some true believers here. No one has been able to support SD outside of SD. It is obvious The' is a bull****ter. So why do you go along with it?
No one outside of SD can prove that it is not what we say it is, can they??

What makes GMS story any different than anyone elses out there? I mean up until recent times the stories of and many histories and lineges in CMA were unknown and unfounded and now many of them are being proven to be incorrect as well, so what do you make of that??

So what if they are stories that were told to a child to teach him the proper spirit of the art?? Many styles do this and have done this. it is possible that just like anything else that has a story that they have been blown out of proportion??

This does not take away from what they art has to offer. And if it does the art is not for them.

Believe me I do not know anyone that thinks that the legends/ history/ lineage is a major selling point.

It is the art and the people involved that are the selling points

[tattooedmonk]

If this bothers you so much why do you get involved?? Why not contact the Better Business Bureau , ETC., file a complaint and then take SD and GMS to court??

[kwaichang]

Hey PT I enjoyed the forms I can see the generation of power from the waist in the ones that I saw , I feel the practitioners have merit. I have to disagree with my SD partners and do not feel the practioners look weak at all. I can see the generation of power and the speed etc. As far as what I believe let me agree with TTM on most of what is said as far as the statue stone at the temple who cares the point is it is an honor that the Shaolin Temple allowd it to be erected in the 1st place paid for or not. As far as the differences of the "flavor" of the films shown compared to SD let me say this: In Karate Do power generation is from the base and depends upon Uchi Waza and Tsuki Waza. Most Chinese MA depend upon Uchiwaza style of stricking as Japanese have alot more Tsuki waza. I trained in Japanese styles for many years and I know them well and SD is not Japanese in power or form period. Does SD generate power as the ones in the clips , yes in some cases but not all, I have seen a different method in the clips posted by SD people so let it be known that not all the demos of SD are the best that I have seen performed by SD people. So please do not judge the style by the stylist. Mas I asked earlier what is the weight class of the Wu Shu guy who will fight ?? Again nothing has changed are the styles shown and SD different ?? Yes is one CMA and the other not ?? Who knows for sure. KC

[cjurakpt]

Actually it was me that asked for your examples , but that does not matter.
sorry, my mistake - hard to keep track of you all...

So, now tell us what you see as being the difference between what you have seen from SD and in these videosa and similarities, if any.
I am truely interested in your perspective and opinion .
I have already seen things that I believe are different, but also similar.
What would you tell an SD practitioner to help them gain this FLAVOR?? Be serious . Do not say take another style.
no, I wouldn't say to change styles, mainly because, to be honest, it's not of any interest to me what someone would do - changing styles might be the answer, it might not be, probably depends on the individual
anyway, as far as the differences, the only way I could do that effectively in a way that might convince you, is to sit down with you and review videos or practitioners side-by-side; but as I stated before, I am not going to bother with that because there is little point; you asked me to give you examples of what I thought constituted the flavor of which I spoke, I did so; if you do not see differences, then my describing them wouldn't do much good anyway; if you do see differences and feel SD's way of doing things is preferable, that's fine, again, my argument was not to convinve you otherwise

I never used the word better than or skill level......I understand what you mean....I only said I didn't see anything (flavor wise) any different than the way our forms should be performed other than power generation which if not applied properly, the forms will seem too choppy & not have the flow you would normally associate with TCMABQ
your original statement made mention of how forms are done by humans, not robots so everyone will have flaws, which implies that you were responding to a supposed critique of how someone performed the form, and it was in context of the vids I posted, so again it implies a comparative;

cjurakpt - The point of my post was that SD looks very similar to or better than the forms you posted, IMO. I also agree with Baqualin. If I have to take the power and snap out of my forms to be considered legit TCMA, I'll pass. My "so many happy students" comment was sarcasm, not justification. I think the whole "flavor" thing is like discussing art. Every one's opinion is subjective. I post on this thread for the fun of the debate. SD has given me a great deal. I freely admit that I have difficulty remaining objective in my arguments. That doesn't mean that I am dumb and blind. Some of the criticisms of SD are valid, some aren't.
similar and better than are two different criteria: they can look the same and better / worse or different and better / worse; likewise they can look better and same / different or worse and same / different; as far as lacking power and snap, I would suggest taking another look at the CLF vid of the guy doing technique drills with his students or the Baji vid of the guy doing the Green Dragon form; if youthink these lack "snap" and power generation, then I really can't say much more about it;

Have to agree with BQ here. This may be what some of you call TCMA - and maybe it is "modern" TCMA but you can't seriously believe that people practiced like we see in these two examples that was posted as good TCMA and then stepped on the battlefield the next day.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-595785909503964460
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=837097191211311101&q=fu+bagua&total=406&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=3
Some of the other clips were better - but most of them had the same complete lack of martial intent and power.
I would agree about the Kunlun sets that they do not appear to be that martially oriented - but I don't think that the intent is to be martial, TBH; however, bear in mind, that no one asked me to give examples of fighting or "real" martial application per se - remember, the entire example was about "flavor"; these are two entirely different things - if you wanted examples of how TCMA should be trained as relates to actual fighting, you might be surprised but I would not have posted forms - I would have posted San Da or Shui Jow or other things that involved live training against resisting opponents - personally, I think that forms are a tremendous misuse of time if youwant to train actual fighting, so, quite frankly, all your counterarguments about the forms lacking martial intent and power generation mean nothing to me anyway, because the whole context is irrelevant (let the gods of TCMA start hurling their thunderbolts...)

Originally Posted by Baqualin
I have to agree as well. I liked a great deal of those videos for what they were, but those videos are the EXACT reason why people think CMA / Kung Fu is not effective in a fight.
All of our training starts with the basics of rooting, balance, stability, strength, etc.
Most of what I see in regards to TCMA now a days the wind could blow them over and their strikes would make us laugh when and if we were hit by them.:D
The modern traditions of CMA are for show and have no martial application, unless you have a very cooperative opponent.:DThe lion dance , the outfits, the rituals ,etc. is sooo far removed from what REAL TCMA is about .
I think more TCMA schools should be looking at SD and borrowing some of the ideas to adapt their styles for modern day usage.:D
again, if you think that forms have anything to do with training fighting, I have a bridge here in NYC that is in need of new ownership
now, this is, of course, an entirely different discussion than what we were originally "debating" - again, be very clear that my entire discourse and example set was in regards to "flavor" - I made no claims or statements about martial efficacy - TBH, many of the guys I posted probably couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag - and that is regardless of how they do their forms; probably the Baji guy showing apps and the CLF guy would be the most able to actually use their stuff; possibly the Dragon guy depending on what he trained aside from forms; the Tong Bei, Kun Lun, Taiji and Bagua guys - I wouldn't hold my breath (even the bagua guy showing apps, although I like a lot of them, not so sure he'd do much in a fight); the best example of fighting, actually, was the push hands competition vid, because what you had there were two guys trying their hardest to resist what the other guy was doing (of course the skill level was very uneven)
as to why people think that TCMA-ists can't fight - it's not because their forms are weak, it's because they spend time doing forms in the first place, as opposed to other things that would be of greater benefit when it comes to fighting, like working against pads, or resisting opponents; these things not only give you real skill, they train all the stuff that forms proporte to train - rooting, stability, strength, balance, timing, coordination, speed, agility, etc. - in a FUNCTIONAL context, which contemporary Motor Learning theory research has shown time and again is one of, if not the strongest determinent of actual motor skill aquisition (KC - you must be familiar with the work of people such as Horak, Shumway-Cooke, Gentile and concepts of the contextual interference effect if you are in neuro rehab...)

Hey PT I enjoyed the forms I can see the generation of power from the waist in the ones that I saw , I feel the practitioners have merit. I have to disagree with my SD partners and do not feel the practioners look weak at all. I can see the generation of power and the speed etc.
again, my point had nothing to do with power generation or even inherent merit in regards to fighting - it was a matter of "style"; whether they are weak or strong, TBH, you can't say without seeing them in action

Most Chinese MA depend upon Uchiwaza style of stricking as Japanese have alot more Tsuki waza. I trained in Japanese styles for many years and I know them well and SD is not Japanese in power or form period. Does SD generate power as the ones in the clips , yes in some cases but not all, I have seen a different method in the clips posted by SD people so let it be known that not all the demos of SD are the best that I have seen performed by SD people.
you can debate power generation all you want - the fact of the matter is, when you train under live conditions against skilled, resisting opponents on a regular basis, most of that goes out the window, because you end up with a common denominator that, sorry to say, looks like MMA, BJJ, Sambo, Boxing / kickboxing, San Da, Muey Thai, Bando, etc.

So please do not judge the style by the stylist.
again, I have never commented on individual performances - my comments have ALWAYS been directed at content

[cjurakpt]

Do you believe
That Sin The' is THE Shaolin Grand master?
that's a stretch - I don't know if they claim that per se, but obviously this is not a singular position - there are / have been many individuals who have trained in Shaolin arts that could be construed as being of "grand master" status; what he actually studied, well, I think it was a bit more variegated than what the party line puts out...

That Shaolin Do is the original and authentic art?
I personally find that hard to believe, considering that what I have seen of it looks very different from the classical Shaolin sets that I have seen in my years in the TCMA community, or what now can be easily found on You Tube; it looks like it is a few generations away, xerox of a xerox, etc., and based on the content, looks like it was learned piecemeal and reconstituted into its current form - which is fine, it's just not "the original and authentic" Shaolin style anymore (but then again, that is, evidently and entire argument in and of itself - I believe Sal Canzonieri and others are currently discussing this on other threads in the Shaolin forum, and their research skills and experience far exceeds mine in this area)

That the Shaolin monks honored Sin The' by erecting a stele in his honor?
if he had the $$$, I;m sure they did, as they have done for many others (and, BTW, the Chinese don't inherently have a problem with this, because culturally it is understood what it means; the problem is when you come back to the US and put it out as an example of how someone is connected to the temple in a special sort of way)

These are things the 'grandmaster' says on his website. Do YOU believe them?
I personally have a hard time with the entire lineage story, especially as the pic of the Shaggy DA Grandmaster looks a lot like a pic I recall seeing elsewhere in the past...also, the whole idea of one person transmitting 999 forms to another person and that person doing the same to another is highly suspect; that, and the fact that Sin The's teacher and his teacher's teacher are not mentioned anywhere else is suspicious (and the justifications for why this is are just a bit too pat); all in all, it's a very romantic, idealized story, which, as those of us who have studied with actual Chinese "old guys", knows is hardly the way it is (e.g. - none of them studied with only one person, none of them knew 999 forms)

No one has been able to support SD outside of SD. It is obvious The' is a bull****ter. So why do you go along with it?
the lack of independent verification is a red flag: a very good litmus test is whether independent, outside sources who have no vested interest in a system's veracity corroborate its claims (e.g. - Jigiro Kano can be "verified" by many source who have nothing whatsoever to do with Judo)

SD seems to have a fair amount of "cult of personality" to it; I suspect it is also pretty cliquey; and again, it seems like a lot of the explanations are a bit too convenient: explaining the use of gi's, why no one has heard of his teachers...

in the end, it's up to the individual to decide if it resonates as true or not, of course...

[kwaichang]

My post commented on the biomechanical movements and generation of power which in my opinion is what constitutes the "flavor" of the style. also GMT claims to be the GM of SD not all the Shaolin Temples. SKTJ passed what he learned to Ie Chang Ming and on to GMT, there were other masters of the temples and I am sure they did the same after the split of the temples etc. So of course there are differences and different forms. GMT traces the origin of SD to the Shaolin Temples of which there were 6. That is SD lineage. KC

[tattooedmonk]

So you think forms have NOTHING to do with fighting or how to learn how to fight??

[Mas Judt]

KC - let me know what weight classes you want, and I'll see what can be done.

TM - nice respone, but Sin The' says 'there are many engineers, but only 1 shaolin grandmaster..' sure sounds like a very specific and often repeated claim...

[kwaichang]

Give me a Middle weight , Light Heavy and Heavy weight. KC

[Judge Pen]

Well, I'd say you are delusional, but perhaps you are way past that.

I'd like to know:

Do you believe

That Sin The' is THE Shaolin Grand master?

I believe that Sin The is the grandmaster of Shaolin-do as taught to him by Ie Chang Ming and the other teachers in Indonesia.

That Shaolin Do is the original and authentic art?

Yes, I beleive that Shaolin Do is an original and authentic art.

That the reason kung fu in China is different is because it is a lesser variant of the true original style?

No, its different because it evolved differently

That the reason your stuff looks like Karate is because it is 'for combat.'? (Heard from SD students.)

I don't think our stuff looks like karate, but I think our flow is different because the emphasis on power (or more fairly different ways of generating power) are different then much of what is seen in CMA today. I've never said that other CMA would be ineffective or not powerful in combat.

That the Shaolin monks honored Sin The' by erecting a stele in his honor?

Nope, American students honored their teacher by purchasing the stele



My comments are in bold.

[Judge Pen]

It is near impossible to bring a true believer out of their delusion, so lets focus on the lies of Sin The', the grandhamster of shaolin do.

Do you believe them? Do you repeat them? Do you sell your 'art' by repeating them?

If so, do you sleep at night? How does it feel to be engaged in such bald faced deceit?

Kung Tao is full of embellishments and tall tales (a nice way of saying a lie), but the art is still effective and can be freely taught with little more than a wink and a nod to the fantastical claims that are made. I think your approach is a good example of that.

[Judge Pen]

FWIW, some will call me rude, but no one has bucked up and addressed the moral implications of fraud to support a martial arts club. It happens a lot, but I sense there are some true believers here. No one has been able to support SD outside of SD. It is obvious The' is a bull****ter. So why do you go along with it?

I think its effective, practical and fun. And I don't feel misled as I can form my own opinions on things that are of less importance to me personally.

I mean I could care less if Su Kong Tai Djian was real or a fable. Since debate, part of me would love for some unknown record of his existence to pop up, just to shake things up, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

[cjurakpt]

So you think forms have NOTHING to do with fighting or how to learn how to fight??

minimal to not at all

[tattooedmonk]

minimal to not at allSo how do you think it helps minimally to not at all??

[cjurakpt]

So how do you think it helps minimally to not at all??

minially in the sense that there is the slight possibility that you might be doing some of the moves in the forms with the same intrinsic motor patterns that you might use in gihting, and also that, in a very general sense, you are developing fighting-related skills, or are at least in the mind-set of fighting; also, learning techniques "in the air" can be a good way for someone to get the basic, initial idea of a movement, but only provided that the way you practiced it was as close as you could get to how it would look in actual useage

not at all in the sense that the above is tenuous at best, and that otherwise real fighting has absolutely noting to do contextually with forms, in terms of how techniques are delivered, how you adapt to resistance from an opponent, the fact that you are throwing techs in the air versus contacting something, how your mind functions solo versus in confrontation with another person, etc. etc. etc.

throw in the fact that many of the most skilled fighters these days do not train forms, and you are about home...

finally, if you analyze forms practice from a contemporary motor learning perspective, you immediately see that they come out very very low on the continuum of contextual interference, which is probably the key ingredient in terms of developing functional motor skill, in the sense that you need to have a relatively high level of CI in order to get real retention and transfer of a motor skill; what that means is that if you want to be able to successfully fight against a live resisting opponent, you need to spend most of your time training in that context

BTW, before you throw out the old saw about MMA guys being limited by rules and that kung-fu techs are too deadly for the ring, my point is that it's the context that is more important then the content...

[Toby]

Can't believe I'm subscribed to this thread, nor that it's gone for so long. I remember when it started ...

... here is a clip of me practicing my understanding of yang tai chi chuan.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=9nJ3vwcR1EQ

what is "strange" about the way i presented yang tai chi chuan as i have learned it from shaolin do?

how is what i presented a "basically cheap rip off of tcma"?
Hi Bruce,

I don't formally learn tai chi, yang or any other style, but your movements are very limb oriented. It's "empty", there's no body behind it. I see no opening or closing, no torquing, your body seems static the whole way through. Sure, you turn and move but it's driven by your feet. Your arms move but they move alone, not through your centre. Compared to tcma, it's not necessarily strange or a cheap rip off because I see a lot of empty tcma too, at least on youtube vids. The way I learn (almost?) all movement should originate in the lower dan tien and all movements should be whole body, not limb. So, e.g. at ~19s you step with your left leg, weight it and turn to your left. It's not driven by your body. If I did the move, my leg would turn because it had to, because my centre would've turned it. Hard to explain, easy to show, hard to do.

I'm sure you could develop good mechanics if you specialised in yang style tai chi, but I guess that's the downfall of SD - as soon as you learn the basics of something you change to something completely different (at least from what I recall of the syllabus).

[TenTigers]

if there's one thing that can sum up this thread, it's...
"Never teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time, and it annoys the pigs.":p

[cjurakpt]

to quote A. M. Hall: "Oink oink, my good man..." (cr@p, can't remember the movie that was from though...was it Vacation?)

[synack]

My post commented on the biomechanical movements and generation of power which in my opinion is what constitutes the "flavor" of the style. also GMT claims to be the GM of SD not all the Shaolin Temples. SKTJ passed what he learned to Ie Chang Ming and on to GMT, there were other masters of the temples and I am sure they did the same after the split of the temples etc. So of course there are differences and different forms. GMT traces the origin of SD to the Shaolin Temples of which there were 6. That is SD lineage. KC


I'm sorry but about GMT is completely false. Go to shaolingrandmaster.com watch the intro alone!

"the youngest grandmaster in shaolin history, Sin Kwan The. Shaolin Grandmaster"

In the biography it claims GM Su is the grandmaster of Shaolin. Then claims that it was passed onto E Chang Ming who then:

"Grandmaster E died in 1976, but not before passing all of his knowledge on to me, the current Grandmaster of Shaolin."

Now for GMT:

"Mastering more than 900 forms from over 100 fighting systems, I became the youngest Grandmaster in 1500 years of Shaolin history."

"At age 25, Grandmaster E passed the title and rank of Grandmaster to me, making me the youngest Grandmaster in the history of Shaolin."

"After Grandmaster E's death, I realized that while there were many engineers in the world, there was only one Grandmaster of Shaolin, so I left my graduate school studies to devote my life to teaching and preserving the art of Shaolin Do." (this is the first time he's mentioned Shaolin Do.)


Monument Honor:

"I am also the only person in 1500 years to be honored with two monuments at the Shaolin Temples in China."

"In 1992, at a large celebration at the Honan temple in Honan Province (the original Shaolin temple), Chief Abbot Su Xi presented a stone tablet to commemorate my visit. Fewer than twenty such monuments have been erected in the history of Honan temple."



He even signs his biography as "Shaolin Grandmaster Sin Kwang The'"


If he's not completely full of ****, he's definitely misleading people intentionally to make himself seem more important. You can like the art (like I do) and not drink the kool-aid. There are big claims with nothing to back it up. And I think it's so obvious what the truth is and some people prefer to live in a turtle shell.

[Mas Judt]

This is where the ethics come in. How can you sleep at night if you support and rrepeat these falsehoods? This is more than just a fanciful history - in Chinese culture you often find an innovation attributed to an ancestor. But claims to be something else that already exists is still fraud, even within that context.

Where are your ethics?

[Mas Judt]

JP my man, you are a good guy and a true barrister... the truth of things in the Kuntao world is often never worth worrying about for reasons long explained - but the key point here is that Sin The' is actively marketing his art with statements his own followers claim not to believe.... claims that 'steal' equity from existing methods with claims of being the original and authentic version... while the original and authentic versions still exist and look nothing like SD.... it is a moral quandry.... more than just a fanciful history...


KC - I'll see what I can do - I might even have the heavyweight, he's a local Wushu teacher who has trained in China. I'm going to see if there will be a CSC tournament this year - that way we can have our fun within a context we can mutually control (I've got some weight there) and it will look like just another part of the event rather than a 'big challenge'. I'll need your help coordinating as my time is limited...

[DPL]

So you think forms have NOTHING to do with fighting or how to learn how to fight??

minimal to not at all

Let me get this straight. You (cjurakpt) and others have spent an ungodly amount of thread space lecturing SD people about how their forms aren't true CMA, don't have the right flavor, etc., etc. and you don't even think forms matter when learning to fight?

WTF, dude? What in the h3ll does it matter then? If no one practicing forms regularly is providing themselves any significant martial benefit, regardless of the 'flavor' of the forms they're doing, why all the emotion and energy?

If forms are all worthless as a way to learn to fight (which, last time I checked, is one of the main purposes of most martial arts), then what does it matter if my forms look a little more 'karate-like' or 'kempo-like' than yours?

You guys are like a bunch of little old church ladies, gossiping about the sins of all the other women in church while blissfully ignoring your own faults, and you've decided Shaolin-Do is the church wh0re.

But make sure you forget about all the little indiscretions in your past (or the past of your art) while you're lecturing the wh0re about her behavior, right?

[Shaolin Wookie]

This is where the ethics come in. How can you sleep at night if you support and rrepeat these falsehoods? This is more than just a fanciful history - in Chinese culture you often find an innovation attributed to an ancestor. But claims to be something else that already exists is still fraud, even within that context.

Where are your ethics?

Hahahaha.....I enjoy his martial system more than the other Chinese systems I tried. I don't care what stories he wants to tell. I want to learn Drunken Boxing, and I might be willing to kill just to do so. Luckily, I only have to dedicate some time to his martial art. haha......

BTW, there aren't really any other Grandmasters of Shaolin, are there? There's monks, abbots....not really any grandmasters, eh?

[Mas Judt]

Shaolin Wookie, you made me snort coffee out my nose. THAT was really funny.

[Shaolin Wookie]

JP my man, you are a good guy and a true barrister... the truth of things in the Kuntao world is often never worth worrying about for reasons long explained - but the key point here is that Sin The' is actively marketing his art with statements his own followers claim not to believe.... claims that 'steal' equity from existing methods with claims of being the original and authentic version... while the original and authentic versions still exist and look nothing like SD.... it is a moral quandry.... more than just a fanciful history...


KC - I'll see what I can do - I might even have the heavyweight, he's a local Wushu teacher who has trained in China. I'm going to see if there will be a CSC tournament this year - that way we can have our fun within a context we can mutually control (I've got some weight there) and it will look like just another part of the event rather than a 'big challenge'. I'll need your help coordinating as my time is limited...

BTW, if you want to keep plugging a match between a wushu player and an SD player, I'd be willing to help. I've got a friend at the Longfist school I used to go to named Richie who's been doing contemporary Wushu and traditional Shaolin Ch'uan for something like 6 years. I've been doing SD for about 2 or so, maybe a little more. We've sparred a couple of times (outside of class--as his teacher wouldn't allow sparring at the school he taught out of privately [wasn't his school]), and I completely decimated him. Last time I accidentally unleashed an elbow (we'd agreed to controlled contact, b/c I outweight him, and he's a skinny wushu guy), and he said he didn't want to spar anymore. I find your proposition amusing.

BTW, he tried teaching me some Emei snake (he's excellent at forms, etc.), but I gave up on that. I don't think I had the bendability for it. Can't do wushu to save my life. hahah.....:D

[Mas Judt]

Heh, I don't think you understand what I am talking about when I refer to wushu....

[Chain Whip]

Let me get this straight. You (cjurakpt) and others have spent an ungodly amount of thread space lecturing SD people about how their forms aren't true CMA, don't have the right flavor, etc., etc. and you don't even think forms matter when learning to fight?

WTF, dude? What in the h3ll does it matter then? If no one practicing forms regularly is providing themselves any significant martial benefit, regardless of the 'flavor' of the forms they're doing, why all the emotion and energy?

If forms are all worthless as a way to learn to fight (which, last time I checked, is one of the main purposes of most martial arts), then what does it matter if my forms look a little more 'karate-like' or 'kempo-like' than yours?

You guys are like a bunch of little old church ladies, gossiping about the sins of all the other women in church while blissfully ignoring your own faults, and you've decided Shaolin-Do is the church wh0re.

But make sure you forget about all the little indiscretions in your past (or the past of your art) while you're lecturing the wh0re about her behavior, right?

Well put. This outlook on forms explains the entire problem. I have asked twice whether anyone actually believed that warriors trained like we see in the "accepted" TCMA forms and no one has said "Sure, they put on the silk jammies and danced around and then went out and killed 10 guys" To say that a form is traditional martial arts - but lacks martial effectiveness makes no sense. When cjurakpt says they do not appear to be that martially oriented - but I don't think that the intent is to be martial, This explains our entire issue with what many of you call TCMA - we think martial arts HAS to be martially oriented - and the intent IS to be martial. Hence the confusion. the "accepted" TCMA guys can't find the connection from forms to fighting - which is to be expected when you do the forms like a dancer. SD people are taught to make the connection between forms and fighting. How can you claim to be "traditional" and do non-martially oriented forms?