I posted this on the black kung fu experience thread.
And then it got me thinking…wanted to see what others thoughts were.
I really like alot of the masters from this era. They seem to be cut from a different cloth. Alot of them were Vets who brought back their art from the Orient etc.
And I think you can get a feel for that in the way they train, no games.
Check out the Pete Siringano section - he is nailing Bob Long - the red head.
I think in the main today, sadly if you ran classes at this intensity it would leave you with very few students, only those who really wanted it.
Even though this is the stuff you actually need from a quality view point as a potential new student.
All of my teachers opened up their schools in the '60s and early '70s. It was a good era because there was so much enthusiasm about the arts, yet it was still relatively hard to find schools. None of my teachers taught for profit. I think that was a major difference. Nothing wrong with teaching as a business but these guys taught because they were enthusiasts themselves and they weren’t babysitters. They kept to hard traditional training.
Now there are so many concerns about liability, catering to youngsters to pay the bills, rising costs for tournaments, etc.,.
Some things, I think, are better now though. Improvements in sparring equipment and more exposure to different schools allow for better information and cross training.
I began training in the '70s, and I agree that the attitudes were a lot different in the MA. No whining or BS was ever tolerated. Also, people weren’t sue-happy like today. But I do agree with a lot of what you say, jdhowland
Of course, someone’s inevitably going to say, “They weren’t as tough as modern MMA, blah blah blah”.
Of course, someone’s inevitably going to say, “They weren’t as tough as modern MMA, blah blah blah”.[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately a lot of the “old school” guys have been marginalized in the modern era. Sadly, nowadays, more of the guys with a “tough” mentality are likely to gravitate towards MMA simply because there’s no place for them in many traditional “martial” arts schools.
[QUOTE=Kellen Bassette;1212597]Unfortunately a lot of the “old school” guys have been marginalized in the modern era. Sadly, nowadays, more of the guys with a “tough” mentality are likely to gravitate towards MMA simply because there’s no place for them in many traditional “martial” arts schools. :([/QUOTE]
That’s a good point. MMA is a great thing, IMO. But it is sad that so many TMA schools must rely on kiddie classes to survive, and much of the ruggedness is gone from a lot of them.
[QUOTE=Jimbo;1212602]That’s a good point. MMA is a great thing, IMO. But it is sad that so many TMA schools must rely on kiddie classes to survive, and much of the ruggedness is gone from a lot of them.[/QUOTE]
It breaks my heart. I love TMA. I consider myself a traditionalist. But I like to fight; I often find myself with the MMA crowd because too many TMA guys don’t want to train for real.
I’m convinced the only thing MMA has on TMA is a willingness to do the real training you need for fighting. These methods came from TMA.
[QUOTE=Kellen Bassette;1212604]It breaks my heart. I love TMA. I consider myself a traditionalist. But I like to fight; I often find myself with the MMA crowd because too many TMA guys don’t want to train for real.
I’m convinced the only thing MMA has on TMA is a willingness to do the real training you need for fighting. These methods came from TMA.[/QUOTE]
i’m not so sure they came from tma. why was judo created? so guys could spar and practice at full speed safely. the traditional style had techniques used for breaking and killing that couldn’t be used in live training situations.
traditional karate masters gave funakoshi hell because he had his students sparring. traditional karate jutsu guys thought he was watering down the style. same with Korean styles. they may have done hard drilling - three star drills, live throwing, etc. but not sure how much in terms of hard sparring. seems like that was mainly wrestling styles and “sport ma” like judo, karate do, boxing, etc.
The issue that many TMA that were based on striking had with sparring was that it wasn’t full contact, that “pulled” and “controlled” sparring would take away from the “killer instinct” and water it down, the “kime” would be lost.
Of course going out and actually fighting was far more “observed” than some people would have liked.
It gave Karate a bad image to show that old school masters were *******s that went around beating up people or each other ( which they did a lot).
The silliness on their part was the reluctance to embrace protective gear for sparring.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1212892]The issue that many TMA that were based on striking had with sparring was that it wasn’t full contact, that “pulled” and “controlled” sparring would take away from the “killer instinct” and water it down, the “kime” would be lost.
Of course going out and actually fighting was far more “observed” than some people would have liked.
It gave Karate a bad image to show that old school masters were *******s that went around beating up people or each other ( which they did a lot).
The silliness on their part was the reluctance to embrace protective gear for sparring.[/QUOTE]
lol, not all of them. you saw that vid of the wu taiji master and the white crane master. I don’t think either of them had beaten up anyone. ever.
[QUOTE=SevenStar;1212911]lol, not all of them. you saw that vid of the wu taiji master and the white crane master. I don’t think either of them had beaten up anyone. ever.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=SevenStar;1212911]lol, not all of them. you saw that vid of the wu taiji master and the white crane master. I don’t think either of them had beaten up anyone. ever.[/QUOTE]
Yes, they sucked not everyone fought.
There has been many cycles of combat focus and performance focus in TMA over the years. The Lei Tai was an ancient tradition in China. I’ve heard plenty of stories from Karate people involved in Dojo feuds during the 70’s. Muay Thai has had a fight tradition for centuries and there’s reason to believe it may have partly developed as an answer to Chinese arts.
Combat has always been a part of TMA, as has performance. What matters is are you honest about what your focus is?
people say Thai was influenced by immigrants from southern China. I doubt it tho. localized arts have a similar flavor. northern kung Fu looks similar. southern kung Fu has a similar look and characteristics. southern kung fu however looks nothing like Muay Thai. Thai looks like bando, golden boxing, bokator, pradal serey, etc. Muay Thai likely came from cambodia.
[QUOTE=SevenStar;1212985]people say Thai was influenced by immigrants from southern China. I doubt it tho. localized arts have a similar flavor. northern kung Fu looks similar. southern kung Fu has a similar look and characteristics. southern kung fu however looks nothing like Muay Thai. Thai looks like bando, golden boxing, bokator, pradal serey, etc. Muay Thai likely came from cambodia.[/QUOTE]
Many southern styles look like Muay Boran. Old Muay Thai has a lot in common with what we call “traditional” martial arts.
I’ve never heard any convincing evidence from any view point. But based on the appearance, the forms in Muay Boran, the fact that they used poems for naming techniques and other circumstantial evidence, I believe there was probably a Chinese connection. Of course there may not have been as well.
I would be more inclined to consider Burma than Cambodia for origins of Muay Thai.
Muay boran looks like the old kmher styles. look at bokator. it also looks alot like some forms of silat. these styles would have all originated from India.
[QUOTE=SevenStar;1213005] these styles would have all originated from India.[/QUOTE]
Is there any proof of that? We heard that about TCMA as well…We can trace Japanese, Korean and Okinawan arts back to China. Is there any proof that Indo-Chinese arts come from India, or just folk stories to attempt to intertwine Indian religion into other aspects of non-Indian culture?
Come to think of it, I’ve seen very little empty hand Indian martial arts…can we look at IMA and see the connection to Indo-Chinese arts, the way it’s obvious that Burmese, Thai, Lao and Cambodian arts are related???
[QUOTE=Kellen Bassette;1213016]Is there any proof of that?[/QUOTE]
No. No proof. Just speculation based on, as you noted, other cultural exchanges. In the case of martial arts I don’t believe it was a matter of a single point of origin, just some technologies spreading and others arising independently out of similar circumstances. There has been a continuum of related cultures across Eurasia for millennia but that doesn’t suggest a single point of origin.
[QUOTE=Kellen Bassette;1213016]Is there any proof of that? We heard that about TCMA as well…We can trace Japanese, Korean and Okinawan arts back to China. Is there any proof that Indo-Chinese arts come from India, or just folk stories to attempt to intertwine Indian religion into other aspects of non-Indian culture?
Come to think of it, I’ve seen very little empty hand Indian martial arts…can we look at IMA and see the connection to Indo-Chinese arts, the way it’s obvious that Burmese, Thai, Lao and Cambodian arts are related???[/QUOTE]
with this stuff there’s rarely proof of anything, just as some say Japanese jujutsu had no Chinese influence and that out was developed by three physicians, and others day it came from China. much of the recorded Thai ma history was destroyed during war. as far as Indian arts, there are wrestling arts, striking arts and dances. what you’ll see in them looks more like these styles than Chinese styles.
