rochester, I like your thinking. 
[QUOTE=t_niehoff;924861]One of the things I find amusing about the “internal” guys is their belief that they “know” something that world class level fighters, i.e., the external guys, don’t. I mean, it would be one thing if they could step up and actually hold their own (or even defeat) withe even some decent low level fighters with their “internal aspects”. Yet they can’t. They claim to have all the “secrets”, they have “the system”, all the “internal aspects”, only they can’t fight worth beans.[/quote]
Those are a lot of assumptions by someone else who hasn’t taken the holistic approach to his Wing Chun training.
There are proper internal mechanics and proper external mechanics!
The external mechanics are simpler and that would in some way explain why the more simple minded gravitate towards the external martial arts.
You are just like Bruce Lee. Making generalized assumptions on arts that you have not really studied.
I believe that you have missed the point of the discussion. We were not discussing any particular Bruce Lee.
Actually I have no where near completed the Wing Chun system. When you refer to those world class fighters don’t forget to mention that most of them are “world class” in the sporting arena.
[QUOTE=rochester;924920]So let me get this straight. A fighter who can’t fight might just as well be a theoretical nonfighting nutrider who plays with balls. Never thought of it that way, but it does kinda make sense.[/QUOTE]
And Niehoff has lots of “balls”.
[QUOTE=gabe;924898]It’s equally amusing that you “claim” to understand how to throw a ball, but when asked for video of you throwing the ball, your answer is that you don’t have to because you yourself don’t personally claim to throw the ball well- meaning you theoretically “understand” how to throw the ball better- but you yourself don’t “do” it particularly well.
[/QUOTE]
I am not claiming anything of the sort. I have never made any claims of my abilities at all. I am merely saying – and try to follow this – is that we should not follow people who can’t do it. That is the blind leading the blind. I’m not saying follow me or my way. I’m saying don’t follow anyone who can’t do it IN FIGHTING. Whether I can do it or not is immaterial to you unless I am your instructor (your leader). And I’m not.
When we look at who can do it, we see that the functional martial artists, the BJJ, MT, boxers, judoka, samboists, MMAists, etc. can do it, and for all to see. We KNOW that their method of training works. We can see it on display. So listen to what they say about training, not to guys who can’t do it. So, if our goal is to develop significant fighting skills, then we should train like those guys train, not like some overweight, out-of-shape, self-appointed grandmaster that has never done any significant fighting in his life tells you.
And when you were asked to meet a low level beginner and show how well you understand throwing the ball, “do” what you “claim”- you refused. Sounds a bit like the internalist you mention, or your theoretical nonfighter, don’t you think?
If I wanted to meet low level beginners, I’d start with certain grandmasters.
I don’t waste my time meeting with people who aren’t serious. I can tell by what that guy writes that he has no clue. What purpose would meeting with him serve?
Worse yet, you are a nutrider at his best, riding the nuts of your brothers overseas, to provide evidence that you yourself can’t provide. Don’t you hate when TMAists do that? You can “talk” but you cannot “do” so you refuse to “show” because you can’t. You and your “internal” strawmen are birds of a feather, except you make more daily claims of superior knowledge. You “know” things “internalists” don’t, but you can’t “do” any better than them. Yes, I’m amused!
You aren’t making any sense. We know what so-called “external” martial artists, the judoka, BJJ, MMAists, MT, etc. fighters can do. What they can do has nothing to do with me personally. The evidence of what they can do is incontrovertable. Follow that so far? Or is that too difficult?
I’ll take this slow, just for you. Now contrast that with the “internal” guys. Where is the evidence that they can produce similar results in producing fighting skills? I’m not talking about stories or demos or chi sao or anthing other than fighting. Where? Name the fighters. You can’t. And once again, this has nothing to do with me personally. The evidence of skilled internal fighters just doesn’t exist. Yet these same “internal” people – some of whom are the overweight, out-of-shape, unskilled and self-proclaimed grandmasters – claim they have"secrets" and “systems” and “knowledge” of how to do things better than the world-class fighters!
And if that isn’t funny enough, people like you believe them!
^
Oh Snap.
(I think that is well deserved)
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;924934]
It was you who started arguing and putting words in my mouth.:rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
Your words. I can quote your stupid fantasy alternative Bruce Lee story. Keep on dreaming! Maybe write some fantasy Bruce Lee quotes.
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;924031]I believe that an interesting question would be, how would Bruce Lee’s fighting approach have evolved had he stayed in Hong Kong and continued and completed his Wing Chun under Yip Man rather than one his students?
What if he had gone on to take up or “cross train” in another kung fu style that was more profound than Wing Chun both in concepts and in the internals? How would his martial arts philosophy have developed then?[/QUOTE]
I am not claiming anything of the sort. I have never made any claims of my abilities at all. I am merely saying – and try to follow this – is that we should not follow people who can’t do it. That is the blind leading the blind. I’m not saying follow me or my way. I’m saying don’t follow anyone who can’t do it IN FIGHTING. Whether I can do it or not is immaterial to you unless I am your instructor (your leader). And I’m not.
– All your posts are claims of having a better method. Try to follow this- Like your buddy knifefighter said, why should we even listen to you since you can’t provide a shred of evidence that you can do it. You deserve the same respect as those you ridicule.
When we look at who can do it, we see that the functional martial artists, the BJJ, MT, boxers, judoka, samboists, MMAists, etc. can do it, and for all to see. We KNOW that their method of training works. We can see it on display. So listen to what they say about training, not to guys who can’t do it. So, if our goal is to develop significant fighting skills, then we should train like those guys train, not like some overweight, out-of-shape, self-appointed grandmaster that has never done any significant fighting in his life tells you.
– Gee, ya think? Your posts are painfully obvious.
If I wanted to meet low level beginners, I’d start with certain grandmasters.
I don’t waste my time meeting with people who aren’t serious. I can tell by what that guy writes that he has no clue. What purpose would meeting with him serve?
–You post on a public forum hammering people with your views. Meeting him would provide some credibility which you don’t currently have.
You aren’t making any sense. We know what so-called “external” martial artists, the judoka, BJJ, MMAists, MT, etc. fighters can do. What they can do has nothing to do with me personally. The evidence of what they can do is incontrovertable. Follow that so far? Or is that too difficult?
–No, I don’t follow that. What is my position on “external” martial artists? What did I state? Oh yeah- I didn’t say anything- so you are now making up my position on the subject?
I’ll take this slow, just for you. Now contrast that with the “internal” guys. Where is the evidence that they can produce similar results in producing fighting skills? I’m not talking about stories or demos or chi sao or anthing other than fighting. Where? Name the fighters. You can’t. And once again, this has nothing to do with me personally. The evidence of skilled internal fighters just doesn’t exist. Yet these same “internal” people – some of whom are the overweight, out-of-shape, unskilled and self-proclaimed grandmasters – claim they have"secrets" and “systems” and “knowledge” of how to do things better than the world-class fighters!
And if that isn’t funny enough, people like you believe them!
–I believe them? Since when? LOL. You make up arguments, amateur ones, that you can win. I can care less what your internal strawmen or internal vs. external argument is. It’s so mundane that it is hardly worth arguing. My point, and only , point, try to follow, is that yes, you make claims of having better understanding of how one should train to fight. But you yourself can’t provide evidence that you yourself can do it. So why should anyone give you any more credence than those you ridicule. I said nothing about these silly internalists. You don’t follow very well, do you.
[QUOTE=Edmund;924976]Your words. I can quote your stupid fantasy alternative Bruce Lee story.[/quote]
You can and you have quoted me but you have not understood what you have quoted.
The fact is that Bruce Lee came to his conclusions regarding traditional kung fu without having even completed a single system of TCMA, and I don’t mean completion of the system by just “learning” the forms!:rolleyes:
The above being correct, then the basis of his conclusions were incomplete, raising questions on the credibility of his final conclusions, which may have been different if he had actually gained a holistic understanding of at least a single style of kung fu.
As you can see, the dreams are all yours as your logic is failing you the harder you try to justify your position.
You are the one who quoted Bruce Lee, not me!
The fact is that his knowledge of the TCMAs was too incomplete for him to have made the serious criticisms that he did!
However, I would say that he knew more than you and all of your crosstraining MMA forum buddies put together, but then that is not saying much, is it?
[QUOTE=gabe;924986]I am not claiming anything of the sort. I have never made any claims of my abilities at all. I am merely saying – and try to follow this – is that we should not follow people who can’t do it. That is the blind leading the blind. I’m not saying follow me or my way. I’m saying don’t follow anyone who can’t do it IN FIGHTING. Whether I can do it or not is immaterial to you unless I am your instructor (your leader). And I’m not.
– All your posts are claims of having a better method. Try to follow this- Like your buddy knifefighter said, why should we even listen to you since you can’t provide a shred of evidence that you can do it. You deserve the same respect as those you ridicule.
[/QUOTE]
What I’vebeen saying is that the better method of training is to do what all good, proven fighters – and all athletes – do.
To decide that, i.e., what training methods work best, you don’t look to specific individuals. And that’s because some really talented people may develop with poor training or some untalented people may not develop much with good traiining. You need to look across populations. It’s the same with drug/medical research – anecdotal evidence (individual cases) isn’t significant proof.
When we apply that to martial art training, looking across populations, we see what sort of training (that done by the functional martial arts) consistently produces very good results. Similarly, we see what sort of training (that done by TMAs) consistently produces poor results.
What I can do or not do is irrelevant to THAT. The evidence exists outsdie of me.
The only reason my skills would be relevent isif I was teaching someone (since you can’t teach what you can’t do) or if I was trying to tell someone that they should do what I do BECAUSE I do it that way. And neither is the case.
When we look at who can do it, we see that the functional martial artists, the BJJ, MT, boxers, judoka, samboists, MMAists, etc. can do it, and for all to see. We KNOW that their method of training works. We can see it on display. So listen to what they say about training, not to guys who can’t do it. So, if our goal is to develop significant fighting skills, then we should train like those guys train, not like some overweight, out-of-shape, self-appointed grandmaster that has never done any significant fighting in his life tells you.
– Gee, ya think? Your posts are painfully obvious.
Lots of things are obvious, but that doesn’t mean people see them. It’s apparent to methat you don’t understand what I am saying.
If I wanted to meet low level beginners, I’d start with certain grandmasters.
I don’t waste my time meeting with people who aren’t serious. I can tell by what that guy writes that he has no clue. What purpose would meeting with him serve?
–You post on a public forum hammering people with your views. Meeting him would provide some credibility which you don’t currently have..
Try to understand this – IT IS NOT ABOUT PERSONAL CREDIBILITY. It never is. But this is what you try to make it about. It should NEVER be about “I believeit because so-and-so said so.” It is about evidence. I don’t want peopleto believe ANYONE, including me, based on credibility. I want them to reach conclusions based on reason and evidence. And the evidence about training methods is already out there for anyone to see.
If I sparred with this beginnerand beat him to a pulp, what would it show? That I could beat some beginner. BFD.
You aren’t making any sense. We know what so-called “external” martial artists, the judoka, BJJ, MMAists, MT, etc. fighters can do. What they can do has nothing to do with me personally. The evidence of what they can do is incontrovertable. Follow that so far? Or is that too difficult?
–No, I don’t follow that. What is my position on “external” martial artists? What did I state? Oh yeah- I didn’t say anything- so you are now making up my position on the subject?
So, what you are saying is that you weren’t disagreeing with my view? That you just wanted to say that my view hadno weight since I personally won’t videotape myself?
I’ll take this slow, just for you. Now contrast that with the “internal” guys. Where is the evidence that they can produce similar results in producing fighting skills? I’m not talking about stories or demos or chi sao or anthing other than fighting. Where? Name the fighters. You can’t. And once again, this has nothing to do with me personally. The evidence of skilled internal fighters just doesn’t exist. Yet these same “internal” people – some of whom are the overweight, out-of-shape, unskilled and self-proclaimed grandmasters – claim they have"secrets" and “systems” and “knowledge” of how to do things better than the world-class fighters!
And if that isn’t funny enough, people like you believe them!
–I believe them? Since when? LOL.
Who is your grandmaster? You do believe him, don’t you?
You make up arguments, amateur ones, that you can win. I can care less what your internal strawmen or internal vs. external argument is. It’s so mundane that it is hardly worth arguing. My point, and only , point, try to follow, is that yes, you make claims of having better understanding of how one should train to fight. But you yourself can’t provide evidence that you yourself can do it. So why should anyone give you any more credence than those you ridicule. I said nothing about these silly internalists. You don’t follow very well, do you.
Yes, I do have a better understanding of how to train than most TMAists because I base my conslusions on evidence, and the evidence ALL proves that the traditional way of training produces poor results and that the modermway of training produces good results. It’s not about ME. You need to get past that.
"Yes, I do have a better understanding of how to train than most TMAists "
–Prove it.
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;924990]
The fact is that Bruce Lee came to his conclusions regarding traditional kung fu without having even completed a single system of TCMA, and I don’t mean completion of the system by just “learning” the forms!:rolleyes:
The above being correct, then the basis of his conclusions were incomplete, raising questions on the credibility of his final conclusions, which may have been different if he had actually gained a holistic understanding of at least a single style of kung fu.
[/QUOTE]
LOL. Who gives a **** about this hypothetical fantasy that you raised?
You are the one who quoted Bruce Lee, not me!
The fact is that his knowledge of the TCMAs was too incomplete for him to have made the serious criticisms that he did!
Yeah I quoted actual quotes. I didn’t presume to think of what Bruce might have said IF his whole life was different.
It’s like any other famous person’s quotes.
His opinions are there to be read not rewritten.
He didn’t WANT that classical mess. From his perspective it was restricting him. Why would he enslave himself by doing more of it?
[QUOTE=Edmund;925047]LOL. Who gives a **** about this hypothetical fantasy that you raised?[/quote]
Well some you “scientifically” trained athelets should.
You should teach that approach to lkfmdc I think that he will find it useful in his future business ventures.
That is because your knowledge and understanding of TCMAs is even less then Bruce Lee’s.
Furthermore, this is a discussion forum and there is nothing wrong in hypothesising on what someone might have said, specially when it is an educated guess and does not claim to be anything else!
There is nothing wrong in considering the possibilities of what someone might have said if they had a complete or at least a better base of knowledge to base their conclusions on!
The classical mess was all in his mind. It does exist in some traditional schools but the generalizations that BL made were based on an incomplete knowledge base and were mainly WRONG!
For the same reason as many REAL kung fu masters and serious practitioners before him who did so and fought with their art.
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;925097]
The classical mess was all in his mind. It does exist in some traditional schools but the generalizations that BL made were based on an incomplete knowledge base and were mainly WRONG!
For the same reason as many REAL kung fu masters and serious practitioners before him who did so and fought with their art.[/QUOTE]
IT DIDN’T SUIT HIM.
It doesn’t suit everyone. For many people, his vision is the better match to what they want. Hence his vision became theirs. It’s not for you.
You can keep saying “it’s all in his mind” “He’s wrong” blah blah if you like. You’re a shining example of the stuff he didn’t approve of. Hence you’re the last person who should be speculating about what he could have thought if his life was different.
[QUOTE=Edmund;925105]IT DIDN’T SUIT HIM.
It doesn’t suit everyone. For many people, his vision is the better match to what they want. Hence his vision became theirs. It’s not for you.
You can keep saying “it’s all in his mind” “He’s wrong” blah blah if you like. You’re a shining example of the stuff he didn’t approve of. Hence you’re the last person who should be speculating about what he could have thought if his life was different.[/QUOTE]
I did not say he was wrong about what suited him. That is understandable. He took his incomplete knowledge of kung fu and crosstrained trained it with other arts and created something that “SUITED” him.
I was just saying that if his knowledge of traditional kung fu was more complete then his “final product” and conclusions may have been different!
DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW?
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;924294] I was under the impression of him being very open about what he did, "no secret techniques"and all that. He taught openly. After all he was one of the first to teach Westerners. . . . .[/QUOTE]
Bruce wasn’t as open as people think. He once wrote: .."Really martial arts is not for the masses. This is what I feel . . " He thought some things should not be shown to the masses.
Edmund
I respectifully suggest you stop wasting your time with the Unglorified Mouthboxer, HW8/108. Put him on your ignore list and be happy.
[QUOTE=Phil Redmond;925109]Bruce wasn’t as open as people think. He once wrote: .."Really martial arts is not for the masses. This is what I feel . . " He thought some things should not be shown to the masses.[/QUOTE]
I see what you are saying.
But that statement could be interpreted in different ways. One can interprete the “Really martial arts is not for the masses” statement as, “not every one has the dedication and the will to learn MAs”.
And then why show some things to the masses if they will not stay and train them to the required level? Even today a lot of sifus will not show everything until they are sure that the student is serious and is not just a “fly by night” passer by.
Of course it is always possible that he held back things, but what? And how to they compare to the lot of the advanced internal stuff that is and has been kept back throughout history?
The fact still remains that Bruce Lee did not complete a single system of TCMA. So where did he get the knowledge that he may have held back?
I do appreciate that someone as talented, dedicated and fanatical as Bruce Lee would have discovered some facts on his own but again some of the higher stuff has to be taught and then practiced for a long time for one to gain any credible understanding.
At the end of the day I am hypothesising based on my knowledge of Bruce Lee using as reference the traditional kung fu that I practice. It seems that other people have their own opinions. Fair enough.
[QUOTE=anerlich;925352]I respectifully suggest[/quote]
:eek: I never thought that I would see the day when you anerlich would make a “respectful” suggestion to anyone.
Tell whoever who has been hitting you in the head during your recent “functional” training to continue doing so as it is doing you good.
Thank you, you finaly understood. People like me do not study kung fu to be “glorified” anythings unlike you and your other Glorified Kickboxer friends.
Kung fu should never be seen as a path to glory!
You will understand that phrase eventually. Just keep telling your sparring partner to hit you in the head the same way he has been doing recently and you will get there, “mate”.
That is right put me on ignore, I mean why should he discuss kung fu matters in a kung fu forum with one of the few people who actually practices kung fu.:rolleyes:
Then again, I am getting tired discussing Bruce Lee and I don’t think that Edmund nor you are capable of enlightening me on the internals and other traditional TCMA practices.
So, yes put me on ignore both of you as there are plenty of knuckleheads and Glorified Kickboxers here that will provide you with food for “thought” regarding the latest MMA trends including the color of Ken Shamrock’s shorts and technical questions regarding how to get out of a “nose lock” in under 10 seconds. Of course don’t forget to classify what you do under the “improved” or “functional” kung fu section :rolleyes:
I bid you farewell.
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;925107]
I was just saying that if his knowledge of traditional kung fu was more complete then his “final product” and conclusions may have been different!
DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW?[/QUOTE]
I always understood. That doesn’t mean your argument has any merit.
IF “this” and THEN “that” is a HYPOTHETICAL THEORY. You think it has more weight than the actual opinion of the guy expressed in many different quotes.
It doesn’t.
The fact that you assign more validity to your THEORY than the guy’s REAL writings demonstrates how biased against the guy you are. You can’t comment on living Bruce Lee’s vision or how he would change it if you are one of those who rejects his ideas!
The only thing you know about Bruce Lee is that you clearly don’t like him, so shut your yap.
[QUOTE=anerlich;925352]I respectifully suggest you stop wasting your time with the Unglorified Mouthboxer, HW8/108. Put him on your ignore list and be happy.[/QUOTE]
Agreed.
It’s like not following any ideas of Sigmund Freud and then giving a commentary on how he’d write some different letters to Carl Jung.
[QUOTE=Edmund;925385]I always understood. That doesn’t mean your argument has any merit.[/quote]
Then you should have ignored it!
It was a hypothetical theory. That is all. Let everone decide on its “weight” for themselves.
Where did I assign more validity to my theory? It was just theorising for discussion purposes and of course I have my own view about what I wrote.
You seem to be lost. All this stupid discussion has been because of your own biased against me and that has to do with your little bit of kung fu knowledge mixed with your too much of MMA one!
I do not reject most of his ideas, after all they are present in the TCMAs…lol
You would have known that if you had actually practiced authentic kung fu.
Actually I do “like” him. He was a dedicated martial artist.
I assume that Sigmund completed his studies in the relevant areas before becoming the “genius” that he was?