Does CMA Need a Heavy Sportive Aspect?

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Kung Fu Forum
1

OK, I’m going to try and break this down in points. That way, we can try to discuss this in a more constructive fashion than usual.

Point 1. In CMA, you really need to check out each individual school as there is a good chance you will not be learning useful skills for dealing with a physical confrontation. The opposite occurs in the following disciplines: Boxing, Muay Thai, Judo, BJJ. In these schools, chances ARE that the school you run into will be the real deal. All of these schools have a heavy sportive aspect to them.

Point 2. Wars are much different then they were 100 years ago. Wars are now fought with bif boomie things rather than fists and sharp pointy things. Also, society is much safer than it used to be and violence is definately frowned upon. This removes the traditional litmus test of personal violence that kept CMA honest. Basically, the old proving ground has been removed and not replaced with anything else.

Point 3. The hardcore competitive personalities are being drawn to the combat sports. This removes the level of competition within the CMA school and drops the level to which we are challenged. (I like to compete, but I’ll never be a top class competitor. But the chance to work with those who CAN be top level competitors increases my ability as well)

My question is as follows: Can/should we attempt to develop a strong sporting arena that would increase the skills specific to CMA? This could be in the lines of style specific tournies with rules designed to enhance the desired traits of that particular discipline or local tournies between schools in the same area.

2nd Question: This would definately change the arts we practice. Would this be seen as a good thing? Also, there are techniques that cannot be safely used in competition. Should these be preserved in some capacity or abandoned in favor of techniques that can be used somewhat safely in competition?

Now, I know that some schools do compete at some level, but I would like to see a bigger (regional or national) system set up with more frequent tournies.

Looking forward to your thoughts.

2

My thoughts is that CMA = street fighting and street fighting=CMA.

That’s why in CMA’s we wear our shoes and never take things “to the mat” or for that matter to pavement.

Only in CMA the streetfighting is organized into more of a system.

As long as this is the case it can never be “sport-a-sized”, it’s simply too dangerous.

As well it should be.

The sport MA’s that exist would not be street effective because by making it a sport you immediately cut out many techniques that people on the street would not be afraid to use.

It also doesn’t address things like weapons multiple attackers etc.

CMA developed on the street or the battlefield and not in a gym or a ring so you are really talking about two different things.

I’d hate to see Kung fu “sportisized.”

3

Point1: this is true. People are going to find a school where they are comfortable with the level of contact or aggresivness. Doesn’t matter whether it’s BJJ or CMA. Generally speaking the sportive MA’s are most likely going to attract more competitive people.

Point2: ok

Point3: I agree to a point. Kung fu schools with a harder edge will still attract good people doesn’t matter if they are sportive or not.

I don’t know about the whole tournament thing there.

At my school the emphasis is on street fighting but if you want to fight in the ring, sifu is more than happy to train you.

Sparring is different with gloves and without. I can’t hit someone with a phoenix eye or palm in the ring, for example.

4

depends on what you want.

If you want to compete, there are avenues for that. If you want to train for health, it can be covered also. But i know plenty of people who generally kick @ss and they have never competed in their lives! Training with people who have just ‘got it’ brings up your level. It doesn’t matter if you want to compete or not.

I agree that competition fighting is not the same as defending yourself. Even if i am fighting NHB there is not anyone really trying to kill me. Nothing can scare the crap outta you as much as a real encounter, no matter what you do.

I think there are different schools that cater for different things, and attract different people. Some of the more traditional schools do have methods of ‘testing’ yourself in a controlled environment. Hence, increasing your understanding and level. Not really any ‘competitive’ element to it though.

Competitions are fun though. I think it really depends on what you want, and what you think is best for yourself and the art you practise.

david

5

Fu Pow, You have given the essence of the debate. I would reply that the skills gained in competition and the attributes you acquire do carry out on to the street. I would claim that they do even more so. Also, you can develop a safer version of the technique which will work with or without the destruction. I have seen examples of qin na combined with Throws that actually made me get queasy. We don’t do those in competition. But, by practicing the throw and the lock seperately, and understanding how they are joined, allows us a better chance of combining them on the street. But we can’t practice that. We CAN practice them seperately in competition.

Paul, The NHB style gloves allow both palms and phoenix eyes. Granted, you can’t throw phoenix eyes to the head in a comp, but you could hit the torso and use flat fists to the head. Again, with the understanding of what those flat fists signify.

6

the understanding of what it signifies vs. getting cracked in the head with one is a big diff.

I’ve just started training for san shou a few months ago. To me there is a big difference between fighting with or without gloves.
kind of like the difference between tying your shoes and putting on a shirt. As in very different.

7

Fu-Pow,

I just wanted to add something to your streetfighting viewpoint, IMHO their is no such thing as pure when we are talking about what is needed in a streetfight, no style has a claim to it, anything that can be used to damage or destroy the opponent is a legitimate accessory to the students “core” martial system, be that armed or unarmed, as long as it can be applied under the pressure of stress, something which a sportive aspect can help refine as long as the student is being honest that what they are doing is based in a sporting enviroment.

By doing hard freestyle sparring or as WaterDragon stated a sportive based contact event it will remove a number of the techniques that are more based on myth than in real life, by that I think it will let KF players who do not freestyle spar to understand that brute power can win over finesse of technique, but that technique is still important if one is to maximise power and avoide self inflicted injury, though this will all be moot if the person does not train with the right mindset, that the objective of hand to hand fighting is to survive by any means possible.

If not tempered with the other traditional & modern training methods I think a pure sportive approach can be a bad thing. I just look at it as another training tool.

My thoughts, :smiley:

8

My general answer to the questions is: I think anytime you are presented with an opportunity to get your ass kicked in a controlled environment it should be taken advantage of. Obviously there is a difference between the street and the kwoon or the mat or the dojo. But getting hit in the nose is getting hit in the nose no matter where it happens. The more prepared you are do deal with the shock of being struck for real the better off you are when stuff gets serious.

I don’t think that competitions should be held simply for the fact that CMA has drawn criticism for it’s lack of sport and competitions. I think that there should be an increase of events that give more of an opportunity to put what you know to the test against other skilled fighters.

9

WD,

good post

Point 1. I would say the opposite is true what you are learning is how to deal with opponents are the same wt and doing the same things that you are doing. The difference that you may be alluding to is the level and intensity of the practice which can be found at some CMA schools and always on your own as many here say they have done to test their art.

Point 2. CMA is part of a historical culture the training terminology and philosophy are all part of the art. While it is good to say “hey I came here to learn how to kick butt” I think many of the higher levels will not be available this kind of mind set. to busy trying to learn how to kick butt.

Look at all the western arts and all others that switched to competition as there primary focus…

Point 3. if you like to compete then I would say compete. But to infer that by not competing or having no competition drops the level of practice. I can’t agree with this. there are a number of combative arts not widly known that don’t compete but are said to be highly effective.

My old teacher changed many things to compete in full contact in the 70s using white crane. It really changed the essence of the art. and took time away from the real training. The use of gloves and all the rest not good for the development of real skills for this style.

Point 4. this has been done and is being done in many areas, but lets look at something like TC which I think we might have some common understandings in. take push hands. A kind of a test and development exercise now a competition in many areas. Are the winners the best guys that really demo true skills? did they use real skill to win? what i see is that much of their ideas are about how to win and not about developing real skill.

they don’t care as long as they can win and you lose, then i think all lose.

10

No. Doing hard sparring in front of a camera, after paying more money, and after signing more forms doesn’t make the time you spend doing it any more valuable. The potential pitfalls of competition have nothing to do with what techniques are allowed.

Seriously though. Bamboo leaf brought up a good example. Look at what competition has done to push hands.

11

I posted this before…

Basically sportive aspects are fine - as long as you DO NOT TRAIN FOR THEM.

Train for the street. You’ll lose occasionally to those that play well whatever rules you are following, but so what. The experience helps you identify holes in training and mindset. Treat sparring as a drill, just like any other.

I have had matches in the ring that have gone several rounds. I used to fight a lot in the street, and I rarely had a fight that lasted more than a few seconds once flesh met. But my quick wits in the street were available because I worked out weaknesses in the kwoon … and the ring.

The danger is when you start training for the ‘sport’.

Oh, and I know a lot of guys talk tough and are internet warriors - I’m not asking you to beleive my experience (although you can ask my friends and students), but please consider what I say.

It will keep your blood circulating in your body rather than the sidewalk.

(Too bad I couldn’t say that in a Raymond Chandler voice…)

12

CMA needs to be tested to KEEP the art from diluting, not the other way around, IMHO

Good question, Water Dragon.
I think the answer is YES, CMA needs a strong sporting aspect.

I think the key word here is ‘aspect’…CMA is so huge and widely encompassing that cannot all be changed just because there is an element of sport that is available. The other arts mentioned are mostly sportive, but CMA is so many other things too.

So there will always be finger strikes, etc…all the other aspects of the art, self defence, yadda yadda. There will always be a place for non-competitive individuals, its not like everybody has to compete or experience that, to each their own.

But I think it needs to be tested hard against other arts and within the many various CMA styles, it is the most realistic (and legal) simulation and method of testing ourselves and our arts that we have. And if you really ‘know’ all the nasty techniques that arent enabled or allowed in the ring, then great, its not like they’ll evaporate just because you put gloves on, and then you won’t know them or they won’t exist in the style anymore…and sure its different with gloves and rules, but it puts all arts on a level enough playing field to actually test the techniques…and of course kung fu is not just about finger strikes or whatever, you can still use all the basics we train, footwork, etc.

So i don’t think it will change the arts for the worse, but we need a hard-core forum in which to test our kung fu, or else other important combative aspects of the art might be lost, and all we’ll be left with is a bunch of dance moves and ‘too deadly to use’ snake venom strikes, that will get crushed in real life, or in the ring, if the basics arent pushed as far as they can be in competition, the only real forum where we test ourselves against trained and skilled people, and techniques can’t be well honed or gauged, or even evolved if we only train for an unskilled assailant or become inbred and dulled within a school with cooporative classmates.

Besides, its just like like the yin and yang, on one side exists the ring-capable training, and on the other side is the more traditional, training and street techiques. I believe both can and should coexist in harmony within CMA.

13

Water Dragon, good post!
IMO sparring is THE most important tool in learning how to fight. Thats where you make the moves your own by gaining a higher understanding of what its like to apply them on a resisting (stronger) opponent. Not sparring is compareable to taking drivers ed. for years without actually getting behind the wheel. Until you feel the momentum pulling at you and the different scenerios popping up without warning that you have to react to, you really dont have a physical understanding of it.
To answer your question, yes, there should be an attempt to develop a strong sporting arena that would increase the skills specific to CMA. That may be the only thing that saves it in the future!

14

Well, I like swords, so I’m going to use that for my sport vs. traditional debate.

I’ve studied Taiji saber fairly seriously for the last year, and I’ve been taking Western fencing for a couple months now. To me, it seems that ultra-realism would be to fight full contact with live blades. The lethality of that, of course, makes it impossible. It seems to me that the traditional arts strive to keep in all the really deadly aspects (power generation, using full weight weapons, sliding the blade to increase the cut, aiming for any vital target, sealing or grabbing the other person’s weapon, and moving in for body contact, etc.), but in order to keep that in there they tend to de-emphasize the full speed fighting against a resisting opponent. With more sportive martial arts, they tend to train with blunted, lighter weapons, more protective equipment, and with more limited targets—but they strive to keep in the full speed, totally non-cooperative combat and mindset. To be honest, if you put a real rapier in the hands of a 2 year fencing student, and a real sword in the hands of a 2 year Taiji sword student, IMO the Western fencer would destroy the Taiji guy easily. If you’re talking 10 years though, and the Taiji guy has gone through the traditional training which does include free sparring, then he’s going to be a much more powerful swordsman, IMO, at the end because of the depth of art he’s learned.

I don’t know–it’s a tough call, and it depends on what you’re looking for. Right now, I’m enjoying both and don’t see myself giving up either. Actually, I totally agree with what Black Jack said about sport martial arts:

“…it will let KF players who do not freestyle spar to understand that brute power can win over finesse of technique, but that technique is still important if one is to maximise power”

I agree it’s good to get a dose of reality and get humbled occasionally. That’s one important thing I got out of my karate days in high school—the ones who are great at forms and 2 person drills are not necessarily very good at free sparring, and vice-versa. But, people who REALLY understand what the forms and 2-person drills are teaching can increase their arsenal and potential ability.

15

To stay with the question “Does CMA need a heavy sportive aspect”, I’d say no, not heavy, but it should have some kind of sportive aspect.

I do a style of TKD that isn’t a sport style. We practice three things every class, forms, one steps or drills and most importantly bare knuckle sparring. At a lower level the sparring is light but by black belt it’s heavy medium to heavy. By senior blue belt you should have a good idea of what works, what doesn’t and what’s it like to be hit hard. If you’ve never felt pain or discomfort how do you know you can handle it?

I don’t feel that we need to be sportive. By the same token if you can’t spar live with your art then you’re being short changed.

16

I don’t think a sportive aspect is absolutely necessary.

There are many people who want to learn kung fu but not necessarily for fighting or competing. Look at all the old people practicing Taijiquan in the East - should they be fighting or competing?

For example, I have one student without any vision in one eye. She’s 11 years old and studies violin with me. Her mother wants her to join my school because it’ll give her a bit of a physical workout without putting her in direct competition with classmates.

I used to want to open a school so that I could teach a fighting art, but I’ve changed my focus. Even if a person can’t fight nor compete, he can still have kung fu 100%.

17

hey guys and girls…
IMO - the first and foremost thing that kung fu needs is standardization and regulation. i really don’t have a clue how this can be accomplished, so i’ll spare talking out of my butt about it.
in short, without a set quality of training, etc, kung fu has become more chaff than wheat.
aside from that, competition-friendly kung fu is just that, friendly.
to use the current standard martial sport - nhb - as an example, the majority of my techniques
would get me disqualified the moment i used them and, no, i’m not talking about biting and eye gouging.
that argument for kung fu, IMO, is weak and pathetic.
anyway, current competition standards rule out strikes to the neck, hammer strikes, open hand strikes, etc.
these are the things that make up almost all of my personal arsenal.
admitted, they are ruled out in favor of the competitors.
in a san shou competition, more than likely i would get creamed.
i’m pretty much going on about nothing at this point so i should stop.
too much coffee and not enough sleep i suppose.

and no, that isn’t me in my avatar.

18

Hey neptune, ya look like a girl :stuck_out_tongue:

19

Wow, good discussion so far. A couple of points I’d like to present.

I’m not advocating that everyone within a particular school compete. My argument is that by having this emphasis, even those who choose or cannot compete will get a lot of benefit due to two things. The curriculum would be geared toward competition. This means that the training would standardize itself to some extent simply because what does not prove itself valuable to competition will be discarded.

Granted, the above point does have a few problems. The first is the classic argument of efficiency of training methods. Basically, are the traditional methods currently used highly efficient or is there room for improvement. That’s a whole ‘nuther argument that might fall outside the scope of this thread. Also, by the nature of some techniques, they can’t be used in competition. What should be done with these techniques? Should they be abandoned? If not, how should these techniques be preserved? Again, although these are important and valid questions, I feel they me be outside the scope of this thread.

I do feel that my first question has been answered with a solid YES. That question, quite simply is: Will the introduction of a sporting aspect be beneficial to the development of CMA as a whole?

The next point takes the form of a question. There seems to be a consensus that although a sportive aspect would definitely be beneficial, a purely sportive art would not. What I would like to determine, is exactly how heavy that aspect should be. If I compete 2-3 times a year, and use as many effective traditional training methods to achieve that (forms, 2 man drills, power exercises, push hands, etc) I would consider that a heavy sportive aspect. Although my physical training may change only 10 %, the mindset will force me to look for efficiency in everything I do. Is this considered “heavy” or just another aspect to training?

I guess the question is, Will the aspects developed during traditional training carry over to the competitive arena? If they do not, and we have no means to test the methods, how do we know that they are valid at all?

Again, looking forward to your replys.

20

Hi.

A quick point here.

I think that because these are more sport orientated styles, the less useful aspects are USUALLY filtered out. Now, what i mean is… well, if you watch them they aren’t pretty - you realise how hard it really is when you try it yourself.

Now the danger comes in when the “sport” is so far from reality that the students start training “bad habits” that will hinder them in the street (ie point sparring or v light contact - they won’t follow through).

However, on the whole, these are “show and tell”, “put up or shut up” styles, so the crap is filtered out.

IMO.

You will notice that the simple things work best, and these styles emphasise the basics. Not that CMA don’t, and i’m not trying to say that these sport styles are “simple” but lets take boxing into account - there are only 4 common types of punches.

Bleh.

Edd