I am curious for Kung Fu folks who have trained in another style or spent significant time training with others from other styles what you’re Kung Fu training
had that other styles did not. In other words, what are techniques that you believe make you’re Kung Fu system and you a better fighter.
Personally my bread and butter from Pai Lum was the side thrust kick. I have found that in other traditional arts, mostly Karate styles, not as much emphasis was put on this kick whereas we trained it constantly. This was also true of kickboxers and Muay Thai folk, who focused much more on roundhouse and front kicks. Reeping was another useful technique I found that was not found in many of the other arts I either trained or trained with. I’m sure there are more, but I’m just trying to get the general idea started.
The Kungfu I learned is solid and places much emphasis on iron skills and very close range work. In the years I’ve played it, it’s end expression is similar across the board though the practitioners are whittled away with time.
I think it’s due to frustration and self induced hardship required to succeed with the style.
It’s not for everyone. It has certainly contributed to my outlook on life and my understanding of my true nature.
[QUOTE=Iron_Eagle_76;970311]I am curious for Kung Fu folks who have trained in another style or spent significant time training with others from other styles what you’re Kung Fu training
had that other styles did not. In other words, what are techniques that you believe make you’re Kung Fu system and you a better fighter.
Personally my bread and butter from Pai Lum was the side thrust kick. I have found that in other traditional arts, mostly Karate styles, not as much emphasis was put on this kick whereas we trained it constantly. This was also true of kickboxers and Muay Thai folk, who focused much more on roundhouse and front kicks. Reeping was another useful technique I found that was not found in many of the other arts I either trained or trained with. I’m sure there are more, but I’m just trying to get the general idea started.
Let’s hear it folks, what makes you “teh deadly”:D[/QUOTE]
what ****ty karate have you seen where they generally disregarded the side kick?
[QUOTE=goju;970328]what ****ty karate have you seen where they generally disregarded the side kick?[/QUOTE]
Plenty in my area, particulary a few Shotokan schools. They have them, but they don’t train them correctly and generally throw a half assed side snap kick where the hip does not roll over and very little power is generated. Many also kick with the knife edge of the foot rather than the heel.
Also, I am not making a blanket statement on all Karate or Shotokan for that matter, I’m just giving an example, so please, don’t get you’re panties in a bunch there Goju grand master.
After having trained a long time, I generally will tell you there is nothing “unique” in any art… it isn’t even arts, the same art (like Shuai Jiao or Praying Mantis) can have different lineages or schools that focus on certain techniques, but in the “tradition” as a whole, you find all the techniques…
That being said, certain things always seem to be undervalued in martial arts. IN both TMA and MMA/“modern” schools I often see a lack of attention to footwork and angles… with my background in Lama Pai, we do a lot with footwork and angles.. but I will also tell you I’ve seen the same stuff in French Savate and Filipiino MA.
Lama Pai gives us “loopier” punches, but again, I can show you a few cases of very loopy style in boxing, and the Russians who do combat forms of sambo have their “casting punches” (which IMO probably come from Chinese MA but who really knows?)
Perhaps one of the truely “unique” things from CMA is “fah jing” or short power in the clinch and the use of total body to “bump”…
[QUOTE=lkfmdc;970373]After having trained a long time, I generally will tell you there is nothing “unique” in any art… it isn’t even arts, the same art (like Shuai Jiao or Praying Mantis) can have different lineages or schools that focus on certain techniques, but in the “tradition” as a whole, you find all the techniques…
That being said, certain things always seem to be undervalued in martial arts. IN both TMA and MMA/“modern” schools I often see a lack of attention to footwork and angles… with my background in Lama Pai, we do a lot with footwork and angles.. but I will also tell you I’ve seen the same stuff in French Savate and Filipiino MA.
Lama Pai gives us “loopier” punches, but again, I can show you a few cases of very loopy style in boxing, and the Russians who do combat forms of sambo have their “casting punches” (which IMO probably come from Chinese MA but who really knows?)
Perhaps one of the truely “unique” things from CMA is “fah jing” or short power in the clinch and the use of total body to “bump”…[/QUOTE]
The man speaks truth.
BTW Dave, the first time I saw the “bump” was in Kenjustu and when I was exposed to Chen Taiji a few years later I mentioned that to the teacher and he said, " Of course, because Taiji is everywhere".
he was right.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;970395]The man speaks truth.
BTW Dave, the first time I saw the “bump” was in Kenjustu and when I was exposed to Chen Taiji a few years later I mentioned that to the teacher and he said, " Of course, because Taiji is everywhere".
he was right.[/QUOTE]
LOL, well, like I said, all the shit is the same… I could even suggest that when you pummel and over/under in wrestling…
I think the first kung fu style I learned, truly laid my foundations for martial art training. It helped me learn other systems at a faster rate, providing the instructor wasn’t holding back or wasn’t very organized teaching his material. All other systems strengthen my understanding of that style.
It gave me a solid understanding of body mechanics, what the instructor called ‘natural strength’. He deviated from his classmates in that he emphasized relax strength/structure instead of the dynamic tension drills. He believed it was better way of developing the ‘heavy hand’.
The grabbing drills, if done right, developed sensitivity for qin na.
The drills we did where we stood facing each other at arms length, hands down at our sides, forced us to be fast in defense and attack; and non-telegraphic.
The combos we learned was designed so that strikes were difficult to see coming. And as some fighters reported, they are usually knocked out by punches they never coming.
They are others but the above comes to mind first.
[QUOTE=Iron_Eagle_76;970311]Let’s hear it folks, what makes you “teh deadly”[/QUOTE]due to the nature of my masonry job and my iron ball juggling, i’d say it would be clawing attacks that emphasize rending muscle from bone, tearing ligaments, snapping joints and all that fun stuff - orbital hammerfists are fun to play with… another dimension comes into play when you add the foundational aspects of bagua circle walking and rotational torque concepts of body manipulation via trapping and leverage - these applied concepts do not use any strikes per se… another favorite aspect is the use of the head to strike an opponents facial areas. headbutts are truly devastating and usually take people by suprise, especially if one is tangled up in some tsai chingenergy where they are having difficulty issuing forth a strike or escaping the point of connection between the two bodies… one can further startle and disrupt an opponent by using the age old monkey techniques of suddenly screaming in your opponents face… a little spittle here and there to ensure some unbalancing rage will further affect the opponent in question. then again, if things are not going your way, it’s pretty easy to pick up a nearby clubbing object to further facilitate the end to the confrontation.
fight like a cornered tiger… that’s my motto.
[QUOTE=lkfmdc;970373]Perhaps one of the truely “unique” things from CMA is “fah jing” or short power in the clinch and the use of total body to “bump”…[/QUOTE]nothing like a little k’ao ching…
What makes a man dangerous is not the number of fighting styles he has learned, but how able he is to use them in a deadly manner. Of course you need to be able to apply the techniques that can kill or maim, but if you don’t have the heart for it, you can not be all that deadly. It is just a frame of mind. You have to have the mind of a killer.
I agree with what lkfmdc wrote. Chinese arts seem to have more types of body contact takedowns such as bumping, “sitting” on the opponent’s thigh, and “horse breaking” with leg contact (although judo does some of this).
Two differences that come up when I train with people from other styles that seem to be advantageous to me are that my system (lama/hap ga/white crane) has institutionalized jumping and running training and a preference for gross motor skills. The jumping and running (preferably on steep hills) does more than contribute to general endurance. It seems to add dynamic leg strength to a wide funtional range of skills. The “gross motor” part deals in using striking training to apply to throws and kam na without using the fingers. We can do as many joint locks and throws as the aikido, hapkido, judo, and jujitsu guys without being upset if we miss a grip because the grip is accomplished by limb positioning, not by catching with the fingers. Finger grips are used in the system, but are considered high-level specializes skills. Instead of expecting a technique to work, we expect it to fail and the backup plan is to continue with the same power into a strike. A major tenet is to never reach for a flailing limb, but the shoulder or hip that controls that limb is a fair target.
Is this common to other systems? Dunno. I’ve seen some of the ideas in other northern systems, but not to the same degree.
Exposure to a series of interconnected rare skill sets, logical in both arrangement and developmental progression woven in to training sequences that are cleverly constructed as well as physically demanding.
Just when you think you’ve reached a comfort zone a new facet of the curriculum is presented to boggle the mind and challenge the body.
[QUOTE=Lee Chiang Po;970514]What makes a man dangerous is not the number of fighting styles he has learned, but how able he is to use them in a deadly manner. Of course you need to be able to apply the techniques that can kill or maim, but if you don’t have the heart for it, you can not be all that deadly. It is just a frame of mind. You have to have the mind of a killer.[/QUOTE]well said… this probably why they tell us that the mind is the path.
[QUOTE=Iron_Eagle_76;970420]By “bump” to you mean throw, reep, or simply knock off balance:confused: Sorry to sound ignorant, just wondering what you mean by that.[/QUOTE]
bumping is clearing a hook or a hold. Dislodging it from it’s firmness and allowing yourself to pass.
example, you are clinched, so you break that structure using a bump (dislodge a grasp on you) and then move into your reversal.
[QUOTE=Ray Pina;970550]
From E-Chuan I learned the invaluable lesson of using the elbow to deflect while striking… two for the price of one. And mechanics and structure. [/QUOTE]do this is what makes you teh deadly?? LOL
