[QUOTE=Taixuquan99;1139592]Would you two like the rest of us to leave you alone?[/QUOTE]
Sorry about that. It is just that Dragonzbane here likes to stalk me across this forum and “provoke situations”. Apparently, every time I speak pro-TCMA in relation to his beloved MMA (I still don’t know why him - and others of “MMA is best” persuasion - post in this kung fu forum), he sees it as “abrassiveness” on my part, hence the stalking.
Sign of the times, I say…
HW108- You do all these things you complain about.
You continue to badger and bait people and continue to taunt with “clueless idiots” and so on and so forth.
You don’t so much talk with people as you do talk at them.
So, be warned, if you continue down this path again the former result of that behaviour from you will be permanent.
So mind your P’s and Q’s I won’t ask you again and it’s not up for debate.
Be civil or be gone. Tired of it already.
:mad:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taixuquan99
Would you two like the rest of us to leave you alone?
Sorry about that. It is just that Dragonzbane here likes to stalk me across this forum and “provoke situations”. Apparently, every time I speak pro-TCMA in relation to his beloved MMA (I still don’t know why him - and others of “MMA is best” persuasion - post in this kung fu forum), he sees it as “abrassiveness” on my part, hence the stalking.
Sign of the times, I say…
Me posting in multiple threads does not mean anything. In all truth most times i choose to skip conversations with u in them because it usually ends with a meaningless debate of the same crap. You think too highly of yourself for me to care in all events concerning u. Because you hate my opinions so much usually its u that illicits the conversations. Leave me alone and ill return the curtesy.
[QUOTE=Dragonzbane76;1139609]Me posting in multiple threads does not mean anything. In all truth most times i choose to skip conversations with u in them because it usually ends with a meaningless debate of the same crap. You think too highly of yourself for me to care in all events concerning u. Because you hate my opinions so much usually its u that illicits the conversations. Leave me alone and ill return the curtesy.[/QUOTE]
If you look at this very thread, you will see that it was you who started to “converse” with me, but yes, just ignore me!
As for my part, I should not have implied that I get laid a lot, it seems that the moderator got jealous. 
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;1139482]I would politely ask you not to call me a liar!
If you are not aware of the fact that some TCMAs address the ground scenario, then that is fine too, as you are in the majority who claim to train “Kung fu”. Also, keep in mind that most kung fu out there is taught in an incompete manner, so there is no reason to think that your training has been otherwise - based on the point view you have just put across!
I will repeat again, the Mainland Chinese lineage of Wing Chun that I train has ground fighting training as part of its traditional curriculum. So, take that to the bank!
Sifu Mike Patterson, in another thread has stated that during his time of training Hsing I in Taiwan, he did ground fighting. He also said that this type of training was the norm in those days and in that part of the world.
I have posted a Tiger Claw style video which also shows ground fighting aspects.
So, it is a LIE to say that the TCMAs do not address the ground![/QUOTE]
You really need to re-read what Sifu Patterson said, really.
thanks for sharing;)
[QUOTE=Indrafist;1139493]My first TCMA teachers were three brothers who all cross-trained, and were all street fighters. Each cross trained at least three styles. The eldest of the brothers did both Dai-Shing Pek Gwa (with Chan Sau Chung) and, Japanese Judo, as well as SPM. The middle brother did Lion’s Roar with Shuia-Chiao and Chin Na incorporated, plus Wing Chun, and Western Boxing. The youngest brother did Lion’s Roar with Muay-Thai and Tai-Chi. The middle brother told me in no uncertain terms that if a fight went to the ground and I couldn’t handle it, I’d be finished. He broke my arm by way of explanation. As well as their own styles, they regularly cross-trained with each other, and with invited people from outside. They made us fight full contact which was rare in 1973 in the UK. Did I ever compete in combat sporets? Nope. Did what I did in those early years help me defend myself/test myself? Yep, in 13 years of frontline law enforecment. Would I have been any good as a combat sports athlete? I doubt it. Did what I trained help me in my chosen area of pressure testing? Yep, absolutely (see above). Did what I did in groundwork match up to BJJ? Nope. Did I continue with TCMA? Yep, for the past 38 out of 44 years of my MA training. What did I start my own son on? Judo and Muay-Thai, before getting him some experience with BJJ and MMA. What’s he doing now after that base? TCMA. Why? Coz it’s what he wants to do. Is TCMA ‘complete’? Unto itself, yep. Can it evolve? Yep. Should it evolve? IMHO, yeah.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1139638]You really need to re-read what Sifu Patterson said, really.[/QUOTE]
I might just do that, but I remember reading it with a smile on my face. He did say that ground fighting was practiced during his time in Taiwan, and not just in his school. He also confirmed the Internal approach, hence its validity. On top of that he said that in his school, 50% of the training involves the forms practice.
All of the above and their validity have been discussed to death in this forum, and often with valid points on both sides, but what sifu Patterson said validates what me and people like me have been saying here for years - that the Internals exist; forms training is an important tool, and that the TCMAs do address the ground scenario.
If you remember, I have for a long time referred to my Mainland Chinese Wing Chun syllabus, where ground training is part of the curriculum. 
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;1139647]I might just do that, but I remember reading it with a smile on my face. He did say that ground fighting was practiced during his time in Taiwan, and not just in his school. He also confirmed the Internal approach, hence its validity. On top of that he said that in his school, 50% of the training involves the forms practice.
All of the above and their validity have been discussed to death in this forum, and often with valid points on both sides, but what sifu Patterson said validates what me and people like me have been saying here for years - that the Internals exist; forms training is an important tool, and that the TCMAs do address the ground scenario.
If you remember, I have for a long time referred to my Mainland Chinese Wing Chun syllabus, where ground training is part of the curriculum. :)[/QUOTE]
Sifu Patterson made it clear that other practionmers and teachers of other systems were brought in and that is, presumably, where His system developed the skills to deal with them.
Sifu Patterson’s views on “internals” don’t seem to mesh with your though.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1139653]Sifu Patterson made it clear that other practionmers and teachers of other systems were brought in and that is, presumably, where His system developed the skills to deal with them.
Sifu Patterson’s views on “internals” don’t seem to mesh with your though.[/QUOTE]
These are a few quotes from Sifu Patterson:
Here, sifu Patterson answers Dragonzbane76’s question as to wether he had to go “elsewhere” to learn grappling:
See, I did not misread Sifu Patterson. It is all there, and of course, and as always, ground fighting is still part of the traditional curriculum of the Mainland Chinese lineage of Wing Chun which I study.
More quotes from Sifu Patterson:
It would seem that outside of the China/Taiwan, etc. the TCMAs are trained somewhat differently, for the most part, hence people’s erroneous views and assumptions as regards what they contain and don’t.
And this says it all:
At face value, there are a number of standing applications that one can extrapolate for possible use on the ground. But theoretical extrapolation doesn’t equate to styles that actively had or have practice and training in such scenarios.
I shake my head to the majority of what was on the videos that were posted as evidence of TCMA/Shaolin “ground fighting”.
Those of us that train and have trained in a CMA, need to be honest with ourselves. The vast, vast majority of CMA does not include fighting on the ground outside of excapes and techniques designed to get back up.
The more than a little bit of “vs MMA” or “vs grappler” type videos and demonstrations I’ve seen are really not that practical. There are millions of guys and now a growing number of gals out there that have wrestled in highschool, or local club, or amateur athletics. And I’m sure many of them that watch so many of these vids showing how a “grappler” attempts a takedown against a kung fu stylist roll thier eyes at such ignorance.
I study a CMA, have for over twenty years now, but like a buch of other people on these boards, I also wrestled in highschool. I enjoy my training and have learned a lot. But we really need to get past this “vs MMA” mentality. If what we study doesn’t have a practical method in a certain scenario or fighting range, well, it just doesn’t have it. It doesn’t invalidate everything else you train and learn.
[QUOTE=Eric Olson;1139456]With great personal sacrifice they come to this forum with a message to deliver–kung fu sucks and we have come to awaken you from your delusional fog.
Thank god for those brave souls who take the time to tell us how lame we are and how great they truly are because they practice <insert martial flavor of the week>.
What would we do without them?
Internet forums bring out the attention seekers. Kung fu is not the direct reason. Check out internet forums on dogs, and even speed chess- you will get similar jabberwocky.
joy chaudhuri
The way past the mentality of x vs y is to participate in both and understand they are not “vs” at all but complimentary skill sets that strengthen each other.
See, I did not misread Sifu Patterson. It is all there, and of course, and as always, ground fighting is still part of the traditional curriculum of the Mainland Chinese lineage of Wing Chun which I study.
I think you are SELECTIVELY reading what you want t because he also said:
Perhaps I was fortunate to have open minded and knowledgeable teachers who encouraged me to explore other disciplines via “crossing arms” (this is what we said in those days) and to bring back any questions or dilemnas I had. There was always an answer waiting.
I think it always has MUCH to do with the teacher/environment. I also think it has to do with the individual.
Master Hsu had many, many accomplished friends from different disciplines. They used to drop by the school all the time to show us “their style’s way” of doing things. This always prompted MANY questions in us regarding the whys and wherefores of our respective differences of technical persuasion and tactic.
I was fortunate… no doubt about it.. to have open minded teachers that did not shun others that were different as being “wrong” but only as different.
I have had numerous discussions with practitioners/teachers that tell me that they feel that they are able to fight and fight well. Oftentimes, by asking just a few quick questions… Do you spar in your school? What are the rules if any? Do you engage with outsiders at all? Do you go to other schools/venues to play with unknowns in contact environments? What are the rules, if any?.. tells me where their respective heads are. It is amazing to me how many practitioners keep their metaphorical heads in the sand but yet profess that “they know” what they do is real and effective.
Yes. This is how were were in those days, how it was in my teacher’s school when I trained and how I still am today.
We always welcomed outsiders to come by and train with us, fight with us, or do whatever they wanted to do at their comfort zone with us to invest in the learning process.
We have always been game to do such things. This is what I find sorely lacking in many schools in this country today (and not only kung fu schools), and have mentioned consistently since my beginning post in the first thread.
My message is not that Kung Fu sucks. It’s that self-proclaimed masters with no real combat experience suck… and that they talk out of their arse for personal financial or ego rewards… and then they spawn kook students.
Also, these people are quick to play up how calm and emotionally balanced they are compared to competitive sport types but the best answer to every situation is to remove someone’s eye, cripple them or knock them dead with one fatal, precisely aimed shot:)
TCMA is fine… it’s the delusional douche bags that train it that’s the problem. They don’t train real resistance, they don’t go out to compete in open grappling or striking forums, have produced no notable champions anywhere … and yet are the most opinionated. Even providing detailed instruction regarding their methods’ superiority.
It’s hilarious. Good entertainment.
kung fu is like chairman mao. 70% right, 30% wrong.
[QUOTE=bawang;1140251]kung fu is like chairman mao. 70% right, 30% wrong.[/QUOTE]
60% of the time, bawang is right all the time. 
why oh why does this never end… yes, I contribute to it - but in all it doesn’t matter.
Here’s some big secrets. Get strong, get tough - exercise, do some cardio, work on flexibility… get into a couple of fights. Spar. Take a BJJ class, supplement with Judo or Shuai Jiao. Fight some more. Get it out of your system. Take a chill pill, and then get back to TCMA if that matters to you. If not - quit. In the immortal words of Hank Williams the Third when referring to some people’s bias against his style of country… “If you don’t like ****** Tonk music, then go - F_CK You”
[QUOTE=MightyB;1140254]60% of the time, bawang is right all the time. :D[/QUOTE]
He’s also illegal in 9 countries and smells like pure gasoline.
[QUOTE=wenshu;1140257]He’s also illegal in 9 countries and smells like pure gasoline.[/QUOTE]
Is there anything more awesome than Anchorman references?
I think not !!
Why?
Cause I killed a man with a trident !