Let's kick a dead horse

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Kung Fu Forum
1

This is not a troll, but a question:

Is it the man or the style? I say it is both, because it is the man that picks the style.

The man is important, he needs the discipline and mental toughness to train. BUT, at the same time he needs to be flexible and open to potential answers to questions that arise from his training.

TOO often, and I’ll use Wing Chun because its an easy target, someone chooses A style and that’s it, they are unbeatable. This first style they picked out of the Yellow Pages is the be all and end all of MA. No need to look further, bong sau will save the day.

I disagree. I truly believe there are better methods, better styles and way. Now, a better way in the hands of a lessor man does not accomplish much. But take that die hard Hung Gar guy, Wing Chun Guy, S. Mantis guy pounding away at Iron Palm, and show him some inner Ba Gua, and watch the hell out – that guy is going to tear it up. He can still be a S. Mantis guy, but it will be super charged with higher level principles.

This is my opinion, but I am so sure of it I would give it the FACT stamp of aproval.

I find people limit themselves by being afraid to admit that perhaps they did not get it all from one style. Not even the style, let’s say the school, the teacher.

I myself have studied Isshin-Ryu for 14 years. I used to laught at people to bounced from a school after 2 years, and rightfully, MA is a lifetime. But I got the core of that stystem, and then moved on in life (literarly, moved, and started college). Then I did Hung Gar and WIng Chun. The HUng Gar had a good lineage (from Frank Yee) but too much form not enough fight. WC was good to learn sticking, and some core principles, but the weight distribution was off. I didn;t know that until I started fighting with S Mantis, then training with my S. Mantis Sifu, a disciple of Uncle Milton.

I learned true fighting from him. Was getting good. Then I got a beat down from a so-so student of Master Chan Bong. The technoogy was higher than anything I had seen before. So little done, so much result. I pursued an introduction for a year – got it last Feb. My gung-fu has never been better and growing by the day.

I am hungry, so maybe people will say it is me when I win, but I think it is the methods that I have learned along the way. It is me who has mastered them from hard work, but it is the methods – I just put thgem to use; they are second nature and becoming first nature now.

Without question, Master Chan Bong’s E-chuan is the best. most direct and real methods I have ever seen. Not saying he is the best, because I haven’t seen it all. BUt I have stopped looking. I will spend the rest of my life with this master.

I believe he is a great man. He knows an amazing method. It is both, the method and the man. Put his method into a lesser man, and if its fully realized, he will not be lesser anymore, but it will take a man of a different color to grasp it though.

I guess its the yin and yang not to be hoaky.

Peace
Happy New Year

2

I think it is the man. Why? Well, for a few reasons, sometimes, just being tough enough is all you need, and the best martial arts person in the world would get beat up, but beyond that genetic propensity for taking large amounts of damage and still giggle like a school girl, th eperson has to commit himself, to his art and to himself. You have to want to learn and to drive yourself, stay focused and know what you are getting into. Most arts by now, especially more traditional ones, have been tested and they work. They are systems designed to all do the same thing in different ways. If the man finds the system that is right for him, and he dedicates himself to it, and works hard, he will probably be at th etop of the heap.

3

But is it the mind of the man, or the body?

Where do techniques lie? In the body or the mind?

4

It is a combination

A bad style can be “made” good by certain individuals

A good style can be misrepresented by some

A good man can pick a bad style and be nothing

A poor man can pick a good style and use it effectively to win

Sorry to be so abstract, that’s just the way I see it. In the end, the most important person is your teacher. He makes you what you are.

5

Guohuen, that is without a doubt the best thing I have read on this sight! 100%.

You must be very good.

Nice meeting you.

Ray

6

[b]
… S. Mantis guy pounding away at Iron Palm, and show him some inner Ba Gua, and watch the hell out – that guy is going to tear it up. He can still be a S. Mantis guy, but it will be super charged with higher level principles.

[/b]

I believe this is what cross training should be about. You don’t have to jump from style to style and patch things together. You can find a style that speaks to you, and when the time comes, you can learn other methods to fill in the gaps and make yourself more efficient.

Anyway, to answer you question, it is definately a combination of the two. I know everybody hates the NHB comparisons, but would Royce Gracie have done so well in the UFC is his family studied Chung Moo Do or even kickboxing? I doubt it.

7

Royce Gracie can bite my ass.

Ralek has made me hate him eternally.

8

Funny

9

Man chooses style. Style shapes man. Man transcends to formlessness.

So as we approach formlessness, does man replace style?

Does formlessness really have no boundary? Or is he bound by a set of universal principals that in the abstract cover all possibilities? Bound by the boundless?

10

I think people tend to overcomplicate the “style”. I mean all styles were created by somebody right? Usually styles are born out of a person combining what he has learned and experienced over his life. Now a question to the hard core “traditionalists” Why couldn’t some one do this today? Most will answer with “We don’t have the experience they did” . They may be partially right but the “style” should change and evolve with the times, this doesn’t mean the combat methods change a punch is a punch right?. What it means is that it needs to fit the needs of the times or the training is pointless. Kind of like the changin of jitsu arts to Budo.

With that being said, the “masters of old” were probally to concerened with staying alive to worry about where the techniques came from. If it worked for them they probally used it. I think if the school is combat emphasised they will have a similar attitude. You shouldn’t try to adapt everything, you should choose carfully and only use the essential.

I think the man is most important cause once you eliminate all the “deffintitions” and catagories, man is all thats left. Man made the styles, and man made the catagories.

11

True, true; but a punch is not a punch. There are ways. Most would not recognize the way that my master’s e-chuan attacks. Looks wierd done outside of context as just a punch. Put it into the system when in combat, when working off of an aponant, man it works.

It looks like a wave (taiji opening up down). Very powerful without having to put power in, the mere mass of the arm driven by the wave momentum of the body is devestating, hot a nice spot, and doubly, no triply so. Not words, I know.

So, that get’s me back to methods. To me its a revolving circle, man and method. Style is one’s own interpretation of the methods. I can trane in my master’s “style”, but we will not have the same style, he is he and I am me. But I wish I had his style, smooth like butter.

12

Originally posted by shaolinboxer
[B]Man chooses style. Style shapes man. Man transcends to formlessness.

So as we approach formlessness, does man replace style?

Does formlessness really have no boundary? Or is he bound by a set of universal principals that in the abstract cover all possibilities? Bound by the boundless? [/B]

Oh Jesus F*cking Christ! :confused:

Why do people take this attitude. The only way you will reach “enlightenment” is if you practise for 11 hrs a day. Or if you are Ralek, then you just need to play Tekken for 7 hrs a day. :rolleyes:

In the end, a style is just a name. Every move is just a move. You never EVER do something the same as your Sifu. So you essentially create your own style. So everyone has their own personal style.

Abstract. Formlessness. Boundless. Anus. :stuck_out_tongue:

13

Bak Mei- Their are differences in method. Let me give you an example of what I mean. Bagua(example people no offence to bagua) guy see a man practicing a martial art in the park they talk for awhile and decide to have a freindly sparring match. The bagua guy is doing good until…bam he gets hit with some spectacualr technique. Afterwards he complements his opponent on the technique and the man offers to teach it to him. The Bagua man thinks how useful that technique could be and is excited but…it’s not Bagua so he refuses the offer to learn it.

I just made that story up but I noticed alot of martial artists think like this. People who want to be effective in combat see techniques in 2 ways useful or not. If you restrict yourself to one line or “style” that could be a mistake. Traditional for being traditional is useless, the masters “traditionalists” hold is such high reguards would have taken the man up on the opportuntity to learn the useful technique.

delicate sounds words fit here-"In the end, a style is just a name. Every move is just a move. "

So that would leave the importance up to the man right?

14

I suppose that was my point Shaolin Dynasty.

Thank you for picking through the faeces of my post and retrieving it for me :slight_smile:

15

Shaolin Dynasty, I agree with you 100% with no buts added.

Every Ba Gua player I know, and martial artists that I consider friends, would in a heart beat praise the person that beat them, and ask for guidence, in what that it was that beat them. It usually doesn’t come down to a technique at that level, but the aproach, what was it … ?

I am fortunate that my teacher takes the same aproach. Whatever get’s you home in one peace, that’s what I consider traditional.

Most “traditional” guys would look at what I do in combat and think it is Navy Seal stuff, very intight, a strong, shor structure, the arms will look like they are pumping once or twice, maybe a twist of the shape here or there and that’s it – over.

But if they saw me walking the circle, O, then they would be interested. Martial Artists are funny, aren’t they?

Nice meeting you guys. Some great conversation on the board today. Happy New Year.

16

Hey Bak Mei

Where can one find information on the style you are currently studying??

17

Me too

That is the kind of attitude everyone should strive for.

18

Ok everyone agrees…what the:confused: Did we just beat the forum? Whats going to happen now, I’m scared:(

19

OH MY GOD. We all agreed!!!

Quick - Ralek, say something stupid. Bullsh!t, lies, idiocy ANYTHING!!!

QUICKLY :confused: :eek: :confused: :eek: :confused: :eek:

20

It’s both that matter, different degrees for every indivuduals but hey we’re all different. For someone to take an extreme view that style doesn’t matter AT ALL, is just as silly as the Gracies 10 years ago saying that “style is everything”.