See Oso! Thats why I do not shut them down too quickly.
My take/opinion is this:
These fighting methods were designed with groups & battlefields in mind. Somebody tossed you to the ground & either your allies or theirs stuck a weapon in one of you, game over. The ground is a fickle place to be if you are not 1 on 1.
As far as mantis goes, I have seen ground technique. Not a lot of it though the the main goal of what I did see was to cya untill you were on your feet again. This makes sense to me when I take into consideration what the system was desinged for.
The fastest racecars in the world cant keep up with a jeep off-road. Everyhting is designed for something…not everything.
I think BTL does a wonderful job of monitorng this board. Even if a thread gets off track momentarily I think there are enough of us mature grownups to get it back on track. this board should never be cofused with the main board.. its just a playground over there
The only CMA that can be credited with battlefield arts is Xing Yi, and as I study and probe deeper I am finding little proof of that as well. None the less if you are thrown on the battlefield you are ****ed! Ground work was just not an intelligent option.
Shuai Chiao does not have any ground curriculum! Some SC teachers have even been quoted as saying ground fighting was akin to “Dogs rolling in the dirt!” Now how much has the art changed over the years…don’t know. For instance their used to be many sacrifice throws in SC, but have been removed for modern competition. Some like the “Pillow Toss” were removed because you would land on your opponents ribs often causing injury.
So was there ground work in SC? Unlikely. To argue that it is a “wrestling / grappling” style as the foundation of your argument that ground work must have been included is not very solid.
[QUOTE=Three Harmonies;911291]The only CMA that can be credited with battlefield arts is Xing Yi, and as I study and probe deeper I am finding little proof of that as well. None the less if you are thrown on the battlefield you are ****ed! Ground work was just not an intelligent option.
Shuai Chiao does not have any ground curriculum! Some SC teachers have even been quoted as saying ground fighting was akin to “Dogs rolling in the dirt!” Now how much has the art changed over the years…don’t know. For instance their used to be many sacrifice throws in SC, but have been removed for modern competition. Some like the “Pillow Toss” were removed because you would land on your opponents ribs often causing injury.
So was there ground work in SC? Unlikely. To argue that it is a “wrestling / grappling” style as the foundation of your argument that ground work must have been included is not very solid.
Jake[/QUOTE]
I thought Eagle Claw was created for the battlefield, whatever that means.
Nasty rumor. I have not seen any substantial proof of it. And think about it…
Correct me if I am wrong Sanjuro, but you are/were a bouncer no? In the short 6 years I bounced I can honestly say, chokes being the exception (and technically I was not allowed to choke anyone), Chin Na Fa (joint manipulation), is one of THE MOST difficult aspects of the Si Ji Fa (kick-punch-throw-lock) to pull off. Don’t get me wrong I got my occasional wrist lock or shoulder lock, but overall very, very difficult to pull off even with years of training!
So the argument that soldiers were taught joint manipulation as there primary source of hand to hand combat quickly fades into the fantasy realm when looked at with a critical eye. You train soldiers as efficiently as possible. Joint manipulation would not be efficient. Nor as effective as say striking.
[QUOTE=Three Harmonies;911385]Nasty rumor. I have not seen any substantial proof of it. And think about it…
Correct me if I am wrong Sanjuro, but you are/were a bouncer no? In the short 6 years I bounced I can honestly say, chokes being the exception (and technically I was not allowed to choke anyone), Chin Na Fa (joint manipulation), is one of THE MOST difficult aspects of the Si Ji Fa (kick-punch-throw-lock) to pull off. Don’t get me wrong I got my occasional wrist lock or shoulder lock, but overall very, very difficult to pull off even with years of training!
So the argument that soldiers were taught joint manipulation as there primary source of hand to hand combat quickly fades into the fantasy realm when looked at with a critical eye. You train soldiers as efficiently as possible. Joint manipulation would not be efficient. Nor as effective as say striking.
Just my two cents,
Jake[/QUOTE]
I have used standing joint locks when the patron is already “under control” and usually with another bouncer.
I would never trust my well being to a joint lock, even for any other reason than that I am commiting, typically, 2 limbs to his 1, not good odds.
ON THE ground joint locks/subs work well, standing, not so much.
besides that, they take too long to apply when, typically, there is always someone else to worry about.
As applied on the battlefield, past or present, I can see the study of ground work, simple because the chances of falling are pretty high and the application of strikes and clinches, but everything within the context of being armed or facing an armed person.
3H & SR: yea, only thing chin na wise that I regularly got bouncing was some muscle grabs (don’t forget ‘chin na’ includes more than joint manipulation) but bear hugs, chokes and the occasional arm bar/shoulder lock were the rule
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;910995]I am here to learn and as you see the crap is coming from Kansuke (a friend of Sanuro´s) who does not practice any kung fu. He is here to troll and disrupt threads with his slanderous remarks.[/QUOTE]
Let’s see, you’ve had about two years of actual training in kungfu. About the same as me. And of the two of us, who knows more about grappling? Hmmm? Why don’t you STFU and go google something.
Face it…if you are law enforcent or even a bouncer in a bar the last place you want to be is on the ground with your arms and legs wrapped around the guy…even if he is controlled In the mma ring you dont have to worry about the judge and his friends putting a bullet in the back of your head or the judge and two of his friends kicking you in the teeth while you are controlling the other guy.
[/QUOTE]
Ah, the old ‘While standing one is immune from bullets and his friends will never get involved’ theory. A classic.
Ok then, lay on the ground and wrap your arms and legs around the dude…sneak a kiss while you are down there…have fun!
If you cant see the obvious disatvantage of being on the ground as opposed to standing…well…I hate to be negative like this…but you lack experience in real life situations. Why fight at all…start out with a gun in the first place.
I ask myself again…why do I post here and why do I click on this site from time to time…
[QUOTE=Three Harmonies;911291]The only CMA that can be credited with battlefield arts is Xing Yi, and as I study and probe deeper I am finding little proof of that as well. None the less if you are thrown on the battlefield you are ****ed! Ground work was just not an intelligent option.[/quote]
I have heard that many styles including Tai Chi were battlefield arts as well. Some were apparently created by generals.
Of course that doesn´t mean that the practitioners are not going to be attacked on a one on one basis. Many masters and practitioners have fought challenge matches and sometimes one does not choose his challenger.
And again going back to the fact that this aspect of fighting is present in Siu Lam Wing Chun and was also taught by Earthdragon´s sifu using the 8 Step Mantis´s distinct fighting concepts and principles I would conclude that some styles of kung fu do address groundfighting.
That reminds me of another style of kung fu that addresses groundfighting and that style is called DOG BOXING!
Well Junior you are mistaken. Taiji has never been even rumored to be a battlefield art. Just channel 5 fantasies!
Fukien Dog Boxing (which I have studied a little) has no ground fighting in it. Everything in the style has to do with one person on the ground and his opponent standing above him trying to strike, and or kick. Basically a number of sweeps, kicks, knee destructions etc. Nothing in the system address’ the possibility of someone engaging you on the ground.
[QUOTE=Three Harmonies;911511]Well Junior you are mistaken. Taiji has never been even rumored to be a battlefield art. Just channel 5 fantasies![/quote]
I had read about past masters who were generals, but then if what you say is true then I stand corrected.
I have never studied this system and I did not even know that there schools in the West that trained this style seriously. However I am still surprised that a style that has at least one exponent fighting from the ground does not address a scenario where the opponent perhaps follows one to the ground which is quite possible.
Especially where in at least our Lineage of Wing Chun (supposedly a 100 stand up art) and 8 Step Mantis, provisions are made for a groundfighting scenario. Is it possible that such a scenario exists in Dog Boxing but that perhaps in higher levels/grades?
Mantid1, yea I wondered why a man at your level of training even responded to the troll. But as usual, you have good points and good information. Oso had this one pegged, he can smell out a troll.
I think we can all agree that kansuke is also a troll, he got banned before his other screen name was unkanuoki or something like that… please keep these two on the main board dont bring that $hit over here guys please
Question.If there is a extensive groundfighting curriculum in cma,then why are we having this discussion?If it was there,why did’nt any of the cma guys beat Royce Gracie in the 90’s(when there were’nt many rules) when this UFC/MMA thing was getting started?Even though cma was here in the U.S. way before mma,we are now judged by their standards.I have not seen a mantis specific groundfighting game,the little I know is bjj.If there is mantis ground game,I would like to see it.
