[QUOTE=bawang;1237659]this coming from shaolin do practitioner
[/QUOTE]
Say what?!?! I don’t practice Shaolin Do, you must have me mistaken with someone else.
[QUOTE=xcakid;1237663]Say what?!?! I don’t practice Shaolin Do, you must have me mistaken with someone else.[/QUOTE]
wat
wat u train mang. I confuse
[QUOTE=bawang;1237665]wat
wat u train mang. I confuse[/QUOTE]
Currently, Long Fist 
Been in long fist since I came on this board.
I have trained in other arts, but never Shaolin Do.
[QUOTE=bawang;1237659]this coming from shaolin do practitioner
ya. just because shaolin monks trained firearms doesn’t prove they trained firearm[/QUOTE]
they used firearms at a point or two along the way. They didn’t “train” them as you are inferring and it certainly isn’t anything that made it’s way into regular training along the way and even in the outlying villages.
so, perhaps some Shaolin monks used guns in the 1800’s and early 1900’s
Otherwise, no, no they didn’t make it a regular modality of training.
geez, I’m sure the occasional chaplain had to pick up a rifle in ww2 as well, that doesn’t mean he’s got it as part of his training regimen.
[QUOTE=xcakid;1237670]Currently, Long Fist Been in long fist since I came on this board.[/QUOTE]
NICE ur a long fist brother. ok I will reveal the secreets.
plum flower spear and pear flower spear are firearms. did I blow ur mind
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcCCgj0ew7U
This clip is an excellent example that point out the difference between the Taiji method and the SC method.
- The pull at 0.09 is “Taiji” way with 2 contact points, the wrist and the elbow. He “pulled his opponent away” from him. Please notice that his opponent’s legs are free.
- The pull at 0.40 is “SC” way with 3 contact points, the wrist, the elbow, and the leg. He used his right leg to “spring” his opponent’s left leg so his opponent will “fall near by” him (if he did not release his grips). Please notice that one of his opponent’s legs is not free.
The difference between Taiji and SC is the leg move. If you add leg move into Taiji, Taiji can be a very effective throwing art. The adding result may make Taiji not “pure”. But why is that important?
[QUOTE=bawang;1237672]NICE ur a long fist brother. ok I will reveal the secreets.
plum flower spear and pear flower spear are firearms. did I blow ur mind[/QUOTE]
All styles, like David(s) and others pointed out, are evolving constantly, but at a pace measured in generations, perhaps only barely visible in our own lifetimes. Even a seminal figure like Bruce Lee took two generations to establish his style. And the rule is, the more generations removed from the ‘seminal figure’ the weaker the Fu.
As with all study, once you have completed the regular training to the standard of your instructor, you begin to hone your skills further, and perhaps some might find a new bit to add. That being said, perhaps consistency is more relevant than purity. Purity to me indicates an un changed, un evolving constant, which may be good for academic purposes as a snapshot, but its not a living breathing thing.
Here’s the question in my mind, if you have two options, or 3 or more, in a situation, which do you choose? If you are a striker who has a little x-training to understand grappling, do you grapple or strike? Can you afford the time to think about it?
It takes work to learn to apply a style of fighting, boxing, wrestling or Pak Mei and it becomes an issue of depth vs breadth with how many different things you learn.
And it goes without saying that if you find holes, you fill them with whatever works for you. Its the duplication that worries me.
[QUOTE=Yum Cha;1237722]
All styles, like David(s) and others pointed out, are evolving constantly, but at a pace measured in generations, perhaps only barely visible in our own lifetimes. Even a seminal figure like Bruce Lee took two generations to establish his style. And the rule is, the more generations removed from the ‘seminal figure’ the weaker the Fu.
[/QUOTE]
While I think these are the general rules, you can always hope to challenge them… we should strive to be alive and evolving. That doesnt have to mean “disrespect” or giving up your root, but the greatest disrespect is going stale
If I try to search for my ancient root and DNA, I may find this.
http://imageshack.us/a/img24/8929/sc2cv.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img689/8172/sc1p.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img692/2203/sc4fu.jpg
Why do I want to do that for?
[QUOTE=YouKnowWho;1237730]If I try to search for my ancient root and DNA, I may find this.
http://imageshack.us/a/img24/8929/sc2cv.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img689/8172/sc1p.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img692/2203/sc4fu.jpg
Why do I want to do that for?[/QUOTE]
I have been martial arts ever since I was a kid. I somehow I always knew things that they passed off as “tradition” were not right…
We learn this technique, it is the third thing we learn, but we can’t use it in sparring? WHY?
Another school, there is no sparring, hah hah, this is clearly a joke, time to move on
School tells me they don’t kick, well, what if I kick?
Lots of TCMA say they don’t wrestle? Well, anyone who has ever done any sparring, much less actual fighitng, kinows there is going to be wrestling
[QUOTE=Yum Cha;1237722]
Here’s the question in my mind, if you have two options, or 3 or more, in a situation, which do you choose? If you are a striker who has a little x-training to understand grappling, do you grapple or strike? Can you afford the time to think about it?
[/QUOTE]
If I can see you are a good grappler but not a good striker, I want to strike you
If you are a striker with no wresting, I want to wrestle and/or submit you
When you punch, I kick
When you kick, I punch
If you wrestle, I knee
If you knee, I wrestle
The art of war talks about “local superiority”, you fight them where they are weak, not where they are strong
If I try to used this “steal a peach under leaves - groin strike” in sparring,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys8LziWtHdE
I would always get hit on my face. Since this is the 1st form that student has to learn in my system. I told my guys that the purpose of this move is to “bend down, grab a handfull of dirt (or sand), and then throw at your opponent’s face”. One of my smart ass guys asked me, “What if you stand on pavement road?” I was speechless. Why did the original form creator put this move into his form? I have no idea.
[QUOTE=YouKnowWho;1237735]If I try to used this move in sparring,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys8LziWtHdE
I would always get hit on my face. Since this is the 1st form that student has to learn in my system. I told my guys that the purpose of this move is to “bend down, grab a handfull of dirt (or sand) and then throw at your opponent’s face”. One of my guys asked me, “What if you stand on pavement road?” I was speechless. Why did the original form creator put this move into his form? I have no idea.[/QUOTE]
I think (hope) you are being funny…
right hand is striking the groin, left hand should have already moved the arm/punch aside… or circled to trap as you turned…
not the best technique, but it has some potential I think
PS: I also think this is example of how to 'simplify" movement old teachers left out angles, sometimes forgetting that without the angle the technique is worthless
[QUOTE=lkfmdc;1237591]And what are “principles” when we talk about combat? There is only what works and what does not, and anyone looking to fight and survive only cares about what works…[/QUOTE]
A lot of things work, but that is not the only thing to care about. In fighting, ending quickly is also important because the longer the fight proceeds the greater the chance of being seriously injured. So we must also care about efficiency. We don’t go into a fight with sportive mentality, knowing we have several rounds and decide to feel out the opponent during the first round.
So one such principle of efficiency is constant forward pressure. Some styles may re-chamber a kick and bring the leg back and place it down before moving forward, which may give the opponent the opportunity to reset. Adhering to your principle you’d turn the kick into a forwarding step to keep the pressure on the opponent with relentless attack.
See chambered kicks may well work, but it is within some system principles to eat up time and every gap with forward pressure to ensure a quick end. You may win either way, but it is possible to adhere to your principles for valid reasons, keeping a “pure system”.
[QUOTE=lkfmdc;1237736]moved the arm/punch aside… [/QUOTE]
If that’s the case, the left hand should move sideway instead of downward.
[QUOTE=LFJ;1237737]
A lot of things work, but that is not the only thing to care about. In fighting, ending quickly is also important because the longer the fight proceeds the greater the chance of being seriously injured.
[/QUOTE]
many times you don’t have a choice, it WILL go on longer than you want
people who practice in their kwoon often think it will be easy to end a fight. They think some technique will do so much damage
when you see a real fight, when you have experienced it, you understand things are NOT that simple…
Things are done and happen that you would have sworn would result in a KO or death and yet the fight goes on…
[QUOTE=LFJ;1237737]
So we must also care about efficiency. We don’t go into a fight with sportive mentality, knowing we have several rounds and decide to feel out the opponent during the first round.
[/QUOTE]
you’d better learn how to pace yourself, or you will run out of gas and find out that the other person is still alive, fine, fighting, and looking to kill you
[QUOTE=LFJ;1237737]
So one such principle of efficiency is constant forward pressure.
[/QUOTE]
forward pressure without proper conditioning is an excellent way to gas out and get slaughtered… it’s one of those things those mere “sport fighters” learn rather quickly :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=YouKnowWho;1237738]If that’s the case, the left hand should move sideway instead of downward.[/QUOTE]
student learned it wrong and then taught it wrong
or the teacher thought is should be the other way
or the teacher didn’t know the real application
or the teacher wanted to hide the real application
so many ways for these things to get messed up
[QUOTE=lkfmdc;1237734]If I can see you are a good grappler but not a good striker, I want to strike you
If you are a striker with no wresting, I want to wrestle and/or submit you
When you punch, I kick
When you kick, I punch
If you wrestle, I knee
If you knee, I wrestle
The art of war talks about “local superiority”, you fight them where they are weak, not where they are strong[/QUOTE]
We agree in principle, but not in execution. “Fight them where they are weak…” can mean a lot of things, including using surprise and unfamiliar attacks.
This is my rant, you don’t respond to your opponent wherever possible, but make him respond to you. Even if you step right, forcing him to adjust, you are starting to dictate the engagement.
Just like BJJ says to consolidate, then submit, I think the same, consolidate an advantageous situation and attack. That situation may be an expected attack from the other person, with their hands because you wrong footed them, or the like. Initially attacking their balance to weaken a counter, and then pouncing like a tiger with whatever you got, generally knees and elbows, break a knee if you get the chance. All over rover.
Straight blast is what Lee called it, its nothing new. And you gotta have plan B…
[QUOTE=Yum Cha;1237742]
This is my rant, you don’t respond to your opponent wherever possible, but make him respond to you.
[/QUOTE]
some people are aggressive, others are counter fighters, the style can not make the man, only inform him