Bacon is the troll of the Shaolin forum. He once criticized a video of a form demonstration as completely useless in combat, although he has never done a martial art with forms to even have a clue, except for the WC he’s doing now, but he’s probably not halfway through Siu-nihm-tau, or he’d know things aren’t applied as they appear in the form, and you can’t understand all that’s going on in an action just by looking at it, especially if you don’t even practice that style. So just ignore him in the Shaolin section.[/QUOTE]
Actually I said most of it was useless and challenged anyone to prove me wrong by showing me application of anything in the form against a well trained and resistant opponent. No one could.
[QUOTE=wiz cool c;1195529]i have a black belt in bujinkan budo taijutsu, taijutsu is basically traditional jujutsu. yeah this guy is a troll or just a loser with nothing better to do then put his two cents in when he never even studied the style that is being descussed[/QUOTE]
Ummm no nothing in ninjitsu is koryu jujitsu but thank you for playing.
[QUOTE=Bacon;1195530]Actually I said most of it was useless and challenged anyone to prove me wrong by showing me application of anything in the form against a well trained and resistant opponent. No one could.
And I’m in the mook jong thank you.[/QUOTE]
Typical troll argument. It does not follow that because no one on that thread took your video challenge, the form is then proven useless. The fact remains that you don’t understand it, and can’t by just looking at it. That speaks a lot about how you are being taught the forms of WCK.
[QUOTE=LFJ;1195539]Typical troll argument. It does not follow that because no one on that thread took your video challenge, the form is then proven useless. The fact remains that you don’t understand it, and can’t by just looking at it. That speaks a lot about how you are being taught the forms of WCK.[/QUOTE]
They said it was useful and I asked them to prove it. They couldn’t. There were many excuses and attempts to evade any kind of evidence though. So even if as you say I don’t understand it by looking at it there is still no evidence of it being useful.
[QUOTE=Bacon;1195543]They said it was useful and I asked them to prove it. They couldn’t. There were many excuses and attempts to evade any kind of evidence though. So even if as you say I don’t understand it by looking at it there is still no evidence of it being useful.
Trying to insult my training doesn’t change that.[/QUOTE]
You having not personally seen any evidence is not equivalent to there actually being none. You see? It is also typical troll behavior to require video evidence from people who for whatever reason may not want to put themselves or their knowledge online like that, which is their right, and to claim it as proof of your point when they don’t. All we can deduce is that you don’t understand what you saw, and haven’t personally seen its usefulness.
With regards to your experience, you haven’t trained in any style, much less a Chinese style that involves full moving forms like that. Even from the few relatively simple forms of WCK, if you still don’t know that the many possibile interpretations of a single action are not evident just from looking at it, then one can’t help but question your depth of knowledge of the WCK forms, much less take your criticism of other TCMA forms seriously, given your complete lack of experience with them in any style. Imjussayin.
[QUOTE=wiz cool c;1195513]o cool thanks gene,i will read it now[/QUOTE] It’s only available in hard copy, I’m afraid. We still sell a magazine here and have to make ends meet.
