I haven’t abandoned kung fu entirely. I’m just focusing 100% on fighting right now while I’m young enough and healthy enough to internalize the skills. I still do forms, just not in class.
Reply]
Isn’t Kung Fu about fighting?
What R U doing that is not Kung Fu?
[QUOTE=RD’S Alias - 1A;779981]Isn’t Kung Fu about fighting?[/quote]
It should be. But modern fighting doesn’t have room for 3-section staffs, rope darts, etc..
What R U doing that is not Kung Fu?
Everything I do is kung fu.
Ah…maybe its cause I am getting old that I have this view these days.
I use to view TCMA as the end all be all in MA. Afterall it encompassed all of the fighting methodologies. Punching, Kicking, Wrestling, and Joint Locks. Although admittedly, not all instructors are versed in all aspects of TCMA. It was all about fighting with me. Back in the 80’s we did not have MMA yet.
Nowadays, I can’t see myself training in a pugilistic manner anymore. I am no longer fast. I am no longer flexible. I no longer have a strong constitution. I now train for physical fitness, rather than fighting. My fighting will now consist of calling 911 or shooting an assaillant.
So with that said, I view martial arts more for its health and mental aspect. Progressive arts such as MMA just does not provide that. There is a practicality to it if all you want to do is bang knuckles to heads.
I say that to say this. And I have said this on many threads on this forum. TCMA or any type of TMA, have stopped progressing in the 1900’s. It has become stagnant. Training have been wussified. It has not kept up with modern times and modern weapons. Back in the day, MA will train with the most devastating weapons out there, be it bow and arrow, spear, swords etc. Ffwd to today. We still train with those. Good instructors knows and teaches fighting application of these weapons. But c’mon!!! How many people carry around swords and spears nowadays. When was the last time anyone was mugged/robbed with a spear? How come martial arts did not follow progress in weapons? Why don’t we practice marksmanship with firearms? Why do most(not all) not practice with knife fighting. Martial Arts style use to innovate weaponry and ways of fighting individually. Take the hook swords or wing chuns butterfly knives. The varying techniques derived from various regions of China. Most adapted their way of fighting depending on terrain and what was available to them to work with. Heck even Taiji has been reduced to a form of dance these days. I bet 80 of Taiji practitioners do not know anything of the art past the postures such as its defense/offense application. Most practioners I’ve seen do not have the proper stances for the defense/offense application of those postures. Very few arts actually practices concepts in multiple attackers. Or spar with multiple attackers and train in evasion from multiple attackers.
Todays martial arts has been retarded and wussified when it comes to actual fighting. MMA may bring back the innovation and actual combat training. Maybe. But I doubt it, most if not all MMA practioners seem to be testosterone driven pugilist rather than technically martial art minded. There is no mental, philosophical and health aspect of the art. So I believe it will sadly remain a sport like boxing rather than a true art.
So now I view traditional martial arts as a way of learning history and physical fitness/mental health. As for fighitng, I take various firearms courses and continue to study Arnis/Kali. Memorize 911 and keep my cellphone charged. That’s my fighting style these days.
I think this thread is getting messed up because of wording. You can practice a martial art that was created a long time ago and it won’t necessarily be traditional when you practice it. But those who choose to keep what they practice “Traditional” can’t be progressive by definition. It has to remain “Traditional” or else you are re-defining the word traditional.
It’s like the difference between a 60 something Mustang and a 2007 Mustang. Still Mustangs but very different.
[QUOTE=xcakid;779997]Nowadays, I can’t see myself training in a pugilistic manner anymore. I am no longer fast. I am no longer flexible. I no longer have a strong constitution. I now train for physical fitness, rather than fighting. My fighting will now consist of calling 911 or shooting an assaillant.
So with that said, I view martial arts more for its health and mental aspect. Progressive arts such as MMA just does not provide that. There is a practicality to it if all you want to do is bang knuckles to heads. [/QUOTE]
This is wrong. Plenty of people train combat sports for health and hobby. I have a girl in my class that has dropped 40 pounds since January who never intends to step in a ring or get into a street fight.
synak, re-read my original post-Traditional Martial Arts were all about change, evolution, and development. By doing it exactly as the past generations did it, you are going against tradition itself.
Besides, in the last several generations, most TCMA has been taught wrong and is being perpetuated by each successive generation. Emphasis on live drilling, and fighting, and conditioning has always been first and foremost. The emphasis on forms and unrealistic demo-type applications is a more recent innovation. Blindly following this method and calling it tradition is the blind leading the blind.
xcakid, how old are you? Are you disabled, or sufferring from an illness?
It maybe “tradition” but that doesn’t make it “Traditional” or maybe a better word would be “Classical?”
[QUOTE=MasterKiller;780001]This is wrong. Plenty of people train combat sports for health and hobby. I have a girl in my class that has dropped 40 pounds since January who never intends to step in a ring or get into a street fight.[/QUOTE]
How many boxers you know still boxing @ 80yo.? Unfortunately, I can’t ask the same questions for MMA since its fairly new.
Now I would ask the same question regarding a kung fu practitioner, and more than likely we would be able to come up with a few more names.
Does George Foreman count? That dude boxed for a long time.
[QUOTE=xcakid;780009]How many boxers you know still boxing @ 80yo.? Unfortunately, I can’t ask the same questions for MMA since its fairly new.
Now I would ask the same question regarding a kung fu practitioner, and more than likely we would be able to come up with a few more names.[/QUOTE]
An 80 year old boxer can still shadow box and hit a bag, which is the equivalent of an 80 year old KF master doing forms.
But How many Kung Fu people are FIGHTING at 80?
If Kung Fu is about fighting, but you aren’t using it to fight, you aren’t really doing Kung Fu, now are you?
[QUOTE=TenTigers;780007]xcakid, how old are you? Are you disabled, or sufferring from an illness?[/QUOTE]
Will be 39 in August and have bad knees. Some people say my mental health is disabled. 
[QUOTE=MasterKiller;780012]An 80 year old boxer can still shadow box and hit a bag, which is the equivalent of an 80 year old KF master doing forms.
But How many Kung Fu people are FIGHTING at 80?
If Kung Fu is about fighting, but you aren’t using it to fight, you aren’t really doing Kung Fu, now are you?[/QUOTE]
You got a point there, but I don’t see many 80 yr olds shadow boxing in gyms, but I do see quite a few 80 yr olds practicing kung fu/tai chi in parks.
No I guess I am not doing kung fu in the fullest sense of the context we are talking about here. But like I said I am mainly doing it for health.
How many of you have studied I Ching?
To me many of the principles found in I Ching, IMO, share commonalities in regards to the traditionality of combat training and application.
To stop evolving/adapting is to stagnate, to stagnate is to turn our backs on the truth of combat and the essence of life. To do such is to be anything BUT traditional. IMO
Of course this is in regards to TCMA, based upon the principles, philosophies, and foundations of Chinese thought through out the many many years of development of Chinese Martial Arts.
Perhaps those that view the need to stay “traditional” implies the strict and rigid preservance of ALL aspects of the art they study do not view thier art from the mindset in which it was originally developed.
However if you study classic Chinese history and thought you will find that stagnation is anything BUT traditional.
The classic of change easily displays (one source anyhow, there are many others besides I Ching) this thought process the Chinese have developed, and IMO is a core principle and truth in any progressive endeavor.
peace.
Although adaptation is the general rule, traditionalist seek to preserve what was discovered in the past. That is why you have systems with 100 forms. traditionalists are more better termed the collectors of the knowledge, and the fighters are the users of that knowledge. Both have a place.
The fighters only use a small part of the collection, BUT each fighter uses a different small part, so the colllectors need to collect a pretty big library of techniques and strategies for them.
[QUOTE=MasterKiller;779994]It should be. But modern fighting doesn’t have room for 3-section staffs, rope darts, etc..
Everything I do is kung fu.[/QUOTE]
Wouldn’t these weapons be useful for the other aspects that they can improve on..hand/eye coordination, rooting, power generation, etc.?
[QUOTE=zenile;780030]Wouldn’t these weapons be useful for the other aspects that they can improve on..hand/eye coordination, rooting, power generation, etc.?[/QUOTE]
Sure, but they are not as efficient as lifting kettlebells or hitting a speed bag, and the attributes acquired using weapons doesn’t really directly translate into increased hand-to-hand attributes.
Swinging a Kwan Dao around just makes you good at swinging a Kwan Dao around.
[QUOTE=xcakid;780017]You got a point there, but I don’t see many 80 yr olds shadow boxing in gyms, but I do see quite a few 80 yr olds practicing kung fu/tai chi in parks.[/QUOTE]
You could be doing Yoga or Pilates or anything else, for that matter.
It’s not the kung fu keeping people healthy, it’s getting off the couch and doing excercise.
I’m not trying to be argumentative. I just was just referring to your post about no room for these types of weapons in modern fighting. I think swinging a Kwan Dao is analogous to mixing up your training, similar to what MMA guys do with Kettlebells and other tools. Practicing with weapons are just other tools to mix up your training.
You’re never going to find yourself swinging a Kwan Dao around in a fight, just as you would never swing a kettlebell. But I bet after you’ve swung either of these around for an hour, you’ve given your body a workout that you otherwise wouldn’t have gotten from other methods, be it doing forms or doing sprints.
[QUOTE=zenile;780036] But I bet after you’ve swung either of these around for an hour, you’ve given your body a workout that you otherwise wouldn’t have gotten from other methods, be it doing forms or doing sprints.[/QUOTE]
But which is more efficient? That’s the real question.
Spending 3 months learning a 5 minute kwan dao form…practicing “tossing your beard back” for the bow ala General Kwan, working on ground maneuvars and behind the back spins…, remembering complicated foot patterns and which end of the blade does the blocking, etc…All the hours invested in just learning the routine…not to mention the time it takes to perfect the moves.
Or lifting kettlebells, or weights, or whatever, 25 minutes 3 times a week.