For now, I’ll just post some observations and welcome comments and criticism.
Traditional Chinese fighting arts are propagated through a social network–the men-pai systems.
These societies are based on both Confucian and practical values. They allow for a recognition of authority and for some degree of control over a tradition. The traditions and lineages are cultural constructs that may be as important to the membership as any actual skills gained by participation.
The ultimate test of the methods taught within these systems is personal combat, whether it be a life-or-death struggle or challenging in a public arena.
Success within a traditional system may be based more (or entirely) upon recognition as a lineage-holder than proven skills as a fighter.
A fighter may do very well in his field regardless of any standing within a pai or men.
A fighter with “bad” or sloppy technique can still win over a fighter with superior skill in certain techniques, e.g.: a “brawler” over a picture-perfect “boxer.”
The traditional systems have developed high-level skills and pedagogy to support their schools and traditions. Perhaps the greatest asset of these traditonal societies is that they preserve well-structured systems of training and discovery.
I see most Chinese martial arts school as Physical Culture rather than fighting gyms. Where I’m from, most of the old Chinese martial art clubs don’t practice like how they use to. It was a lot rougher back then and you would need to keep a stock of that bruise liniment. Today its more for the kids, lion dance and all.
Today, you would need to gather the students who are serious about fighting and have them train their preferred techniques with harder contact on their own.
[QUOTE=Bernard;1205737]I see most Chinese martial arts school as Physical Culture rather than fighting gyms. Where I’m from, most of the old Chinese martial art clubs don’t practice like how they use to. It was a lot rougher back then and you would need to keep a stock of that bruise liniment. Today its more for the kids, lion dance and all.
Today, you would need to gather the students who are serious about fighting and have them train their preferred techniques with harder contact on their own.[/QUOTE]
This is one of the points I was hoping someone would make. “How they used to” implies a recognition that these societies once gave higher priority to fighting skills, but there are other elements that preserve some of the structure of the school in a different context.
A good teacher can pass on great techniques through forms practice I feel. For example, there’s a tai chi technique (I can’t remember the name of that certain Chen tai chi posture) that pulls an opponent off balance by grabbing the wrist and elbow, but many people who perform that posture in the form have their hands spaced out too far apart as if they’re doing the technique on a giant!
[QUOTE=Bernard;1205743]A good teacher can pass on great techniques through forms practice I feel…QUOTE]
So even if a system is incomplete it still retains value in what is passed on structurally?
I tend to agree. My first sifu said that every teacher will show you what he wants you to learn, but it is up to you to fill in the gaps (what he didn’t know or held back from teaching). This can be done with enough experience.
I think this is where training in a traditional system has an advantage over going it alone. Past experience is built into the structure of the training.
Two of my teachers strongly disagreed, believing that only those with considerable fighting experience can truly reveal a system. I see the point in this, but the fighting experience doesn’t have to come from the same school, and there are many problems associated with sparring only within the same “style.”
Can a system that has lacked real fighting experience for a couple of generations be returned to its combative roots?
I see most Chinese martial arts school as Physical Culture rather than fighting gyms. Where I’m from, most of the old Chinese martial art clubs don’t practice like how they use to. It was a lot rougher back then and you would need to keep a stock of that bruise liniment. Today its more for the kids, lion dance and all.
where are you from? this a is not the case with a lot of the schools I have visited but there are a lot that do however I find this is gross assumption. I personally teach fighters. We don’t teach kids we don’t wear silk uniforms we just train kung fu. 8 step is a viscous fighting system through and through.
I have taught fighter who have won in the UFC and the USMTA ans well as full contact tough man matches.
I do however preserve the culture as I teach traditionally in the language all in Chinese, I have not modified or changed any of the methods other than to update certain techns and I preserved the health side as well learning bone setting tui na acupuncture, qigong and taji
[QUOTE=EarthDragon;1205757]where are you from? this a is not the case with a lot of the schools I have visited but there are a lot that do however I find this is gross assumption. I personally teach fighters. We don’t teach kids we don’t wear silk uniforms we just train kung fu. 8 step is a viscous fighting system through and through.
I have taught fighter who have won in the UFC and the USMTA ans well as full contact tough man matches.
I do however preserve the culture as I teach traditionally in the language all in Chinese, I have not modified or changed any of the methods other than to update certain techns and I preserved the health side as well learning bone setting tui na acupuncture, qigong and taji[/QUOTE]
Well I did say “most” and not “all” Personally I’m glad there are schools like yours.
It seems among the Chinese instructors of the clubs I referred to, their focus changed over the years. While this saddens me, I came to respect their choice. I believe they wanted to teach Chinese children (non-Chinese children are welcome as well) values through Chinese Physical culture and not emphasize so much on fighting.
[QUOTE=jdhowland;1205735]Success within a traditional system may be based more (or entirely) upon recognition as a lineage-holder than proven skills as a fighter.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=jdhowland;1205735]The traditions and lineages are cultural constructs that may be as important to the membership as any actual skills gained by participation..
Success within a traditional system may be based more (or entirely) upon recognition as a lineage-holder than proven skills as a fighter.[/quote]
Lineage without skill is an embarrassment. Better to have no lineage than to claim one and not be able uphold the standard of skill. That is the traditional view.
Old school teachers have told their students not to start fights. Not necessarily because of peace and harmony. But because they did not want it known that they were the teacher of such a poor student.
Traditional martial arts that have lost their tradition and their combat skills have nothing left but to rest on past achievements of their ancestors.
In this modern time of instant gratification and delicate self esteem, wannabees use lineage to represent themselves and self promote, rather than themselves representing the standard of their lineage.
There was a reason for teachers granting discipleship or expelling a student, and not necessarily political as it has turned into in modern times.
[QUOTE=Bernard;1205761]I believe they wanted to teach Chinese children (non-Chinese children are welcome as well) values through Chinese Physical culture and not emphasize so much on fighting.[/QUOTE]
I use fighting, and the discipline to suffer through the fight training to teach Chinese children Chinese values. Others and adults have been welcome as well. The Chinese children were the most successful. The head start from their tiger moms made a difference.
Suffer and endure in order to achieve. Discipline through martial dance is one type of discipline. Going up against adult blackbelts at open mat sparring, getting the wind knocked out of you 10 times(I counted) on your first day, and going back to deliver your own brand of pain is another type of discipline. His offense was excellent. His defense was not. He had tears in his eyes, but never lost composure, and went back in for more.
[QUOTE=-N-;1205765]
Traditional martial arts that have lost their tradition and their combat skills have nothing left but to rest on past achievements of their ancestors.
[/QUOTE]
History is a big part as always.
Lineage is a convenient way to group schools.
We may trace our learning from our teachers.
And our teachers’ teachers.
etc.
That is history, too.
Students are just students.
There are good fighters and there also many not so good.
[QUOTE=Bernard;1205743]A good teacher can pass on great techniques through forms practice I feel. For example, there’s a tai chi technique (I can’t remember the name of that certain Chen tai chi posture) that pulls an opponent off balance by grabbing the wrist and elbow, but many people who perform that posture in the form have their hands spaced out too far apart as if they’re doing the technique on a giant![/QUOTE]
Doesn’t that just mean that many people have not been able to learn great techniques through forms practice alone?
That’s how hippie Tie Chee got invented.
After teaching us form and it’s applications, my teacher lectured us that the form is useless if we didn’t train the techniques(against each other) until we owned them.
It all depends on level of the teacher, any move will work if you are at a high skill level, the problem comes from people that are at a low skill level and don’t know it. Thus their art seems to not work and their students are left at their skill level or usually at a lower level. Thus lies the evolution of most commercial styles.
I.E. Don’t follow a style, but find a teacher that can pass on a path that leads to a high level, not a teacher with a high level of wasted time and effort with little to no results.
[QUOTE=Robinhood;1205773] the problem comes from people that are at a low skill level and don’t know it. Thus their art seems to not work and their students are left at their skill level or usually at a lower level. Thus lies the evolution of most commercial styles.[/QUOTE]
So sad. So true.
Or more like they think their art works, but it doesn’t. And it continues to devolve with each generation.
[QUOTE=-N-;1205772]Doesn’t that just mean that many people have not been able to learn great techniques through forms practice alone?
That’s how hippie Tie Chee got invented.
After teaching us form and it’s applications, my teacher lectured us that the form is useless if we didn’t train the techniques(against each other) until we owned them.[/QUOTE]
True. Usage training and forms practice should always go hand in hand. Didn’t mean to imply otherwise.
[QUOTE=jdhowland;1205735]A fighter with “bad” or sloppy technique can still win over a fighter with superior skill in certain techniques, …[/QUOTE]
This sentence make no sense. There are only techniques that work and techniques that don’t work. There are no such thing as good techniques or bad techniques.
[QUOTE=YouKnowWho;1205781]This sentence make no sense. There are only techniques that work and techniques that don’t work. There are no such thing as good techniques or bad techniques.[/QUOTE]
good technique wont work if you are weak or cowardly. fake kung fu claims a weak cowardly man can defeat a brave strong man with the proper technique, mainly bruce lee era.
[QUOTE=bawang;1205783]good technique wont work if you are weak or cowardly. [/QUOTE]
You can’t call your technique good if you don’t have any of the following:
good timing,
recognize opportunity,
cut in through the right angle,
strong power, and
good balance.
If you are weak -> you don’t have strong power.
If you are a coward -> your timing may be wrong.
