The problem with traditional CMA is...

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Kung Fu Forum
1

David Jamieson said:

All I’m saying is that there is a perpetuation of fallacies in Kungfu like almost no other martial art.

You don’t find nonsense like is found in CMA in lot of other martial arts. I shouldn’t really say “cma”, but just the “classical and traditional martial arts” in general.

It is astounding at how much of it is just pure bs.
To the point where I will not recomend training in traditional martial arts and instead there needs to be a component of rbsd , along with sound stand up, clinch and ground training(mma) or there just isn’t a lot of value in it.

If there is no realistic application work then it just ain’t realistic period.
And the language barrier thing is a cluster-hump all on it’s own.

I basically agree with most of this…and my purpose is to expand upon the thought, not contest the post.

so, a list of random, incohesive thoughts on the subject:

There is a problem is lack of ‘pressure testing’ the techniques.

There is a problem of over complication of movement.

There is a problem of ‘traditionalists’ argueing that CMA needs to be ‘maintained’ with no changes.

There is the problem with ego that, IMO, stems from not getting your ass whupped enough times because you’ve never stepped up.

I think Judo is a great example of a traditional art that went modern. Judo is the result of the modernization of a traditional art that culminated in a martial style that can stand the test of the street as well as the ring.

CMA is not going to get anywhere if the only people we ever fight are other CMA peeps.

…

I’m probably going to get called names and otherwise catch a bunch of crap by uber traditionalists and probably be told that I really don’t know CMA…but that’s fine.

The one point, I diverge on from David’s post is that I still believe that TCMA can be used as an effective fighting method against any other method, the training paradigm needs to change though.

My goal is to take my traditional kung fu and make it work and more importantly, at this stage of my life, make it work for my students.

2

the biggest problem is Liability Insurance… Lawyers… and people that take martial arts but can’t take a punch…

3

insurance? **** i dont think i have ever had that problem with trianing and occasionally we have someone with a swollen nose and once a broken hand. we train pretty hardcore though. all the people are there cause they want to be.

problem is a lot of people dont know how to train. some of these masters in china who claim to teach fighting have never been in a fight in their life so they dont know how to train it and heck it might be totally wrong. some of these other chinese masters have been in lots of fights so they know how to drill for fighting.

its all a matter of finding the right teacher.

4

Suntzu, if insurance were the problem then how could boxing gyms or mma gyms exist?

Insurance is an issue…I certainly do stuff my insurance company wouldn’t like but I don’t train that hard with new students; only once I feel like I’m not going to get sued by that person if they do get busted up some. And, I’ve got levels of students in my school, some that only want the exercise and forms, others that like to lightly spar but don’t ever want to play at harder levels…and right now only 1 of 14 that wants to fight full contact. I just don’t let my students think that they are going to be able to fight with what they know unless they fight. But, I also reassure them that it’s still ok to train for the exercise and such. I just don’t let anyone’s fantasies about being some badass kung fu fighter get in the way of training.

SL, that’s exactly the point, they don’t know because they’ve never tried. Why they never tried is up for speculation.

I still feel that there is a problem with the piety thing combined with the ego of the teacher that prevents a student from figureing out that they aren’t really training hard.

5

Suntzu, if insurance were the problem then how could boxing gyms or mma gyms exist?
because they go ahead and pay the extra costs… and the people that walk thru the doors KNOW that they are gonna get a “beatin”… and look at their turnover rate anyway… PLUS… most of those gyms still have “fitness” classes and a kids program to keep the lights on… and as far as boxing gyms go… atleast in my area AND the more famous ones that i know of… they have been a fixture in their neighborhood for YEARS… nothing like getting in on a piece of property in the 1950s or earlier…

problem is a lot of people dont know how to train.
“people” meaning the instructor or the student?

6

Well, what does CMA have that other arts don’t have to a more extreme degree? Nothing, it seems. Judo is known for its excellent throwing skills, Muay Thai/Boxing for it’s superior striking skills and BJJ/JJJ/Sambo for awesome grappling skills.

What is CMA left with? Center line theory? Useless, flowery rhetoric? Sticky hands practice? Wushu? San shou (arguably a combination of american kickboxing and judo)? “Enlightenment”? Chi? Static stances?

I’m nineteen and I am taking martial arts to learn how to kick ass and it’s as simple as that. I’ve dedicated six years of my life to this myth we call “Kung Fu” and this magical place called “China.” I have good forms and pretty decent sparring skills (kickboxing-esque, I’ve come to find out), and knowledge that if I would have dedicated my time to one of the aforementioned arts I would have progressed alot quicker than what I have. And it really ****es me off.

7

the model of having a serious fighting class and other classes to pay the bills is exactly my goal.

but perception is the key too. for whatever reason CMA isn’t percieved as something hard core for fighting. to much trickery and deciept from a couple decades of media hype about ‘kung fu’ and less than ethical people capitalizing on it.

the UFC gave people a look at something real and so when someone goes to that gym then they know what they are getting into.

kung fu movies only portray a rather fantastical look at kung fu.

8

well, a long time ago, there were chinese people using hand to hand and weapon vs weapon combat to fight battles.

somewhere in there is some good fighting. you just have to find a teacher who isn’t going to bull**** you.

the ‘gun’ changed all of that of course

9

One of the biggest mental problems of TCMA: The idea that “losing face” is bad. If you are always right, how can you learn?

One of the biggest physical problems of TCMA: TCMA has “devolved” instead of evolved… this is mainly due to the biggest mental problem.

One things for sure. BJJ and MMA isn’t popular in China. Heell, Kung Fu isn’t popular in China. Taekwondo, Jeet Kune Do, Tai Chi, Wushu, Jet Li, and Jackie Chan, are popular in China. About in that order too.

10

One of the biggest mental problems of TCMA: The idea that “losing face” is bad. If you are always right, how can you learn?

One of the biggest physical problems of TCMA: TCMA has “devolved” instead of evolved… this is mainly due to the biggest mental problem.

Indeed. the concept of losing as a path to winning is embraced by the sport fighters and accepted as something that is going to happen.

I am fascinated by the stories of the past and which master did this or that but only as stories and a link to the heritage.

I’m reading a book call “The Discoverers” and the author is pretty critical of the chinese mindset that was in place in the late 1400’s and 1500’s that caused china to close it’s doors to the outside world. IF they had not done that then, in just one example, it is quite likely that they would have been the dominant world navy at the time and hence more likely to have done some major discovering i.e. The “New World” of Columbus.

I feel a parallel between this mindset and the one that is keeping CMA from taking it’s place beside other fighting arts.

11

The biggest problem of TCMA IS------------------->It don’t exist anymore!!

12

Hi Oso,

I hear you big time. :slight_smile:

I think one of the major problems is the “my art is too deadly” syndrom. That we see even in our mantis community still. :wink: It is the arrogance and ignorance of using safety measures such as gears and rules. I personally don’t buy the line that Kung Fu can only function in a “real street fighting” situation. That’s a lot of horse crap IMHO. If it’s real Kung Fu, it should function anywhere and any format with or without gear.

I believe you are right about the piety thing too. That’s why the traditionalists more or less are trapped in the “theoretical” superemacy of Kung Fu. I mean not disrepects but in a very sad way, IMHO it’s “inbreeding” only to fight amongst the same style and same lineage. In theory, it is invincible by not fighting anything else that you don’t have a clue about. :frowning:

Warm regards

Mantis108

13

M108, LOL at ‘inbreeding’. That has a special meaning in my neck of the woods.

I feel like I firmed up an idea in my head with my comment about the source of “Traditional Chinese Martial Arts” was stuff that was used on the battlefield. Something happened, probably many somethings, that took CMA down the path to it’s current state. What we need to try and do is get back the true ‘traditional’ warrior/fighter kung fu.

so, I’m feeling like ‘traditional’ should really refer to the much older stuff rather then anything that was developed after…say, 1000 A.D. … or maybe even 960 since Chao Kuan Yin is said to have had a lot of influence on the shape of CMA during his reign.

M108, how do you think Confuciounism played a part in the piety issue? I mean, the whole ‘filiel piety’ concept is derived from Confucious, right?

14

The problem with Kung Fu

I think there’s an intrinsic problem with TCMA and that’s the Fu in Kung Fu. It’s the elevation of martial skills into a vehicle for spiritual transformation. Boxing, MMA, etc. aren’t really spiritual - they are empowering on a physical level, but there’s not really an emphasis on internal arts, like in Kung Fu.

Of course, spirituality opens Pandora’s box, not only to new age charlatanism, but also to corruption of the individual psyche, since the spiritual path is the razor’s edge psychologically. Now the Japanese “Do” arts, like Aikido, Judo, Kyudo, Kendo, etc., have this same focus upon martial arts as a spiritual practice, but the Japanese culture is more regimented and militant. Masters have to bow down the the program and come up through the ranks. Chinese culture, especially CMA culture is more folk based. Sure, there’s militant stuff, but the bulk of it is the People’s art - we’re more about individual paths, like the Jianghu/Wuxia myths. In short, Japanese martial spirituality is more dogmatic, while Chinese martial spirituality is more gnostic.

Frankly, it’s the focus on spirituality that attracts me. Sure, it’s cool to be able to kick someone’s arse, but that deosn’t hold a candle to a shot at enlightenment. The gnostic leanings of Kung Fu has brought forth a tremendous diversity of styles and applications, not just for fighting. That’s where TCMA is absolutely fascinating. Even though TCMA has its share of issues (and what martial art doesn’t?) I feel that the magnitude of Chinese martial culture far outweighs the charlatan regulars - in fact, the charlatans are part of the fun, at least to me.

15

those of you that have said chinese martial arts hasnt evolved is wrong. you just got stuck with some bad experiences. the people who use their martial arts in the “modern” era against guns have had it evolved. you can still keep the tradition alive and flowing in the modern world. its just all a matter of this a forms, fighting, or both school? many people stick to just forms these days and teach half fasted sparring techniques. sparring is a good drill but its not street fighting. its like ufc is good sports fighting but not street fighting.
when i talk about the not training right. its the sifu’s who dont know how to do it right and the students learn from them.

to train for combat isnt easy man. you have to have this mental state you have to be in. its like training hand to hand combat military style. your gonna get hurt from all the bruises and punches you’ll be taking and giving. you will have to deal with lots of pressure and anxiety and such. there will be injuries, there will be blood drawn, but in the end you will learn to fight using your skills and not just this sparring stuff. its not for everyone. people that train like this tend to have a few screws loose sometimes. anyone that has seen real combat and has had to kill a lot people with their fists or guns will almost definetly have a couple screws loose/something not be right with them again.

now can you learn to be a fighter without going through the military type training? yes. will it be just as hard. yeah , probably a lot less yelling in your face too. but same concept. its gonna be a lot of full force, you dont move or do technique right, you get hit or maybe even hurt. expect to get bruises, expect to bleed once and a while.

will this stuff work in the ring? yeah if you modify it not to hurt the person severly or kill them. its just a matter of how you train.

why havent a lot of masters practiced fighting in china? i dont know. the CR outlawed kung fu and they had to practice in “hiding” so maybe thats on reason. public fighting was outlawed between “countrymen” too wasnt it? didnt want to join the army, learning kung fu cause you were weak and such. but not wanting to fight takes a big part of it too. a lot of masters dont want to fight. there are some that did to test their skills. there were others that had to so they wouldn’t be killed.

16

All I’m saying is that there is a perpetuation of fallacies in Kungfu like almost no other martial art.

You don’t find nonsense like is found in CMA in lot of other martial arts. I shouldn’t really say “cma”, but just the “classical and traditional martial arts” in general.

cma and tma has always been the way it is, so if people today can’t fight with it and today it has crappy techniques than it always was like this, and if they survived bandit raids in those villages with it than there is no reason that wouldnt work today considering what is taught is exactly the same and in the same nammer. Also, your saying mma is the only effective ma, why would this be the case when there are so many styles? why does a style automatically become effective when it is a sport style? and what prevents other styles from being sport styles?

I think Judo is a great example of a traditional art that went modern. Judo is the result of the modernization of a traditional art that culminated in a martial style that can stand the test of the street as well as the ring.

Judo was never a tma, unless you consider belts and gis implication of tma.

17

Gene, thanks for your thoughts.

Do you agree with my ‘backyard historian’ opinion of the change from the battlefield discipline to the ‘vehicle for spiritual transformation’?

If so, what is your opinion of when that happened?

I agree with the ‘spiritual transformation’ bit and a lot of that is certainly why I got involved in the first place. But, why leave behind the combat discipline? Why not keep both?

the Dog Brothers motto comes to mind “Higher consciousness through harder contact”

Sure, it’s cool to be able to kick someone’s arse, but that deosn’t hold a candle to a shot at enlightenment.

but, for me at least, there is enlightenment in striving against someone as hard as you can and knowing they are doing the same and at some point a victor is decided. it really doesn’t matter who wins, but that you did the training to get to the point that you can compete (not meaning sport comps especially) against someone at that level.

FTR, I’m not talking about hurting people. I will keep using the words ‘fight’ and ‘combat’ and ‘compete’ but at no time am I talking about a desire to actually hurt someone. That’s why sport competition is so important, IMO. A good sport program is designed to allow maximum endeavor with minimum hurt.

18

When this kind of question/post/subject comes up, I find it interesting that the practices in question are neither identified or discussed. Or, the practices are against that persons particular paradigm.

What exactly is it that is a “fallacy” ? In who’s opinion are these practices not usefull?

And of those tings you don’t like, is it more a lack of understanding or ability?

Also the “spirit” is not in the kung fu. “X” teacher brought his ideas from his religious background. “X” teacher was a budhist/taoist/hinduist/whateverist who just so happened to also know martial arts.

The Shaolin were buhdists before they were martial artists. Their spiritual, moral, and ethical conduct was not a product of their martial practice, it was a product of their religion.

19

SLL, I’m not attacking you…just trying to debate this topic. :slight_smile:

It seems as if people are in agreement that the fighting effectiveness of ‘kung fu’ has been generally reduced (with exceptions of course). I’m curious about the why and how to reach back a thousand years and get it back.

20

Indeed. the concept of losing as a path to winning is embraced by the sport fighters and accepted as something that is going to happen.

Not really, some coaches and schools are really dissapointed with a single loss and could kick the student out for it.

also the thing about forms is how else would you teach a kung fu class without teaching them first. I mean forms is the offensive techniques of the style and without them if you just ask people to sapr they will just use sloppy brawling or fight like kickboxers (which they will do anyway, but not in theory).