In general, the applied kinesiologist finds a muscle that tests weak and then attempts to determine why that muscle is not functioning properly. The practitioner will then evaluate and apply the therapy that will best eliminate the muscle weakness and help the patient.
Basically, but to the extent you can practice on yourself while training.
I don’t think Tug meant exercise kinesiology but only kinesiology in the broad sense that you move and adjust your body while learning forms. Maybe some mild aerobic effect to that but obviously only a side effect.
Yes.
And sorry for being so angry, not having a good week.
How many of you can show and explain what each movement of your form is for?
Not as many as there should be, but still probably a lion’s share.
If you can, can you make it work against a boxer or one of your childhood, muscle head, hero’s?
Against a boxer? maybe. Against childhood hero? Yes. Han Solo’s gerneral thing was just running screeming into crouds of stormtroopers.
Do you even understand how to stick to a boxer from your forms training? Do you even understand what I mean when I discuss principles like “sticking” and “following” and where do forms teach you how to do this?
Yep. Part one of learning a form is learning the basic movements. Then we do the “self-defence” version, wich is learning the application of it. Finally, we go after each other full contact, trying to keep the form as clean as possible. Last, we take the form, pick it apart and use the bits while sparring. There is no way to do this without learning how to stick and follow.
I think you peaked ahead. The point is, and I hope you are getting it, you mentioned a number of things you had to do besides form. It didn’t stop at learning form. In my experience, you learn the other way around, ie learning the form last. Basic first—>applications—>drills—>drills with steps—>2-man drills—>applying it in free fighting—>than forms.
Doesn’t anybody want to tell me how two man forms help and weapons forms are like weight training?
I think you peaked ahead. The point is, and I hope you are getting it, you mentioned a number of things you had to do besides form. It didn’t stop at learning form. In my experience, you learn the other way around, ie learning the form last. Basic first—>applications—>drills—>drills with steps—>2-man drills—>applying it in free fighting—>than forms.
Doesn’t anybody want to tell me how two man forms help and weapons forms are like weight training?
[/B]
I do not see how two-man forms are like weight training, but if you use a heavier-than usual weapon, yes it can be similar. I actually do this with my bo and nunchaku.
Originally posted by scotty1
[B]I think most people realise that you can’t just stop at form. If that’s your point Count, I thinking you’re preaching to the choir here.
Maybe not in the US generally, but on this forum at least. [/B]
Yes and no. The point is the OVERemphasis on forms during training, coupled with the expectations of learning to apply their martial art on the one hand. On the other hand, observations from the outside that forms training is all there is in CMA training and CMA’ists can’t fight because of the way they train.
Originally posted by Becca I do not see how two-man forms are like weight training, but if you use a heavier-than usual weapon, yes it can be similar. I actually do this with my bo and nunchaku.
Sorry Becca, the implication was supposed to be that two man forms might help learning to stick, follow, divert, adhere etc, and that weapons forms might help build strength. But keep thinking about it.
Yes and no. The point is the OVERemphasis on forms during training, coupled with the expectations of learning to apply their martial art on the one hand. On the other hand, observations from the outside that forms training is all there is in CMA training and CMA’ists can’t fight because of the way they train.
Originally posted by count On the other hand, observations from the outside that forms training is all there is in CMA training and CMA’ists can’t fight because of the way they train.
that’s not because of forms though, necessarily. It’s because of the design of traditional training - it seems to take longer to produce a fighter in some styles. It’s like paradox - traditional guys say mma guys are a jack of all trades and master of none, but at the same time, they are doing forms, iron body, two man, chi sau and various other drills, weapons, qi/nei gong, etc… where’s the focus?
Originally posted by SevenStar
traditional guys say mma guys are a jack of all trades and master of none, but at the same time, they are doing forms, iron body, two man, chi sau and various other drills, weapons, qi/nei gong, etc… where’s the focus?
Never heard that before, but I guess I get your point.
its like eggo waffles vs. home made waffles. sure the eggos will be a little different from your buddies cause you toasted them longer. but primarily they will be very similar. but the home made waffles will be different from your buddies cause your recipie is different. Of course in a modern world the eggo’s will get the job done alot sooner, and you will basically have the same end result. You will be full. The home made ones will just have a different type of satisfaction involved in the end result.
MMA will develop fast furious fighters who have a very rounded idea of fighting styles, TCMA will slowly develop fighters with a very very sound understanding of their particular style in regards to fighting.
Both are good, they just approach the end result in a different way.
Originally posted by PangQuan Both are good, they just approach the end result in a different way.
It’s only good if it works. Since TMA isn’t producing the same ratio of quality fighters as MMA, there needs to be some tinkering with the training.
wait until there has been long enough exposure of the TCMA in america, you will begin to see its effects. I bet you anything that there are some bad dudes over in china who studied traditionally. So what if they dont wanna go into cage fighting. Americans will. Besides all that cage fighting is american anyhow. And TCMA is producing great quality fighters, it just takes alot longer, after about 15-20 years of TCMA the mindset is also adopted from the style. And if you dont know what that mindset is, then I am not telling. There will be an upcomming account of TCMA fighters just wait. That is the whole point man, patients. Wait it out, it will come. Just like that baseball movie. If you build it, they will come. tell you what, Ill train my son to be a great fighter using traditional means. so wait about 20 - 30 years and Ill prove it. LOL.
Originally posted by PangQuan wait until there has been long enough exposure of the TCMA in america, you will begin to see its effects. I bet you anything that there are some bad dudes over in china who studied traditionally. So what if they dont wanna go into cage fighting. Americans will. Besides all that cage fighting is american anyhow. And TCMA is producing great quality fighters, it just takes alot longer, after about 15-20 years of TCMA the mindset is also adopted from the style. And if you dont know what that mindset is, then I am not telling. There will be an upcomming account of TCMA fighters just wait. That is the whole point man, patients. Wait it out, it will come. Just like that baseball movie. If you build it, they will come. tell you what, Ill train my son to be a great fighter using traditional means. so wait about 20 - 30 years and Ill prove it. LOL.
MMA is like, what, 10 years old. TMA has been here since at least WWII. CHinese Arts have been openly taught since at least the 70s.
Openly taught yes, but not highly studied until more recently. MMA caught on really fast, and with the methods it develops fighters very fast. I am not in anyway knocking MMA, but you should also realize the methods of TCMA are just different, not wrong. If you change them then you no longer have TCMA. I will not change, and I can garantee you that no other TCMAist will change either. It is futile to try.
Originally posted by PangQuan Openly taught yes, but not highly studied until more recently. MMA caught on really fast, and with the methods it develops fighters very fast. I am not in anyway knocking MMA, but you should also realize the methods of TCMA are just different, not wrong. If you change them then you no longer have TCMA. I will not change, and I can garantee you that no other TCMAist will change either. It is futile to try.
I practice CMA, so I know the difference. I also think the way most people practice CMA is incorrect. Real CMA training is more like MMA training, but without the gay spandex shorts.
LOL, I guess your right. In a sense. There just happens to be many exersises that CMA do that MMAers think are obsolete, those are the practices that will not be given up. I also believe there are different types of MMA, the classification of MMA is (in my opinion) far to broad, and there needs to be some reclassification.
I like form training. I dig it. It’s a mental and physical exercise. It’s something I can do in a class or by myself. It gets chicks.
Form training is good in many ways, but it is not the end-all-be-all that some MAs make it out to be. Why do some seem to believe “knowing” forms means being able to fight? I blame the following:
Teachers who are willing to replace drills and sparring with forms, forms, and more forms. It’s easy, it’s cheap (insurance), and you’re unlikely to run off students who might disappear at the sight of their own blood (or sweat).
Black Belt Theater. As a child, I watched plenty of movies featuring a protagonist who learned a form from either A) an ancient manuscript, or B) some guy with MASSIVE eyebrows, then proceeded to fight with legendary skills. In my youth, I bought into this concept. It was only after getting my butt handed to me a couple times that I began to have doubts.
Anyway, I think form training is useful and has its place, but it should take a back seat to more practical and direct training methods. I realize this statement is neither controversial nor particularly enlightened, but I’m bored at work and haven’t posted in a while.
Originally posted by PangQuan I also believe there are different types of MMA, the classification of MMA is (in my opinion) far to broad, and there needs to be some reclassification.
MMA means really one thing - mized martial arts competition. Ther term was coined as it is more subtle sounding than “no holds barred”. In terms of a martial artist, is it someone who can strike and grapple. How you do that is up to you - muay thai and bjj, boxing and catch, tkd and judo, baji and shuai chiao, etc. I think however, the term has become something of a catch phrase…alot of people say they are mma because they have trained in multiple styles - IMO, they are incorrect.
