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.
other than wushu, how popular is MA over there? I would guess that popularity is greater in the US and Japan.
Originally posted by PangQuan
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.
Why do you think this is?
Adapt or die, biches.
kicks dead horse square in it’s teeth
Originally posted by SevenStar
Why do you think this is?
Not too sure, other then the fact that humans are creatures of habit, my exposure in the martial arts came originally from my studies of taoism, you can imagine the progression from that to kung fu. I guess its just what one is comfortable with. I like the traditionality, its got a unique flavor just as MMA does, I just happen to be privy to that specific flavor.
understandable. Why do you think that changing the training would no longer make it traditional?
Originally posted by count
[B]Point, set and match. BTW, show me one place where I said I don’t like forms or I think they’re useless. But after 30 years of study in CMA and 16 years married to a Physical Therapist, I think I have a good idea of what exercise is all about. If you think you’re getting it from doing your forms, than do your forms. But you are missing the point of your training and you’re missing the point of this post.
BTW, Ray, I didn’t say I did not find any health benefit either. Just that it is not the primary reason to train in martial arts. Just like forms are not the primary method of learning to fight. Glad your making progress and give my regards to Mr. Chan [/B]
I haven’t read any of the posts beyond this one that I’m commenting on…as I feel it’s probably going to be the same thing throughout.
But Count, I also advocate learning martial arts with the primary goal being actual fighting ability. Therefore you can say that in MY martial arts, the dominating adjective would be “martial”. But then there are others may prioritize the “art” side as well, and there is nothing wrong with that.
You telling someone they are missing the point of their training is like me telling you that you don’t understand your wife. I don’t know your wife or your relationship with her, so how can I say that? I can’t. You don’t know the training system this guy trains in nor do you know his relationship with it (his goals etc.) So you cannot say that either.
BTW, learning martial arts and being married to a physical therapist doesn’t make you a physical trainer, or an expert in kinesiology. At the most basic level, the signs of exercise are an increased heartrate, perspiration, heavy breathing, and most of all movement. Forms are similar to aerobics exercises, with a bit of plyometrics thrown in.
Originally posted by SevenStar
understandable. Why do you think that changing the training would no longer make it traditional?
you could compare it to (yes another food analogy, i like food) removing the chocolate chips from a chocolate chip cookie, it will still be a cookie, just not the same exact kind. Remove part of the traditional training regimee and it is still kung fu, just not the same exact traditional style. ie; remove alot of the stance training, and your stance foundation will not develop into the same as it would have.
Originally posted by Vankuen
[B]I haven’t read any of the posts beyond this one that I’m commenting on…as I feel it’s probably going to be the same thing throughout.
But Count, I also advocate learning martial arts with the primary goal being actual fighting ability. Therefore you can say that in MY martial arts, the dominating adjective would be “martial”. But then there are others may prioritize the “art” side as well, and there is nothing wrong with that.
You telling someone they are missing the point of their training is like me telling you that you don’t understand your wife. I don’t know your wife or your relationship with her, so how can I say that? I can’t. You don’t know the training system this guy trains in nor do you know his relationship with it (his goals etc.) So you cannot say that either.
BTW, learning martial arts and being married to a physical therapist doesn’t make you a physical trainer, or an expert in kinesiology. At the most basic level, the signs of exercise are an increased heartrate, perspiration, heavy breathing, and most of all movement. Forms are similar to aerobics exercises, with a bit of plyometrics thrown in. [/B]
Your post is right on many levels. It’s redundant to read beyond a point. There are people making the same points as were made earlier. People are comparing apples to artichokes. So before leaving this sleeping dog, I will reply to your comment.
Being married to a PT for 16 years and studying martial arts for 30 doesn’t make me an expert on exercise kinesiology. Maybe gives me an advantage in understanding the benefit of an exercise that I don’t practice, but certainly not an expert. I did make the point that there is some aerobic benefit to forms in relationship to the very comment about kinesiology, but you did not read further so you probably missed it. It is however, a side effect and not the intention.
As far as the “art” in “martial art”. These arts were created for one purpose only. Without going into a philosophical dissertation, the term martial arts as it applies to combat methods, implies that the method is refined through practice and over time to a degree of skill that can be seen by anyone. While a painter or poet may be doing a similar process, I can not agree with your point. If a person says they are doing martial arts and focusing on the art part, they are missing the point. They are doing something else. For lack of a better word, I usually call that Contemporary Wushu or Ethnic Dance, but not martial art. Personally, I detest the words kung fu except when someone asks what I am doing and I don’t want to explain the entire history or method of my art.
I will say, very few people have addressed concepts of “following” and “sticking” or methods of training strength in this thread. Unfortunate. But I know knifefighter knew what I was talking about. So I’ll leave this thread for now and maybe start another later to specifically address these things. It’s already to long for people to read through to find the important parts. Nobody has convinced me, I’m wrong, so I’ll say it one last time. Forms are to pass on the history and flavor of a system. Not to learn to fight. Damn, nobody even pointed out flavor.
Originally posted by PangQuan
Remove part of the traditional training regimee and it is still kung fu, just not the same exact traditional style. ie; remove alot of the stance training, and your stance foundation will not develop into the same as it would have.
Chinese boxing is a living thing…it adapted time and again to new weapons, techniques, and warfare tactics. So why all the sudden should it remain static?
Do you think Chinese boxing training from 5 C.E. looked anything like Chinese boxing training from 1805 C.E.? Which was more traditional?
The principles are solid. Remain true to them, and you have Chinese boxing, regardless of if you update the training methods.
The wheels on the bus go round and round…
Originally posted by count
Damn, nobody even pointed out flavor.
We had a BIG discussion on flavor and what it means last year. I think everyone is flavored out.
Flavor-Flav on a hype tip
Um ya hype drink, come take a big sip
Um in position, you can’t play me out da pocket
I’ll take da dopest beat yougot and I’ll rock-it
Like chocolate, even vanilla - chocolate, strawberry, saperella
Flavors are electric - try me - get a shock-a
Didn’t I tell you to leave Flavor Flav alone knock-a
A clock on my chest proves I don’t fess
I’m a clock-a, rock-a rockin’ wit-da-rest
Flavor in da house by Chuck-D’s side
Chuck got da Flavor-Flav don’t hide
P.E. crazy, Crazy P.E. - makin’ crazy loowies for the shoppin spree
Originally posted by MasterKiller
[B]Chinese boxing is a living thing…it adapted time and again to new weapons, techniques, and warfare tactics. So why all the sudden should it remain static?
Do you think Chinese boxing training from 5 C.E. looked anything like Chinese boxing training from 1805 C.E.? Which was more traditional?
The principles are solid. Remain true to them, and you have Chinese boxing, regardless of if you update the training methods. [/B]
Im not saying that change will not, or should not take place, I am just saying that the change will be a developement of certain practices not a removal. But what the hell, I think this is turning more into a ping pong game of spitting the same crap back and forth. We all know how we feel.
VIVA LA REVOLUTION!!! PARTY ON WAYNE!!! LIVE LONG AND PROSPER!!! oh and dont forget, SSAAAIIIIIYAAAAHH!!!
k im done now.
…From Tim Carmell’s site…
The basis of the various styles of Ba Gua Zhang, and the practice all styles have in common, is the circle walk. The practitioner literally walks in a circle while holding various static postures with the upper body or while executing “palm changes” (short patterns of movement or “forms” which train the body mechanics and methods of generating power which form the basis of the styles’ fighting techniques). All styles have a variation of a form known as the Single Palm Change. The Single Palm Change is the most basic form and is the nucleus of the remaining palm changes found in the Art. Besides the Single Palm Change, the other forms include the Double Palm Change and the Eight Palm Changes (also known variously as the Eight Mother Palms or the Old Eight Palms). These forms make up the foundation of the art of Ba Gua Zhang. Ba Gua Zhang movements have a characteristic circular nature, and there is a great deal of body spinning, turning, and rapid changes in direction. In addition to the Single, Double, and Eight Palm Changes, most but not all styles of Ba Gua Zhang include some variation of the Sixty-Four Palms. The Sixty-Four Palms include forms which teach the mechanics and sequence of the specific fighting techniques included in the style. These forms take the general energies developed during the practice of the Palm Changes and focus them into more exact patterns of movement, which are applied directly to a specific combat technique. In addition to the above forms and methods, most styles of Ba Gua Zhang include various two-person forms and drills as intermediate steps between solo forms and the practice of combat techniques.
Count, taken from this standpoint, I have to once again disagree with your original statement - that forms are not a way to learn to fight. Now, I am not saying that all you need are forms for true fighting technique, far from it. And I might even be convinced that forms might not be as important when it comes to real fighting (don’t know about that one yet), but as it is for me, forms are where you start in TCMA, of which I am very fond. Forms are the basis of most, if not all TCMA, and without them, I believe one would be lost.
So now, the issue for me is the difference between MMA and TCMA, something that has and will continue to be debated to death here, there and everywhere. Maybe this is more specifically the difference you were trying to address? I don’t know, but it seems that the general consensus at this point is - if you like your art, what it gives you and what it means to your life and survival, then by all means keep it up. There will always be discussion, differences of opinion and heated exchanges, but the one thing we all must fall back on, return to and be true to is ourselves.
Yo, Tug,
Now yer talkin my speak. I’ve read it before. Tim is one man and his opinions are his own. You feel free to interpret what he is saying to fit your argument. I can understand what he is saying since it is my primary style he’s refering to. What I read here is there are
steps between solo forms and the practice of combat techniques.
Now that’s what I’m talking about. But dude, start another thread or something if you have a point.
Well, what he is saying just reaffirms my beliefs, but I chose to use his description because I could never be as articulate.
As for not having a point, what? My point is that I believe forms are just as important as sparring, conditioning and everything else that goes with studying an art. This is my belief, this is my point, feel free to have your own opinion, as we all have a right to.
No Bro,
I didn’t say you “didn’t have a point” at all. I understand your point. I only suggested starting another thread.
To be clear, Tim only wrote about a few points of interest to describe a style. There is much more. Obviously, it would be boring to a reader to hear about it. But the point is there are steps in between.
To me its very simple. When BL started the whole “dead pattern” cliche, he was refering to practitioners who did not have flow or adaptability. They were stuck in the conventions of A following B as per their “style”. This was directed especially to the mostly karate oriented american MA community. Which was doing the stop-hit one point sparing. It wasn’t the pattern that was dead, but the use of it by the practitioners. Fighting with spontaneity is abstract but still draws on the bulk knowledge of your body.
You can be formless even if you practice forms. Its just another mode of conditioning. And a powerful one when done right.
Why is it so hard to distinguish the fighters from the non fighters? That is, after all, the only problem.
The problem isn’t whether or not you do forms. Its whether or not you fight.
Most of what I have read above just seems like a snake eating its tail. Point , counter point, missing the point.
Humans may have evovled technologically but not bodily. On the whole, the super athlete is a tiny minority.There is no “evolution”, no “modern”, no “traditional”, nothing new under the sun. Only what we percieve is new to ourselves. Everything and anything you have ever done bodily has been done before and in eon. fist, Kick , grab, throw, nothing. MMA? Pankration… and even before that.
Originally posted by PangQuan
Im not saying that change will not, or should not take place, I am just saying that the change will be a developement of certain practices not a removal.
Who mentioned a removal?
Steps in between…
It seems as if we may have hit on a vaguely perceivable “common ground”. I guess I had not previously defined for myself those steps in between. I have always thought of studying or training as one entity, as a whole, and actually, because of this discussion, I am being forced to rethink the way I do things. Very interesting feeling.
Why would I want to start another thread? Aren’t we still talking about the same thing? At any rate, I am enjoying this, thank you.
Most of what I have read above just seems like a snake eating its tail. Point , counter point, missing the point.
Maybe, but that’s why we are here, to understand. That’s all I am trying to do.
Good Tug,
I think (maybe stating the obvious)
class is for learning
home is for training
the world is for practice
time is for perfecting.
Can you describe what your classes are like?
