Weak kung fu representin !

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Kung Fu Forum
21

[QUOTE=Yum Cha;717332]Drive down the street and you see 10 TKD schools for every Karate school. You see 10 karate Schools for every “Kung Fu” school.

Its pretty safe to assume that at an open tournament that there would be the same representation?

TKD and Karate(s) are pretty well codified, regimented and organised. Not so “Kung Fu” the term I use to rever to every norther, southern, Hakka and Shaolin style under the sun. Every TKD guy that belongs to the “association” is going to know what makes his stuff good or poor in the eyes of the ‘association’. Hell, show me two Wing Chun, Hung Gar, Pak Mei or CLF schools that are carbon copies of the other?

Sure politics play a role, but don’t put too much into it, Its no conspiracy, its just the numbers IMHO.

However, I do believe a Cruise missle took out the pentagon, and that the assassins were on the Grassy Knoll, and that Bush is really an Alien.

Cheers![/QUOTE]

Diversity is fine and it is not to bring definition or a “one rule” to how each style must be played or performed. One does not have to know all the inner workings of a style to know if someone performs a techinque properly, powerfully with intent or if it is just a dance.

You can look at a CLF or Hung player and know that their stance was strong their techinque defined and proper. Just as you can look at a TKD person and say - wow that was sloppy! Was he supposed to fall on his butt after that kick?

So providing “definition” to each style is not only impractical in KF but impossible - plus KF is alive it is supposed to grow and change and evolve - so to define what things must look like would be a hinderance. HOWEVER, there is no mistaking that Sow Choi is supposed to be done one way or that a horse stance is supposed to look a certain way.

As for the numbers game - it will never change if we just accept it as so. Spreading KF is a goal so that there aren’t 10:1 ratios anymore. But that’s a way’s down the line. First we have to all play nice.

22

“ wondering why there is such a horrible representation of Kung Fu in major open tournaments with Kung Fu divisions.”

Quite simple:

Most open competitions do not have a TRUE Kung Fu division. If they do, they lump ALL supposed Chinese styles together. You then get Taijiquan in with Hung Gar in with Cha quan, in with Wing Chun in with Kempo…. They have limited barehand divisions, limited weapons divisions. They use the stupidest method for tiebreakers – reperforming. First, you are seeing it AGAIN. Second, there are some styles that this is just dumb…like a Yang style person..re-perform what, another section of the long form. Instead of defining a method of using the judges scores (as in 5 judges, low and high drop out…then use the other two for tiebreakers….)

The CMA division is more than likely an afterthought. Being mishmashed together and no thought to the how of CMA, the judging is poor – often with non-CMA people judging.

Then, by being in that division, often there is no thought of inclusion in any grand champion division.

Just a few to list it…and why the CMA stuff tried to split off.

“ - 20 YEARS LATER - CMA is no more organized than it was then.”

EXACTLY. In 1986, for the first time, CMA people actually came and started TALKING with each other. Then, what happened.

Well, you had NACMAF on the east coast spring up and the Kuoshu folks came along too. Then you had the USCMAC try to make sense of this. There was a controversy that sprang up there that was fueled by Inside Kung Fu…. Strange how that works.

Then NACMAF sort of merged with USCMAC and there WAS an attempt to get Kuoshu into this group as well. Kuoshu, being a Taiwan backed thing, and the fledgling USAWKF trying to walk the mid-road but also having some ties to China, ended up with the China/Taiwan junk happening…so you had Kuoshu and WKF. Even then it was not that bad. People went to both and they all got along.

Then more politics at the top level. Things still went along until 1999 when USAWKF imploded with rancor and politics. At no point did the goal of a democratic and accountable organization EVER get reached with ANY group.

Since 1999, everything has been a mess. About the only event that came out unscathed was Taiji Legacy.

The CMA events – well Taiji legacy DOES make money for Jimmy Wong…..but he also does a good event.

The events like Jeff Bolt did - well, Jeff focused on quality. A nice hotel in an attractive place – like Orlando – with time for Non-Kung fu stuff too and he lost money….but got great reviews from all. (Can’t pay the credit cards with good wishes)

Right now, there are a number of folks who have gone their own way due to the bad blood. It IS a mess and has been since 1999. And this is all because some people saw a cash cow when the cow was only there if things were united.

” the circuit is neutral and bares no allegiance to any style”

Not really - as evidenced by the way the divisions are set, the judging, and the fact that the promoters typically don’t even know who to talk with to help set it up. You still have the “Soft Style” divisions…as I noted. This is not likely to change because there is no reason for those folks to do outreach.

” There are no “organizations” that have proven successful because within each branch there are far too many that want to be the chief. “

That is one of the major parts that led to each org failing. But another big part is that NONE of the previous organizations had ANY accountability to the members or competitors. If they did, they might actually have to do what the members wanted. (This is an area that I alluded to as being in the works….a different approach IS coming)

”We get angry or resent the non-CMA “circuits” but perhaps we should take some notes with regard to their structure and relationships. “.

This WAS actually pointed out by many – me included – oh…about 15 years ago. It takes a new approach….

” As such myself and others are ALREADY part of the solution.”

Unless this is a brand new thing, I would say this is not true. The situation has been what it is for about 7 years now with no real improvement. So, I would say that your solution is either very slow or not one.

But there are alternatives….and there are a couple of things in the background that DO hold promise. And THAT is a more on that later discussion.

23

Hi DJC, how’s it hanging?

[QUOTE=djcaldwell;717338]Diversity is fine and it is not to bring definition or a “one rule” to how each style must be played or performed. One does not have to know all the inner workings of a style to know if someone performs a techinque properly, powerfully with intent or if it is just a dance.

You can look at a CLF or Hung player and know that their stance was strong their techinque defined and proper. Just as you can look at a TKD person and say - wow that was sloppy! Was he supposed to fall on his butt after that kick?

So providing “definition” to each style is not only impractical in KF but impossible - plus KF is alive it is supposed to grow and change and evolve - so to define what things must look like would be a hinderance. HOWEVER, there is no mistaking that Sow Choi is supposed to be done one way or that a horse stance is supposed to look a certain way.

[B]Sorry, I just can’t agree. My horse is significantly different to Hung, or WC. The rules of my style, for example elbows down and in, is significantly different to Hung or WC. If a judge doesn’t know that, I can’t be judged properly. This has always been the issue with TCMA and competitions. Of course, a TCMA tournament is more LIKELY to understand the subtlties than an open tournament. The result is that people don’t get their due, go away thinking politics was the reason, or whatever.

Fighting is different, its clear who wins and who loses. Only the rules come into question.[/B]

As for the numbers game - it will never change if we just accept it as so. Spreading KF is a goal so that there aren’t 10:1 ratios anymore. But that’s a way’s down the line. First we have to all play nice.[/QUOTE]

Well, I for one don’t feel the need for it to change. I don’t evangalise the gospel of Kung Fu, I just want to carry my line to the next generation better and stronger than the last. Why is it a goal to expand the numbers? I’d rather have fewer, but better quality personally. I’m not against it, its just not an issue for me.

24

I hear you Yum Cha…it’s one of those issues as GLW pointed out in his post generalizing styles or improperly categorizing things. As for the numbers thing - that’s a matter of each individual I guess. To me, quality of course is important but to keep Kung Fu growing and expanding for the generations is also a goal. But that’s me.

” As such myself and others are ALREADY part of the solution.”

Unless this is a brand new thing, I would say this is not true. The situation has been what it is for about 7 years now with no real improvement. So, I would say that your solution is either very slow or not one.

The entire rest of your post I appreciate and as I said we certainly share similar goals. Obviously many of the points I stated you agree with and have addressed and again my compliments on all you have and are doing.

On the same token, it’s kind of arrogant to state that my comment is untrue and/or diminish the contributions that I and or others have made to our CMA communities. Especially, since I have never touched on my agenda - I assure you tournaments are a tool and not my ultimate goal. Without knowledge of what i have done, plan on doing and/or whom I am working with to ultimately accomplish our goals it’s like me telling you that well for 15 years you’ve been wasting your time since nothing really has happened.

I don’t see it that way. Per your accounts you have contributed a great deal. Obviously, you are aware of things that need to change and obstacles that need be overcome. That’s great and is respectable. My actions are recent, the concept not new at all but the thought process and methods will be. But, if I’m in the same spot 7 years from now then I guess we can say that their slow.

Until then, this is part of the problem that I speak of - versus discussing what our goals should or could be and how we could possibly help each other as fellow CMA’ers it’s “My contribution is bigger than yours.” You don’t do anything or your too slow…Ultimately, MY goal is not to have a just well running tournament but to have strong and unified CMA community.

I know, I know…it will never happen.

25

The issue was not to say that anyone was or was not making a contribution.

It was to say that for the past 7 years (and actually, there were problems that were beginning to break things 8 years ago), Chinese Martial Arts in the US as far as becoming cohesive and building bridges instead of walls has been moving backwards instead of forwards.

The answer here, from many of those of us that were on the ground, is not to assimilate into an Open event or organization. It is to try to create something where the CMA can grow…and then approach the others as a fully formed entity.

I guess, as far as that goes, the only real comfort is that the Kenpo folks have it even worse… :slight_smile:

One of the items that some of us are beginning is to reform an existing organization. By that I mean that the org exists but we are looking at restructuring it from the ground up.

In doing this, the key points on the table are (so far):
Democratically elected officials - and probably term limits unless a majority of the members choose to override it on a case by case situation

Accountability - in actions and in fiscal items to the membership. This has NEVER been the case for any CMA orgs.

A set code of conduct and ethics

A set of benefits to membership. There has to be SOME reason to make a person part with even 50 cents to join any organization… The previous ones - well, a member card (whoopee), one gave a pin (again - whoopee), a newsletter - that is something…but the newletter never came out unless they were trying to raise money to pay some debts…so again…no benefit.

So…this is where we are going…and it is about bridges instead of walls.

What do you think?

26

Yeah Baby - Now That’s What I’m Talkin’ Aboot

[QUOTE=GLW;717538]The issue was not to say that anyone was or was not making a contribution.

It was to say that for the past 7 years (and actually, there were problems that were beginning to break things 8 years ago), Chinese Martial Arts in the US as far as becoming cohesive and building bridges instead of walls has been moving backwards instead of forwards.

The answer here, from many of those of us that were on the ground, is not to assimilate into an Open event or organization. It is to try to create something where the CMA can grow…and then approach the others as a fully formed entity.

I guess, as far as that goes, the only real comfort is that the Kenpo folks have it even worse… :slight_smile:

One of the items that some of us are beginning is to reform an existing organization. By that I mean that the org exists but we are looking at restructuring it from the ground up.

In doing this, the key points on the table are (so far):
Democratically elected officials - and probably term limits unless a majority of the members choose to override it on a case by case situation

Accountability - in actions and in fiscal items to the membership. This has NEVER been the case for any CMA orgs.

A set code of conduct and ethics

A set of benefits to membership. There has to be SOME reason to make a person part with even 50 cents to join any organization… The previous ones - well, a member card (whoopee), one gave a pin (again - whoopee), a newsletter - that is something…but the newletter never came out unless they were trying to raise money to pay some debts…so again…no benefit.

So…this is where we are going…and it is about bridges instead of walls.

What do you think?[/QUOTE]

NOW WE’RE TALKING!!

Very much along the same lines as a matter of fact. The only thing is that we were talking about a new organization. But in all honesty, the restructuring of an existing organization is a more ideal situation. In my discussions the concensus is that democratically elected officials is truly the only way to go. As I’m sure you are aware there are some obstacles that are faced even with that politically but - it is the lesser of the evils.

As for member benefits - we spoke of offering a lot more than a newsletter - professionally many of us in the community have ties to other industries that can assist in offering “member benefits”. I know that even at the early stage that my plan was in - based on member volume - one simple benefit was vendor discounts for equiptment. I spoke with several distributors and/or manufacturers and although some would only offer the standard that truthfully anyone could get…there were two that were very receptive and willing to offer substantial discounts off of wholesale prices versus the retail discount that other vendors were offering. That is just one obvious benefit that can be offered. But there are quite a few even more valuable benefits that can be offered to members from operations and marketing standpoints to benefit proprietors as well as regular members.

There are many concepts and ideas as you can imagine - the problem in all honesty has been dedication and alliances in working to accomplishe the goals. I’m going to PM you my contact info - would certainly like to speak with you more.

Regards,

DJ Caldwell

27

Vote!

If there’s one thing about CMA, it’s not democratic. It never has been. I wonder if it ever will be. We’re a long way from that now, for sure. And I’m not sure that a democratic organization would thrive right now. There’s not enough money in it to attract a fair number of candidates. I’m not looking for a democracy here yet. I’m looking for a few good tyrants.

I totally agree with GLW that accountability is a major issue. Same with benefits from any organization. But again, I’d comment that this is somewhat cultural. CMA is based on a lot of clans. We’ve never had one single clan dominating everything. There have been moments when several of the clans cooperate, but CMA is very hard to unify. That being said, I endorse any attempt at unification, but I work at developing the secular.

The one thing I do abhor is people sitting on their butts at tournaments complaining that there isn’t enough CMA represented. I applaud every CMA person who steps out on the floor, even if they suck, just to get the experience. I sucked when I first competed. I got better from entering and challenging myself. That was the point of entering in the first place. My competitive record was mediocre at best, but I still did what I could to represent. Martial arts is not about complaining as an observer. Martial arts is about striving as a participant.

28

[QUOTE=GeneChing;717600]If there’s one thing about CMA, it’s not democratic. It never has been. I wonder if it ever will be. We’re a long way from that now, for sure. And I’m not sure that a democratic organization would thrive right now. There’s not enough money in it to attract a fair number of candidates. I’m not looking for a democracy here yet. I’m looking for a few good tyrants.

I totally agree with GLW that accountability is a major issue. Same with benefits from any organization. But again, I’d comment that this is somewhat cultural. CMA is based on a lot of clans. We’ve never had one single clan dominating everything. There have been moments when several of the clans cooperate, but CMA is very hard to unify. That being said, I endorse any attempt at unification, but I work at developing the secular.

The one thing I do abhor is people sitting on their butts at tournaments complaining that there isn’t enough CMA represented. I applaud every CMA person who steps out on the floor, even if they suck, just to get the experience. I sucked when I first competed. I got better from entering and challenging myself. That was the point of entering in the first place. My competitive record was mediocre at best, but I still did what I could to represent. Martial arts is not about complaining as an observer. Martial arts is about striving as a participant.[/QUOTE]

point well taken, sowwy :frowning: At any rate, I’ll see if I can convince some of the others at class to compete. My Sihings would do well. I might manage NOT to make a gimp out of myself.

For some reason though, I was under the impression at first that the WHOLE tourney was black belt only.

29

Organisation? TCMA has developed a very comprehensive organisation, with judges, systems, all the trappings. Its called Wu Shu…

So, some problems with that organisation? What about the Chin Wu association?

Why the desire to organise out all the chaos that makes TCMA so exotic?

Organisation exists, but, for example, from day 1 I’ve been taught to keep my best stuff secret, when opponents know your stuff, it becomes less effective. Teach it only to students that work to know it, and know how to work it. You don’t just show if off for your own ego.

Nevertheless, I agree with Gene on the performance issue, for the younger guys especially, get out there and show your stuff, bring respect and honor to your school and your Sifu. Representing is good enough, just consider any awards to be secondary, and arbitrary. If you win one, it doesn’t mean any more than if you don’t.

30

Organisation exists, but, for example, from day 1 I’ve been taught to keep my best stuff secret, when opponents know your stuff, it becomes less effective. Teach it only to students that work to know it, and know how to work it. You don’t just show if off for your own ego.

Yum are we fighting for our lives on a daily basis? That is why it was so important to keep the best stuff secret. Anyone (and with all due respect - not trying to call anyone out) that says otherwise in this day and age is doing so either simply passing on what they were told from their teachers who DID fight for their lives regularly, or are utilizing the “secret kung fu skills” as an enticement for their students to learn more OR this is the one that ****es people off but is true - they are simply being self gratifying to make themselves feel all important with their “secret” techniques.

Let’s be real…there are no “secrets”. Just things that that individual does not want to share. We are no longer of an era where we need to defend ourselves on a regular basis in life or death situations. Therefore, the necessity to keep family training and/or fighting methods within the family or only passed to a select few are now gone.

Depending on age of course - many of our Sifu’s are of the next generation and we are obviously the following. Many of them make strides and share openly for the betterment and expantion of CMA. No one is saying to infuse entire systems but hey KF became what it is today from growing. If it doesn’t then it will die.

31

DJC, you should know me by now, I love a good rant, here and there.

“Secrets” and who gets them - fighting for our lives daily - Keeping an art growing.

Firstly, I agree, there are no “Secrets” as in magic, only things you don’t share. Sometimes I wonder if its my style, or my personality, but this is the way I have taken what I have been taught.

You learn the style, the fundamentals, the tool skills. How to do the basics, how to deliver the power, how to engage a variety of opponents. Than you learn the “tricks”, the extensions of the basic skills, or perhaps even a couple of killer techniques. Also, how you fuse different skills together to create a different skill. You can’t just show them to someone, they have to be at a level where they can use them properly, and they have to work them hard and long to be able to use them.

My Sifu and I are basically the same generation, he’s 55, I’m 48, he was very generous with me, and I hope my si di think I am generous with them. The secrets so to speak, are not some kind of funny handshake, but rather something earned through hard training. Calling them Secrets plays to the Bruce Lee wannabe imagination of some people, but basically, they are advanced levels, only taught to advanced students who have earned them. Often more brutal and dangerous, thus not fitting for a junior who has not demonstrated comittment or control.

And, additionally, showing them off more often than not simply doesn’t mean anything to somebody who doesn’t know what they are looking at. Taught to an unprepared student, they are as lost as if they were never taught. I don’t know, maybe its part of the motivational technique, an alternative to earning belts. Its worked for longer than I’ve been around. Our school is big for a Pak Mei school, and we have a solid next generation in their 20’s-30’s. I’m quite proud of them. I know there will be several that will teach their own schools when the time comes.

Pak Mei, in addition, has traditions, traditions I’m not going to be the one to break. Its bigger than me. I’m only trying to show you that one answer does not fit all, and that tournaments are not the measure of success, or even a notable objective in my book, but I don’t object to them, having played in a few over the years and enjoyed myself considerably doing so.

Fighting for our lives. My sport fighting days are over. I play a little with friends. Any serious fight I have will be serious, and most likely against an un-trained opponent, fair enough.

Nevertheless, for example, what would you expect from a Pak Mei player in a fight? I would be surprised if you weren’t thinking that you’re not really sure what. Maybe you’ve seen some techniques before, but do you take my point? That is an important element to training Pak Mei.

I know what a WC player will throw at me, I know what to expect from Hung and CLF, for the most part, enough not to get caught too easily. Same with grapplers and shooters. Not that knowing is prevention, but it helps.

My experience with associations and tournaments has always been the same. The junior teachers and lower skilled teachers are the most likely to join in their search for validation and kudos, and the skilled seniors with solid schools are the least inclined, having already established their credibility, and having nothing to gain - thus they become congregations of mediocracy trying to standardise at that level, and than the ego’s start playing. I could tell you some stories about the old association here, hahahahh.

A Pai is not a democracy, its a family - like Gene noted, a Clan.

I’ve seen TCMA in Australia become Chinese forms and western fighting in the associations, and that spells the death of an art a lot quicker than reserving a few techniques for senior students.

Cheers

32

An organization is NOT a school. A CMA org that tries to develop one raucous and sometimes unified voice does NOT have to follow the old thinking - PROVIDED the levels of autonomy and respect to schools and teachers is maintained AND :

The org is seen as being fair AND accountable.

It does not even have to preclude other organizations. But without such a body, what we have seen since 1999 with things going from on the track to off track happen. I KNOW of this because I was in the part that was partly responsible for the off track occurrences…and am still working to try to get things ON track or build a new track.

But, all of this WILL require some folks to be willing to accept olive branches when offered…bury the hatchet - NOT in the other guy’s head… It doesn’t mean you have to love the other guy all of a sudden..but it DOES mean that folks need to see a bigger picture.

33

Bt & Glw

BT:

the WHOLE tourney was black belt only.
Weeeeeeeeeeell, you’re right. That’s the way we marketed it. Of course, that term doesn’t really apply to TCMA, so what can I say? That’s just one of the challenges of marketing an inclusive martial arts tournament in America. Given that there was a small turnout for TCMA this year, some lesser ‘belts’ would have been more than acceptable. But if you need a black belt for next year…:wink:

GLW:

An organization is NOT a school.
Weeeeeeeeeeell, you’re right. If anything, a CMA org is a conglomerate of several schools, which when you sit and think about it, is far worse. Some one has to run it and there really aren’t many ‘free agents’ who stand alone, unaffiliated. Democracy is a grand, idealistic vision of how to govern a country. It is not easy, it is not neat and predictable, and it is hard to reduce it to easily digestible parts. My main issue with your vision of a CMA org is that we’re headed towards a democracy. That’s the same mistake Mao made. His vision was that communism was to lead to true democracy. If we had a democracy, we’d probably vote away our rights anyway. It’s sort of what America does, so why would American CMA be any different? :wink:

I totally agree with you that any organization should be held accountable, but right now, the CMA economy is not strong enough to support an independant org. Any org will be tightly affliated with its leaders, or the schools of its leaders. It’s way too partisan. I agree that we do not have to follow ‘old thinking’ but frankly, if I was in charge, I probably wouldn’t want to be held accountable at this stage of CMA either. There’s just not enough money in it yet.

John Dewey said “The purpose of education in a democracy is to prepare all of its citizens to be members of the ruling class.” I think that’s really the missing element here. We need a just leader - a good ruler in the Confucian sense - to take charge of CMA. Finding such an altruistic individual is hard, just like finding an altruistic politician is hard. That’s the bigger picture.

34

Gene,

we have tried it the other way. NACMAF, USCMAC, USAWKF, USACKF, and so on.

ALL of the past organizations had a set of “officers” that were in it for themselves or were there because of who they were instead of what they could do.

There has NEVER been a way to elect officials. There has NEVER been a way to get an official to step down regardless of what the person did - as long as they kept the other group of board members happy…No Problemo…

There has NEVER been a value to membership in ANY group.

But, there has always been a group that did the work…and did NOT have any authority.

What I am talking about is basically two tiered. One is Advisors. They ADVISE. They get nominated and appointed.

Then there are those that are elected to WORK. They are all accountable but those that are elected, since they do the work and also have access to purse strings, are MORE accountable.

There is a difference in where you are.

for example, I respect most senior level instructors…but that is in the martial world. Don’t then come into my business world and expect me to give that same level… An organization has aspects of both and they need to be separated out.

35

OK, tacking to the windward…

What is it about the Chin Wu association that seems to preserve TCMA better than Wu Shu? I don’t know a lot about the Chin Wu, this is an honest inquiry.

Not living Stateside, my comments are only academic, but for the sake of the discussion, is there a Chin Wu in the US? In San Francisco? Can that organisation provide some leadership?

I’ve been involved in organising and marketing TCMA tournaments, I’m not just talking out of my “hat”, its like balancing a razorblade on a knife edge.

What breaks the machine?

  1. Chinese forms and Western Kickboxing. It than loses its unique Chinese flavour. San Da helps, but too much padding and protection is an issue.

(This issue is really a topic for its own thread I reckon. Fighting in style is, I think, the single greatest issue in preserving the fighting side of Chinese arts. When you train to fight generic, you choke the goose that lays the golden egg, and end up thinking all eggs are brass.)

  1. Clans/Organisers in charge of judging that only appreciate their own skills and abilities.

  2. Rival sifu’s arguing over sparring rules and judging criteria to manipulate it towards their style. For example, the famous William Cheung vs Lacy fiasco in Melbourne where WC tried to outlaw CLF backfists because his fighters kept getting KTFO…

And as Gene mentioned, supporting my initial contention, the CMA economy. Its a numbers game, and the numbers just aren’t there. Inter school “friendlies”. Small non-commercial group comps can work, but if you want to make money, well, ask Gene how easy it is. One I was involved in lost, the other barely broke even, but broke the association.

(A friendly between schools, where you match up guys on the day, glove up and go for it are a lot more exciting than trucking in ringers or ring bred specialists. Sample the cross section, not the sub-set. Improve the cross section, not the sub set.)

In the whole 300 million big US, there are what, 2? Maybe 3? Full scale TCMA meetings, nationally? Economics is economics and Adam Smith’s invisible hand just can’t hold any more.

So, back to my previous line of thought, TCMA isn’t Judo, TKD or Karate, and that’s what makes it cool. Play to the strengths, don’t lament the weaknesses.

And, if those BBJ, MMA, San Da guys are getting under your skin about your skills, more tournements aren’t the answer.

In my humble opinion.