Wushu's lack of respect

Root not important?

If your motive is only taken CMA as a fighting tool that only existed in your mind if you are fighting, you missed all the important life long values of CMA. Root are importan to your moral and as well as deeper understanding and developments. Without it, you can never put the CMA in your life to achieve the total harmonization with the arts. If you only scratch the surface and think you have all, you mus try the traditional(genuin one, not the fake/water down one) and then you will what a base knowledge to know what are you talking about. At lest you can really compare them after that.

That came to an idea of why do you learn it in the first place, what does what you learning means to you.

In technique wise, it will take more than 10 years to really clearly shows the important of effects by root. But if you gone without root, in about 5 years, you will find yourself with no room to improve your art.

If you think the past masters are not discredited by WuShu, then you can find out how many WuShu practioners actually knows all the different styles he/she learned came form? And who are the most influencial masters in the system that directly related to the master that taught it?

To collect as many CMA in one place and unify them sounds good, but I don’t see that would really work under Wushu.

I have learned Yang Taichi, Xing-Yi, BaGua, BaBuTangLang, ShiaoLing ChinNa, TanTui, BaoDingShuaiChiao, KunLunDanTao, LainBuChuan, LiauHeChuan, and TsonHe all in tradional way. I can tell you the master, grand master, the founder(except on KLDT,chinna, Tantui, and TsonHe, the founder is fictional, not really sure). And all the life stories give hint of how behavior the past masters had and what advantages/disadvantage of these behaviors broght in the art.

Or he could be just saying that because he’s humble. Remember that A wise man walks with head bowed, humble..as the dust.

i think it sucks when you start bleeding out of your ass.

If Legendary Fist has found martial value in Wushu (like the guy fighting the Boxer in someone’s earlier story) then who the hell are any of you lot to tell him he hasn’t?

He’s not making any claims to a deep and distant lineage, for chrissakes, I could put together everything I’ve learnt from different styles and call it “Scott style”. You could b!tch and moan about how it has no root and no lineage and no high level, but if I could kick your arse with it then your arguments are no longer valid. And who’s to say Legendary Fist isn’t the best arse kicker on the board?

OK so maybe the vast majority of Wushu practitioners are gymnasts who could not find any martial application of their art if it bit them in the balls. But there are people who can find the martial value in Wushu, and maybe we should be grateful to them for taking the commercialized, public face of Kung Fu and showing us that you can kick arse with it, instead of slagging them down and telling them what they are doing is not real, when it obviously is for them, and the reason it is not for us is because we have never crossed hands with an accomplished Wushu practitioner.

If I can attain good Gongfu in work, schoolwork, etc. then I’m pretty sure that Legendary Fist can attain it in Wushu.

Misunderstand…

I have never said any one has achieve nothing, I have only said about why root needed for higher growth and Wushu cannot support that.

If you only looking forward to kick a$$ and not care about other aspect, you are suppossed to be rejected by all masters form the traditional rule of choosing a tudi.

If Wushu try to take in as much as traditional CMA it could, I wish you guys good luck. I don’t see that will work and I still considered a stealing form tradition CMA, just like alot of Karate and TKD did to CMA.

I felt it would be prudent to dig up something I posted a while ago on the “Shaolin Kungfu” forum:

The main “beef” that most traditionalists have with contemporary wushu is that oftentimes it either tries to pass itself off as the “real deal” (e.g. advertisements that a modern wushu school teaches “ancient Chinese kungfu”) or that it doesn’t bother to make a clear distinction between the two (e.g. “wushu is kungfu! they are the same thing!”). To anyone who has experienced both, it is blatantly obvious that contemporary wushu is not the same thing as traditional kungfu, and vice versa. Also, there is an issue with the “*******ization” of various styles (look at Nanquan - a mix of Hung Gar, Choy Li Fut, and other Southern Shaolin styles) and the change in the main goals - pugilism and philosophy. The main aim of modern wushu is, in three short words, to look good. However, all that being said, the traditionalist oftentimes looks down upon the contemporary wushu practitioner with contempt; not trying understand the time, effort, energy, and dedication required to gain skill in the sport. Wushu practitioners are true athletes, and should be recognized as such.

=========================

With all that being said, I would like to make clear that the distinction placed between contemporary wushu, created and propogated by the People’s Republic of China, and the traditional Chinese Martial Arts is not unsubstantiated. You can make the claim that through learning modern wushu, one can in fact learn valid techniques contained within certain Chinese Martial systems. This may very well be true, but the simple fact of the matter is that no one learns contemporary wushu to learn how to fight. At any rate, the basis of this claim is founded upon the principle that modern wushu is based upon the traditional arts - no one disputes this (think of it this way: you learn how to punch in modern wushu, and the form/technique of that punch is based upon the traditional martial arts, but at the same time you do not learn the concepts/principles/theories associated with that punch, nor do you learn how to condition the body to punch without fear of injuring yourself, nor do you learn a myriad of other things). So yes, I would agree that you can find viable martial techniques within the scope of the modern wushu taolu forms. However, I would greatly disagree with the oversimplification that they are the same thing, when in fact they are not. Teleologically speaking, they have two different aims. And not only do they have vastly different purposes - with those different goals come vastly different methods. I have yet to year of a modern wushu coach who sits with his students and discusses martial philosophy. Has your wushu coach described to you the pressure points? Has he told you why you should do this technique in a situation as opposed to three or four other techniques? Has he shown you the strengths and weaknesses of using one chin na technique rather than another one? Has he went through a description of “You do this because the other guy does this, and when you do that he will do this, so you must then do this, or if he does this then you do this, and then he will counter with this, so you must follow through and do this.” Do you learn basic Chinese Martial fighting theory? Concepts such as ging (and there are several types of ging), rooting, pressure points, footwork, sticking, leaking, trapping, kung training, sensitivity, etc. etc. etc. are all fundamental truths found in all Chinese Martial Arts, no matter the system or style. Does every modern wushu exponent learn of these things? Do you learn not only how to punch, but why you punch, and where you punch? Do you learn what to proect and how to protect it? When you learn the changquan compulsory, do only learn what you should be doing (back straight, leg bent, arm at this angle), or do you also learn why you are doing it (back straight because it allows for proper ging, leg bent because you are shifting foward to move his balance, arm at this angle because he may counter with this move, and you don’t want him to)? Hell, have you even heard of the body/mind/intent/spirit/chi? Don’t try to feed me some bull**** about how they are the same thing, because they are not. Anyone who has the experience and knowledge of both will tell you the same.

And yes, modern wushu is great for developing physical ability. However, I would dispute the claim that it develops the same physicality as that associated with the Chinese Martial Arts. In fact, I would even go so far as to say that certain aspects of contemporary wushu training in fact promote bad long-term health. Certain acrobatic techniques (as well as some ground-based movements) promote bad joint health, and place too much pressure on one particular area. Also, not all aspects of wushu technique correspond with that of the traditional foundation. For example, many movements stress that the arm or leg should be fully extended, when most traditional systems stress that doing so promotes bad habit, as it will leave the limb open to counter-trapping/breaking. It seems that oftentimes modern wushu will take the principle of overextension for training purposes (e.g. kicking to your head, even though you would never have to do so), and extend it even further and then place it at the forefront for aesthetic purposes.

In ending, I would say that there are similarities, but there are also differences. While I would say with certainty that contemporary wushu does not teach pugilism, that does not mean that I would discredit it as a sport. To have kungfu requires great dedication, great perseverence, and great diligence - whether it be kungfu in modern wushu or kungfu in the traditional Chinese Martial Arts.

Well said dude.

Meaning changed

I agree totally. I want to add that Wushu has changed the meaning of CMA, and by that change, people espect different things out of it. And the motive of learning changed. As well as the spirit. Definitly not good for long term growth.

Originally posted by Inquisitor
With all that being said, I would like to make clear that the distinction placed between contemporary wushu, created and propogated by the People’s Republic of China, and the traditional Chinese Martial Arts is not unsubstantiated. You can make the claim that through learning modern wushu, one can in fact learn valid techniques contained within certain Chinese Martial systems. This may very well be true, but the simple fact of the matter is that no one learns contemporary wushu to learn how to fight.

That’s quite a generalization. Though I didn’t join Wushu to learn how to fight (I’ve known how to fight since I was kid), I did join Wushu to learn self defense, along with many other benefits that I have touched on before. Wushu has yet to fail me in any regards.

At any rate, the basis of this claim is founded upon the principle that modern wushu is based upon the traditional arts - no one disputes this (think of it this way: you learn how to punch in modern wushu, and the form/technique of that punch is based upon the traditional martial arts, but at the same time you do not learn the concepts/principles/theories associated with that punch, nor do you learn how to condition the body to punch without fear of injuring yourself, nor do you learn a myriad of other things).

How do you know that we don’t learn the concpets/principles/theories associated with any technique we do? If I’m learning chin na locks, and how hip rotation increases the power of a punch, how is that not learning theory, concpets, and principles behind your art? Furthermore, how do you know that we don’t condition our body? I do weight training, heavy bag training, run, etc. I also condition my body by doing external and internal form sets. In simplest terms, doing forms alone are conditioning the body. While preforming anything from Taijiquan, to Long fist, your body is being conditioned internally, and externally. The more elaborate and expressive of our form sets condition quite a bit more. However, we use common sense when we train so we don’t injure ourselves. However, What school doesn’t? We train responsibly, but we also train with little fear about being injured. We train to better ourselves mentally and physically.

So yes, I would agree that you can find viable martial techniques within the scope of the modern wushu taolu forms. However, I would greatly disagree with the oversimplification that they are the same thing, when in fact they are not. Teleologically speaking, they have two different aims. And not only do they have vastly different purposes - with those different goals come vastly different methods. I have yet to year of a modern wushu coach who sits with his students and discusses martial philosophy.

Then I recommend taking a trip to Pan Quing Fu’s school in Canda. He’s a Wushu exponent who knows quite abit about Martial philosophy, and is a strong martial artist in his own right.

Do you learn basic Chinese Martial fighting theory? Concepts such as ging (and there are several types of ging), rooting, pressure points, footwork, sticking, leaking, trapping, kung training, sensitivity, etc. etc. etc. are all fundamental truths found in all Chinese Martial Arts, no matter the system or style. Does every modern wushu exponent learn of these things?

Students at my Wushu school do learn such things. However, I can’t speak for the entire wushu community, just like you can’t speak for the entire traditional wushu community. You can’t say that every traditional Chinese MA school teaches all of those aspects, nor can you say that those same MA schools are useless because they don’t.

And yes, modern wushu is great for developing physical ability. However, I would dispute the claim that it develops the same physicality as that associated with the Chinese Martial Arts.

You’re quite correct. Advanced Wushu exponents tend to lack the rather large pot-belly found on mid-section of traditional MA instructors.

In fact, I would even go so far as to say that certain aspects of contemporary wushu training in fact promote bad long-term health. Certain acrobatic techniques (as well as some ground-based movements) promote bad joint health, and place too much pressure on one particular area.

The same can be said for traditional arts like Monkey, which require deep, squatting stances, or to a lesser extent, Hung Gar and other Southern styles that also require deep rooted stances. Even beyond Chinese Martial Arts, all intense body movement can cause strain and tearing of the joints and ligaments. All physical training does this. Wushu hardly has the monopoly on “wear and tear”.

Also, not all aspects of wushu technique correspond with that of the traditional foundation. For example, many movements stress that the arm or leg should be fully extended, when most traditional systems stress that doing so promotes bad habit, as it will leave the limb open to counter-trapping/breaking. It seems that oftentimes modern wushu will take the principle of overextension for training purposes (e.g. kicking to your head, even though you would never have to do so), and extend it even further and then place it at the forefront for aesthetic purposes.

Oh please. Both traditional and modern styles stress overextension for training purposes. You overextend to develop strength in the ligaments and the muscles. Take Crane and its absurd high kicking. You train to kick that high to develop the muscles in your legs and thighs, and to stretch the groin muscles. Thus, when you need to preform a technique, you can do it from a variety of ranges. Low, high, and everywhere in between. The same can be said about Hung Gar and its extremely deep stances, or Taijiquan and its slow movements.

In ending, I would say that there are similarities, but there are also differences. While I would say with certainty that contemporary wushu does not teach pugilism, that does not mean that I would discredit it as a sport. To have kungfu requires great dedication, great perseverence, and great diligence - whether it be kungfu in modern wushu or kungfu in the traditional Chinese Martial Arts.

Once again, if you don’t think a wushu man can be a pugilist, all I need to do is point you to Sifu Pan Quing Fu.

I think by the looks of it Legendary Fist has experienced a side of Wushu that lots of people haven’t.

So a minority of Wushu people are good fighters.

I wonder if the ratio is the same:

Good Wushu fighters to gymnasts

=

Good TMA fighters to McKwoon people

Legendary Fist coming on KFO and defending his art, and some of the responses he’s had, kind of reminds me of a TMA defending their art on the Underground or a MMA board.

Which is kind of sad I think.

Over on the other thread that spawned this one Fu-pow posted an idea that will totaly remove my objection to Wushu.

They start to call it “Wushu dancing”

There you go. That ends my objection as it remover any thought that the practitioner has fighting ability or a proper grounding in Kung Fu.

As I stated over on the other thread i would prefer that they just call it Dancing.

Re: Root not important?

Originally posted by PaulLin
[B]If your motive is only taken CMA as a fighting tool that only existed in your mind if you are fighting, you missed all the important life long values of CMA.

Yet that is not my only reason behind studying Wushu. I wanted to get in shape, the style of the open handed and weapon forms amazed me, and spirit of friendship and unity was very refreshing. All of those values are certainly going to be with me for the long-term. I’ve made life-long friends in my wushu class, my confidence has risen ten-fold, and my body is in the best condition its ever been (save for my tooth).

My reasons Root are importan to your moral and as well as deeper understanding and developments. Without it, you can never put the CMA in your life to achieve the total harmonization with the arts. If you only scratch the surface and think you have all, you mus try the traditional(genuin one, not the fake/water down one) and then you will what a base knowledge to know what are you talking about. At lest you can really compare them after that.

This is where we clearly disagree, because I see nothing all that different in traditional schools, that I practice in wushu. Furthermore, the exponents of traditional schools that I’ve run across, aren’t on a physical/mental skill level that greatly exceeds my own, or my classmates. So, you’ll pardon me if I simply don’t believe that there’s some “secret” aspect that traditional arts possess and wushu lacks.

In technique wise, it will take more than 10 years to really clearly shows the important of effects by root. But if you gone without root, in about 5 years, you will find yourself with no room to improve your art.

I seriously doubt I’ll have reached my pinnacle in another 2 years. I highly doubt that I’ll reach the level that I want to reach in Wushu anytime soon. Since I have yet to meet a “wushu master” who has only practiced the art for 5 years, and has flawless form, balance, and application, I think its safe to say that wushu has quite a strong root. This using your definition btw.

If you think the past masters are not discredited by WuShu, then you can find out how many WuShu practioners actually knows all the different styles he/she learned came form? And who are the most influencial masters in the system that directly related to the master that taught it?

To collect as many CMA in one place and unify them sounds good, but I don’t see that would really work under Wushu.

I have learned Yang Taichi, Xing-Yi, BaGua, BaBuTangLang, ShiaoLing ChinNa, TanTui, BaoDingShuaiChiao, KunLunDanTao, LainBuChuan, LiauHeChuan, and TsonHe all in tradional way. I can tell you the master, grand master, the founder(except on KLDT,chinna, Tantui, and TsonHe, the founder is fictional, not really sure).

[b]That’s like asking someone who created boxing, wrestling, karate, Savate, etc. Lineage IMO is overvalued. Though I think it makes a nice conversation piece, having an excellent lineage doesn’t automatically make your art strong by default. It also doesn’t grant your sifu good kung fu skills, because even the best teachers have ****-poor students. I’ve run across quite a few individuals who could trace their MA lineage way back, but their skills were poor.

If I want to learn history, I’ll read a book. What interests me is what can YOU do, not your master’s master.

To me, the only true yardstick of ability is your ability. All that BS about who taught who means diddley squat to me, because if my life’s on the line, the old man who taught my teacher isn’t going to magically appear to save my butt.

If your instructor’s kung fu is good, does it matter who he/she learned it from? What should matter is how well your instructor conveys what he/she knows to their students, and the skill level of the students he/she produces.[/b]

Agreed about lineage.

Once again, PaulLin and Stacey show their childish bravado and utter ignorance by trashing those that are far more trained and far more DANGEROUS than they are.

I will guarantee each of you that Jet Li or Pan Qing Fu would utterly blow either of you away. I’m not a wushu stylist myself, but I know wushu experts that would willingly fight either of you if you were to challenge them.

PaulLin, you show your lack of skill by judging an art and its practitioners via videotapes and heresay. Didn’t your sifu teach you not to judge anybody negatively until you TOUCH HANDS with them? Jiang Jianye makes wushu videotapes and I used to be his student - I’d be happy to oblige you. So will my CLASSMATES.

As far as collecting a bunch of different arts, PaulLin, who are YOU to talk? You practice “Yang Taichi, Xing-Yi, BaGua, BaBuTangLang, ShiaoLing ChinNa, TanTui, BaoDingShuaiChiao, KunLunDanTao, LainBuChuan, LiauHeChuan, and TsonHe”. You’re no different from the wushu guys that learn different styles of sets.

Challenge? I LIKE challenges, being a traditional man myself. Be careful of what you wish for, PaulLin.

Ok HuangKaiVun Ifind you a rediculouse kind of guy.

It says on your profile that you want to start your own Kwoon. I think you are such a bad example.

And if you like challanges then come challange me. Im in the UK right now but i intend to be at the Florida open in july.

Come and find me there guy…just dont expect to be playing violin any time after that.

Man, hot topic.

All I have to add is that when I practiced wushu I fought a lot.

Yan Ming didn’t teach the applications of the forms because, as he would say, “application doesn’t work”. He preferred straight forward striking and long (lead leg kicking) to mid range fighting (elbows and knees). You should ask some of the guys who I helped become a bit less concious if wushu is a fighting art. And my training partners and competitors often helped me in the same way.

You can really chose how you want to practice wushu. I discussed this with some of the guys from the beijing wushu team, and they told me that you have to chose…be a fighter, be a forms stylist for competitions sake. You can’t compete in forms if you focus is on combat and vice versa…because you need to spend all of your time on one specialty in order to be competative. But most practitioners have a strong foundation in both…they just evolve to be more specific according to their interests and/or talents.

I’m a little shocked by the overwhelmingly negative attitude that’s expressed towards modren Wushu on this forum.

I wouldn’t let you get to down about it. The people that hate wushu seem to be more of a very vocal minority. The rest may question the aplication of modern wushu, but what’re you going to do? That can’t be proven wrong on a forum. The only way to prove that modern wushu can be used in a fight is by fighting(allthough that probably still wouldn’t convince everybody).

Hey,

When I went to see a shaolin monk demostration in Helsinki, Finland it really inspired me. It was a demonstration, so some of the moves and forms were actually wushu. I’m going to start wushu very soon, and I’m currently studying taekwondo.

Lots of people have no idea what they’re talking about when they go and mock other arts. There are good schools and there are bad ones, but it’s not about the art. I have LOTS of taekwondo friends who have beaten for example muay thai kickboxers, choy lee fut practisioners etc. Have YOU ever sparred with a taekwondo student? I don’t know about America but here in Finland we give a good fight. In America you can get black belts really easily, so the meaning of the belt isn’t so important (however people think that black belts are very skilled, but it’s not quite so all the time). Here in Finland it takes from 5 to 7 years to earn 1.dan, and you really have to work for it. Taekwondo is a great martial art, and you can’t really compare it with wushu.

Have you ever gotten into a fight where you’ve struggled for your life? I don’t think so. So why practise only fighting arts. Wushu is a great form of moving. I personally like to practise moves by myself, without a partner. So I quess I could get my ass whooped really bad if I’d get into a fight.

One should choose his type of martial art which best suits his desires and personality. People have different goals to achieve and do martial arts for various purposes. I haven’t heard of a person studying a style for 5 years and constantly saying how bad it is. It is the choice of an individual and other people should respect their taste. All humans do not share the same desires, that’s why everyone is unique.

Although this is a discussion forum and open for people’s opinions, I do not find any excuse to start mocking and flaming other people’s ideas. These topics can be debated very politely and well-mannered without any harsh atmosphere. I’m not blaming anyone here, but I have noticed that sometimes expressions get a bit tense.

"With all that being said, I would like to make clear that the distinction placed between contemporary wushu, created and propogated by the People’s Republic of China, and the traditional Chinese Martial Arts is not unsubstantiated. You can make the claim that through learning modern wushu, one can in fact learn valid techniques contained within certain Chinese Martial systems. This may very well be true, but the simple fact of the matter is that no one learns contemporary wushu to learn how to fight. "

And your point is??? The late Grandmaster Wang Ziping was known to say that Wushu (in the strict sense of the word) had to have Lien Yong Kan - Good for health, good for use (applications) and look good as an art. He could do all of that. He maintained that Yong (applicability) had to be maintained. This is one of the reasons you see a different flavor when you compare Beijing people to Shanghai - Shanghai folks tend to keep the roots more.

By the same token, there are many people who do Traditional Wushu who haven’t got a clue what it is for. Many who do one thing in form and fight a different way. So, unless a person actually uses what they learn in their Traditional classes when they fight and do it well, I really don’t see this as much of an argument. It is the pot calling the kettle black.

"but at the same time you do not learn the concepts/principles/theories associated with that punch, nor do you learn how to condition the body to punch without fear of injuring yourself, nor do you learn a myriad of other things). So yes, I would agree that you can find viable martial techniques within the scope of the modern wushu taolu forms. However, I would greatly disagree with the oversimplification that they are the same thing, when in fact they are not. "

Not entirely true. Many Contemporary Wushu coaches do NOT teach these things. Others do. This depends entirely on the teacher.

“I have yet to year of a modern wushu coach who sits with his students and discusses martial philosophy.”

There are those who do. I know a number of them in the US. However, these same coaches are very selective about which students they speak with about these things. Now, we may be bandying semantics. If you DEFINE a Contemporary Wushu coach as one who teaches only the forms and athletic part and then say that there are Traditional Coaches that teach the Contemporary forms and such as well as traditional methods…then I would say within that definition, you are correct.

"Hell, have you even heard of the body/mind/intent/spirit/chi? Don’t try to feed me some bull**** about how they are the same thing, because they are not. Anyone who has the experience and knowledge of both will tell you the same. "

Those same coaches talk about such things in each class. How many of their students listen..that is another question.

" In fact, I would even go so far as to say that certain aspects of contemporary wushu training in fact promote bad long-term health."

As are certain aspects of Traditional training. Basically, anything that over-stresses a joint, puts the body in an unnatural situation, requires consistent injury and recovery to develop over time is going to lead to bad things. Contemporary Wushu does NOT have a lock on such training. Take a look at some of the Iron body and such training and some Qi Gong methods that can lead to serious side effects.

"For example, many movements stress that the arm or leg should be fully extended, when most traditional systems stress that doing so promotes bad habit, as it will leave the limb open to counter-trapping/breaking. It seems that oftentimes modern wushu will take the principle of overextension for training purposes (e.g. kicking to your head, even though you would never have to do so), and extend it even further and then place it at the forefront for aesthetic purposes. "

Zhaquan has the concept of extension to build strength and flexibility. However, the system also has guiding ideas such as “Train low, use high” - and many Zhaquan teachers do not give this idea to all of their students.

“In ending, I would say that there are similarities, but there are also differences.”

No argument…but the differences are not as great as many try to claim.

“To have kungfu requires great dedication, great perseverence, and great diligence - whether it be kungfu in modern wushu or kungfu in the traditional Chinese Martial Arts.”

Exactly.