# Kenpo and Kung Fu



## Manny (Feb 24, 2010)

When I was a small boy the king of MA was Bruce Lee, I saw one or two movies of him and everything was Bruce Lee craze, I have to tell you Bruce was already death when I know him, that was back in mid 70's.

I have to say I don't like Kung Fu at all, however wing chun seems to me to have some good techs and the jeet kune do has his merits, I respecta ll kind of MA.

I have realice that the Kenpo I am learning (Kenpo Karate by Ed Parker) has a lot of chinese moves that I consider efective, am I right? The Kenpo that Parker invented had chinese infleunce?

There are certain kind of had techs in kenpo that really have some resemblance of Kung Fu, correct me if I am wrong.

Manny


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 24, 2010)

Kenpo is Kung Fu. When you consider that Kung Fu is just a way of saying you are really good at something in Chinese. Only the rest of the world understands kung fu to mean martial arts from China. The original way of saying Kenpo in Okinowan is Chuan Fa, meaning hands of China. 
Sean


----------



## MattJ (Feb 24, 2010)

According to Doc, on this thread here:

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=572860#post572860

Checks were an import from Chinese MA. I have heard a lot of people say that all the circular foot work in kenpo came from CMA, too. But I find this a bit dismissive of the tai-sabaki inherent in some Japanese MA. 

But I wasn't there, so........meh.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 24, 2010)

Manny said:


> When I was a small boy the king of MA was Bruce Lee, I saw one or two movies of him and everything was Bruce Lee craze, I have to tell you Bruce was already death when I know him, that was back in mid 70's.
> 
> I have to say I don't like Kung Fu at all, however wing chun seems to me to have some good techs and the jeet kune do has his merits, I respecta ll kind of MA.
> 
> ...


 
But Kung Fu always speaks very highly of you 

Kung Fu means hard work Wushu means Chinese martial arts in China. It was a translation error that got Kung Fu to mean martial arts here in the west

To say you do not like Kung Fu is saying you don't like one hell of a lot of CMA styles including Wing Chun. Kung Fu, as it is understood by the west, is a general term for Chinese martial arts.

So when you say you "don't like Kung Fu at all" you are saying you do not like any of these styles, to name a just few... and many have substyles

Bafaquan
Baguazhang
Bajiquan
Bak Mei
Black Tiger Kung Fu 
Chaquan
Changquan
Chuo Jiao
Choy Gar
Choy Li Fut
Dachengquan
Ditangquan
Do Pi 
Lung Ying
Duan Quan
Emeiquan
Fanziquan
Five Ancestors
Five Animals
Fujian White Crane
Fu Jow Pai
Fut Gar
Gouquan
Hakka Kuen
Hong Cha
Hop Gar
Houquan
Drunken Monkey 
Heihuquan:
Huaquan
Hung Fut
Hung Gar
Jing Wu Men 
Jing Quan Do
Jow-Ga 
Kuntao 
Lau Gar 
Lai Tung Pai
Lama Pai
Leopard Kung Fu 
Li Gar 
Liuhebafa Chuan 
Luohan Quan 
Mei Hua Quan
Mian Quan
Mizongyi
Mok Gar
Nam Pai Chuan
Nan Quan
Ng Mui Pai
Northern Praying Mantis
Northern Shaolin 
Pai Long 
Paochui
Piguaquan
Praying Mantis(&#25955;&#25171 - Free Fighting
Shaolin Quan 
Shequan 
Shuaijiao 
Southern Praying Mantis
Chow Gar
Taijiquan
Tantui 
Tibetan White Crane
Tien Shan Pai 
Tongbeiquan 
White Crane: 
Wing Chun 
Wudangquan 
Xingyiquan 
Yau Kung Mun 
Yingzhaoquan 
Yuejiaquan 
Yiquan 
Zi Ran Men 

so by saying you don't like Kung Fu at all I am assuming yuo have actually seen all of these styles and or tried a few.


----------



## Tames D (Feb 24, 2010)

Xue Sheng said:


> But Kung Fu always speaks very highly of you
> 
> Kung Fu means hard work Wushu means Chinese martial arts in China. It was a translation error that got Kung Fu to mean martial arts here in the west
> 
> ...


 
I thought I'd add one to your list. Not that I know anything about it.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 24, 2010)

Tames D said:


> I thought I'd add one to your list. Not that I know anything about it.


 
Well I said "to name a just few" 
You know about San Soo... Who knew 
But it doesn''t matter because Manny doesn't like it 

Sorry I missed San soo...:asian:


----------



## Tames D (Feb 24, 2010)

Xue Sheng said:


> Sorry I missed San soo...:asian:


 
That's all right. I'm just sorry Manny don't like it.


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Feb 24, 2010)

Tames D said:


> That's all right. I'm just sorry Manny don't like it.


 
OK. That was justa comic exchange. Thank you for that, bothuayuz.

Manny: Mr. Parkers system is very influenced by kung-fu. Specifically, CLF, Mok ga, and some others. I would have to ask...if you don't like kung-fu, then why are you in kenpo?

Regards,

Dave


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 24, 2010)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:


> OK. That was justa comic exchange. Thank you for that, bothuayuz.
> 
> Manny: Mr. Parkers system is very influenced by kung-fu. Specifically, CLF, Mok ga, and some others. I would have to ask...if you don't like kung-fu, then why are you in kenpo?
> 
> ...


 
Note: my first post with the list of styles was not a comic exchange it was pointing out that to not like Kung Fu at all was a massive generalization.

Although the posts after that were mostly comic in nature


----------



## shaolinmonkmark (Feb 24, 2010)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:


> OK. That was justa comic exchange. Thank you for that, bothuayuz.
> 
> Manny: Mr. Parkers system is very influenced by kung-fu. Specifically, CLF, Mok ga, and some others. I would have to ask...if you don't like kung-fu, then why are you in kenpo?
> 
> ...


 









LOL! i concur with you!


----------



## chaos1551 (Feb 24, 2010)

Manny said:


> I have to say I don't like Kung Fu at all...


 
Haaaaawww..... your kung fu no good!


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 24, 2010)

chaos1551 said:


> Haaaaawww..... your kung fu no good!


Your Kung Fu teacher sits on the TV and watches the couch! LOL
Sean


----------



## Tames D (Feb 24, 2010)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:


> OK. That was justa comic exchange. Dave


 
What do ya mean, funny? Let me understand this cause, I don't know maybe it's me, I'm a little ****ed up maybe, but I'm funny how? I mean, funny like I'm a clown, I amuse you? I make you laugh... I'm here to ****in' amuse you? What do you mean funny, funny how? How am I funny?

Sorry Dave, I just wanted to try out my favorite Joe Pesci quote.


----------



## LawDog (Feb 25, 2010)

One should ask Ed Parker jr about his fathers thoughts.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 25, 2010)

Tames D said:


> What do ya mean, funny? Let me understand this cause, I don't know maybe it's me, I'm a little ****ed up maybe, but I'm funny how? I mean, funny like I'm a clown, I amuse you? I make you laugh... I'm here to ****in' amuse you? What do you mean funny, funny how? How am I funny?
> 
> Sorry Dave, I just wanted to try out my favorite Joe Pesci quote.


 

You know... I think he may have offended my family and offended the Shaolin Temple


----------



## Manny (Feb 25, 2010)

Xue Sheng said:


> But Kung Fu always speaks very highly of you
> 
> Kung Fu means hard work Wushu means Chinese martial arts in China. It was a translation error that got Kung Fu to mean martial arts here in the west
> 
> ...


 

UPSSSS!!!! Sorry I knew Kung Fu was Kung Fu I mean certain MA from China. Sorry, so I do Kung Fu most of the time caiuse I like to do hard work jejejejeje.

Manny


----------



## Manny (Feb 25, 2010)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:


> OK. That was justa comic exchange. Thank you for that, bothuayuz.
> 
> Manny: Mr. Parkers system is very influenced by kung-fu. Specifically, CLF, Mok ga, and some others. I would have to ask...if you don't like kung-fu, then why are you in kenpo?
> 
> ...


 
Nice question and I will try to answer, sorry if my english is not good about the explanation. The kung fu that Bruce Lee did certainly liked, but I dislike the majority of the Kunf Fu I've seen in movies where the kung fu stylists fly in the air while doing zillions of cicks or punches and send their oponent to the floor or wall, also I dislike some styles of kung fu like the drunken stuyle or the monkey style, also I dislike for example Caoperia, but that's only me.

Why I got involved in Kenpo Karate (Ed Parker) is very simple, because I tought Kenpo karate was Karate and it emphasis wa son hand techs, I did not know that Kenpo karate was very influenced by Whushu (now I know Kung Fu means hard work). For me Kenpo Karate has moves from whushu but very practical ones that are straight efective on street, I will never perform a double or triple mortal jump while doing kicks. 

Sorry if I bother some of you guys when I said I dislike Kung Fu, but I do believe me, I don't hate it, but don't like it, thats why I never took Kung Fu classes. My main system of MA is Korean and I think kenpo is very nice to enhance what I already know.

For me, Kenpo karate is more than just wushu.

Manny


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 25, 2010)

Manny said:


> The kung fu that Bruce Lee did certainly liked, but I dislike the majority of the Kunf Fu I've seen in movies where the kung fu stylists fly in the air while doing zillions of cicks or punches and send their oponent to the floor or wall, also I dislike some styles of kung fu like the drunken stuyle or the monkey style,


 
So basically you have no idea what Kung Fu is and are basing this on what you have seen on TV which is mostly fake and only for movies.

Might I suggest before you write of an entire cultures system of MA you actually go and see what it REALLY is and not base it on movies.

Saying you do not like Kung Fu based on Movies is much the same as saying I think rabbits are pretty cool because of what Bugs Bunny did on TV. Or saying all Americans are cowboys because that is what I see in the movies.

I can also then, based on the way you are judging kung fu, say that all TKD is useless and only good for sport with no real life applications since that is all I see. However I was old school TKD and I know better. You sir are way off and have no idea what Kung Fu is and have no experience in it as it is defined as a Chinese Martial Art but yet you dismiss it as no good because you saw it in a movie


----------



## DocWard (Feb 25, 2010)

Education is a process of providing correct information and often disspelling incorrect information. It is usually most successful when answers are patiently provided to inquisitive minds. It is seldom successful when it is done through belittling and attacking those who inquire.

Just a thought.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 25, 2010)

DocWard said:


> Education is a process of providing correct information and often disspelling incorrect information. It is usually most successful when answers are patiently provided to inquisitive minds. It is seldom successful when it is done through belittling and attacking those who inquire.
> 
> Just a thought.


 
If you had bothered to read the entire thread you would see I tried that here. and it failed 

But thanks for the thought just the same


----------



## Manny (Feb 25, 2010)

Xue Sheng said:


> So basically you have no idea what Kung Fu is and are basing this on what you have seen on TV which is mostly fake and only for movies.
> 
> Might I suggest before you write of an entire cultures system of MA you actually go and see what it REALLY is and not base it on movies.
> 
> ...


 
You are wrong sir!! in fact when I was younger I had contact with Kung Fu, I saw it and took a few lessons and really don't like it period. Yes I saw a couple of movies about kung fu, lyke enter the dragon amoung others (very nice movie BTW). When I was younger and before taking TKD classes I had some exposure with Kung Fu and don't like it period. Maybe I know two or three styles of Kung Fu and not 25 or so lyke you do but even this does not make you an expert.

I can give you more arguments and can tell you all the things I don't like but it's pointless here, if you dislike TKD good for you, it really does not matter to me.

Please take the sugestions you give me and save them to you please, I really don't need them.

Thank you any way for contributing to my post.

Respectfully.

Manny.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 25, 2010)

Manny said:


> You are wrong sir!! in fact when I was younger I had contact with Kung Fu, I saw it and took a few lessons and really don't like it period. Yes I saw a couple of movies about kung fu, lyke enter the dragon amoung others (very nice movie BTW). When I was younger and before taking TKD classes I had some exposure with Kung Fu and don't like it period. Maybe I know two or three styles of Kung Fu and not 25 or so lyke you do but even this does not make you an expert.
> 
> I can give you more arguments and can tell you all the things I don't like but it's pointless here, if you dislike TKD good for you, it really does not matter to me.
> 
> ...


 
Nope, I'm not wrong and the fact you continue to use the term kung fu by saying you trained kung fu proves that. Kung Fu is a generic term for Chinese martial arts, albeit the wrong term but that is what we are stuck with. Much like Chinese is not so much a language as it is a family of languages. 

But then it is a personal preference after all and if you don't like whatever CMA style you once trained and want to judge all styles of CMA based on that little bit of exposure and say you don't like all Chinese styles based on that so be it.

And please show me where I siad I don't like TKD


----------



## DocWard (Feb 25, 2010)

Xue Sheng said:


> If you had bothered to read the entire thread you would see I tried that here. and it failed
> 
> But thanks for the thought just the same


 
I read the entire thread before making my comment, and it wasn't directed at any one person. In fact, I found myself nodding in agreement with much of what you wrote in the post you reference, at least until my jaw dropped from the sheer number of styles you named.

Manny, perhaps it is because of the fact that English is a second language for you, I don't know, but it seems you dislike the styles of Chinese arts you have been exposed to, notand those you visualize as being "Kung Fu" based upon what you have seen on TV and in movies. Perhaps it was because you saw them as to "flashy" or "flowing" without enough emphasis on power, or thought they were impractical, I don't know. Perhaps you realize that the movies are simply unrealistic, and that gave you a bad feeling toward them

I think I speak for many when I say that to generalize ALL Chinese arts and dislike them based upon a few is kind of like saying you don't like ANY U.S. states because you visited Florida.

At any rate, I would ask you to take what several have said here to heart, and keep an open mind about the Chinese arts as a whole. There are some that have very "hard' aspects, and some that have very practical applications. I am confident there are a number that would work very well in conjunction with TKD and Kenpo.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 25, 2010)

DocWard said:


> I read the entire thread before making my comment, and it wasn't directed at any one person. In fact, I found myself nodding in agreement with much of what you wrote in the post you reference, at least until my jaw dropped from the sheer number of styles you named.


 
My apologies, I should not have made the assumption :asian:


----------



## DocWard (Feb 25, 2010)

Xue Sheng said:


> My apologies, I should not have made the assumption :asian:


 
Thanks, no apologies necessary.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 25, 2010)

Manny said:


> You are wrong sir!! in fact when I was younger I had contact with Kung Fu, I saw it and took a few lessons and really don't like it period. Yes I saw a couple of movies about kung fu, lyke enter the dragon amoung others (very nice movie BTW). When I was younger and before taking TKD classes I had some exposure with Kung Fu and don't like it period. Maybe I know two or three styles of Kung Fu and not 25 or so lyke you do but even this does not make you an expert.
> 
> I can give you more arguments and can tell you all the things I don't like but it's pointless here, if you dislike TKD good for you, it really does not matter to me.
> 
> ...


Just an opinion, but TKD is Kung Fu.
Sean


----------



## Xinglu (Feb 25, 2010)

Touch Of Death said:


> Just an opinion, but TKD is Kung Fu.
> Sean



More accurately TKD is wushu (&#27494;&#26415, and through hard work, good gongfu (&#21151;&#22827 can be developed.

Gongfu you see, is skill achieved through hard work.

So one could see a TKD person in action and say "Your gongfu is strong/good."  But what was said is not that your style is good, rather that your skill level in said style is good.

In summery:
The wushu of TKD can produce students with strong/good gongfu.  Just like any other form of wushu.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 25, 2010)

Xinglu said:


> More accurately TKD is wushu (&#27494;&#26415, and through hard work, good gongfu (&#21151;&#22827 can be developed.
> 
> Gongfu you see, is skill achieved through hard work.
> 
> ...


I stand corrected.:ultracool
Sean


----------



## DocWard (Feb 25, 2010)

Touch Of Death said:


> I stand corrected.:ultracool
> Sean


 
I sit confused! I'm sure I will figure it out eventually though.

Back on topic, though it has been far too long since I have practiced or studied, but I seem to recall my instructor saying a few techniques and perhaps a Kata come from Hung Gar. As I am planning on getting back into it as soon as I can figure out how to put a few more hours in the day, I will make sure I ask!


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 25, 2010)

DocWard said:


> I sit confused! I'm sure I will figure it out eventually though.
> 
> Back on topic, though it has been far too long since I have practiced or studied, but I seem to recall my instructor saying a few techniques and perhaps a Kata come from Hung Gar. As I am planning on getting back into it as soon as I can figure out how to put a few more hours in the day, I will make sure I ask!


Well, the Koreans claim to have had some variation variation of TKD since the time of Christ, but I would contend that it was longer, and just as in Europe, wave after wave of invaders and hordes, were constantly causing the korean area trouble. With that in mind just as french, english, and nordic things are catagorized as Germanic, Korean martial arts fall under CMA. Debate on the issue is just subjective national stuff.
Sean


----------



## Xinglu (Feb 25, 2010)

Touch Of Death said:


> I stand corrected.:ultracool
> Sean



No worries, like Xue, I get a little uppity when when terms are taken out of context and then linguistically abused.

Ignorance is something we should all strive to transcend, and for the most part, people on MT are dedicated to that, something I really like about this place 

However, it is very frustrating when you here people say I don't like gongfu, when they clearly don't know what they are talking about.  

For example, I might say I don't like care for they type of wushu I studied, however I am greatly impressed by Bruce Lee's gongfu!  That would lead me to look at what kind of wushu he studied, and look at other forms of wushu with similar doctrines.  Going further with the Bruce Lee example, I would have little interest in Cai Li Fo (&#34081;&#26446;&#20315 or Baguazhang (&#20843;&#21350;&#25484 as they would be very circular.  However, Yong Chun (&#35424;&#26149 and Xingyiquan (&#24418;&#24847;&#25331 would probably appeal greatly due to their more linear doctrines.

If we are abusing the Chinese language, all would be "gongfu," yet there are few similarities between the two doctrines! Their tactics and strategies are thusly entirely different.  To experience even one of those arts, gives no basis to judge the other four either.  As the differences between even Bagua and Cai Li Fo are extreme despite their similar doctrine.

Coming back to the original post though, one cannot have a fundamental prejudice against the Chinese Wushu and have a legitimate appreciation for Kenpo, particularly EPAK since the influence is heavy.  To appreciate the merits of one is to appreciate the merits of the other, at the very least, the arts that contributed to influencing Parker.


----------



## DocWard (Feb 25, 2010)

Touch Of Death said:


> Well, the Koreans claim to have had some variation variation of TKD since the time of Christ, but I would contend that it was longer, and just as in Europe, wave after wave of invaders and hordes, were constantly causing the korean area trouble. With that in mind just as french, english, and nordic things are catagorized as Germanic, Korean martial arts fall under CMA. Debate on the issue is just subjective national stuff.
> Sean


 
Interesting point!


----------



## Xinglu (Feb 25, 2010)

double post, sorry!


----------



## Xinglu (Feb 25, 2010)

DocWard said:


> I sit confused! I'm sure I will figure it out eventually though.



Let me attempt to clarify through simplification.

This is as simple as I can make it:

Wushu = Martial Arts

Gongfu = Skill achieved through hard work

A chef could have good gongfu, as could a painter.  It is not exclusive to the MA community.

A Kenpoka could have good gongfu in the wushu of Kenpo...

In fact it would be more proper to just say one had good gongfu in Kenpo since wushu is a vary generic term.  In chinese if you mean a certain style, refer to it by name. But I used that example to show it's english equivalency 

Is that more clear?


----------



## DocWard (Feb 25, 2010)

Xinglu said:


> Let me attempt to clarify through simplification.
> 
> This is as simple as I can make it:
> 
> ...


 
Very much so, thank you! I can be particularly dense on occasion. I think it was the definition of Wushu that threw me.


----------



## dianhsuhe (Feb 25, 2010)

Xinglu said:


> Coming back to the original post though, one cannot have a fundamental prejudice against the Chinese Wushu and have a legitimate appreciation for Kenpo, particularly EPAK since the influence is heavy. To appreciate the merits of one is to appreciate the merits of the other, at the very least, the arts that contributed to influencing Parker.


 
Daniel- At least say "In my opinion one cannot have a fundamental..." I say this because I totally disagree.  I really do not like Wushu and most other Chinese styles where the moves are huge and flamboyant (insert Jet Li movie here>   ) but I have a sincere appreciation for Kenpo.

I also enjoy 9-ball in billiards but have a deep seated dislike for the more common 8 ball game.

I really appreciate Van Gogh's "Cafe at night" but do not like his paintings of flowers.  How is this possible?  How can I appreciate one without the other?  Dunno, but I do...I could go on and on with these awkward analogies but I think you get the point.

Our system has quite a bit of kung-fu influence (tighter circles and less wasted motion) but that does not require me to "appreciate the merits" of the other Chinese styles that do not utilize the tighter circles and a reasonable economy of motion.

Manny-  I am with ya!  I love Kenpo but hate Wushu and if someone wants to tell me that EPAK and Wushu are even remotely similar, I am going to break out my "flask".  LOL


----------



## Manny (Feb 25, 2010)

Touch Of Death said:


> Just an opinion, but TKD is Kung Fu.
> Sean


 
Jajajajaja good one!!! good one. Then I habe been a Kung Fu guy for several years.

Manny


----------



## Xinglu (Feb 25, 2010)

dianhsuhe said:


> I really do not like Wushu and most other Chinese styles...
> 
> Manny-  I am with ya!  I love Kenpo but hate Wushu and if someone wants to tell me that EPAK and Wushu are even remotely similar, I am going to break out my "flask".  LOL




Really?  You dislike Martial Arts?  Then why do you train?

Wushu is not a style, it is a broad term for a wide range of different types of martial arts.

So what you just said was "I love Kenpo but hate martial arts."

You also said, "...if someone wants to tell me that EPAK and martial arts are even remotely similar..."

Do you see how non-sensical that is?

Most Americans have a very myopic view of the term Wushu incorrectly labeling it as a specific style. The National Wushu Team (for china) consists of practitioners who are "experts" in specific styles.  They train for demonstrations and competition, but they are still an amalgam of different arts competing under the same banner.



dianhsuhe said:


> Our system has quite a bit of kung-fu influence (tighter circles and less wasted motion) but that does not require me to "appreciate the merits" of the other Chinese styles that do not utilize the tighter circles and a reasonable economy of motion.


Using the language correctly it would better read "Our system has quite a bit of TCMA influence."

-OR-

"Our wushu has quite a bit of influence from TCMAs who's focus is economy of movement."

Wushu = generic term meaning martial arts.
Gongfu = skill achieved through hard work.

To say a system has gongfu influence is non-sensical.  To say it is influence by certain forms of wushu found in China would make sense.



dianhsuhe said:


> Daniel- At least say "In my opinion one cannot have a fundamental..." I say this because I totally disagree. I really do not like Wushu and most other Chinese styles where the moves are huge and flamboyant (insert Jet Li movie here> ) but I have a sincere appreciation for Kenpo.


Respectfully, I disagree. I was clear and said exactly what I meant.  "To appreciate the merits of one is to appreciate the merits of the other, at the very least, the arts that contributed to influencing Parker."

I said the merits, this does not imply the entire art.  Furthermore, if you appreciate the merits of EPAK, then you appreciate the same merits that are found in CLF since it was a contributor. This in no way implies that one must love CLF.  Just appreciate the merits that are common.  

What appreciating the merits DOES imply is that one cannot have a universal dislike of all TCMA (wushu).


----------



## Manny (Feb 25, 2010)

dianhsuhe said:


> Daniel- At least say "In my opinion one cannot have a fundamental..." I say this because I totally disagree. I really do not like Wushu and most other Chinese styles where the moves are huge and flamboyant (insert Jet Li movie here> ) but I have a sincere appreciation for Kenpo.
> 
> I also enjoy 9-ball in billiards but have a deep seated dislike for the more common 8 ball game.
> 
> ...


 
I feel the same my friend, I like Kenpo karate but don't like wushu.

I don't like chicken period, if you invited me to dinner at your home and the oly thing to eat is chicken I will eat it for don't spect I would have a second plate, however if you invited me to dinner in a Restaurant I won't esat chicken period.

There are people who likes and loves wushu and that's fine, simply I don't like it.

Manny


----------



## Xinglu (Feb 25, 2010)

Manny said:


> I feel the same my friend, I like Kenpo karate but don't like wushu.
> 
> I don't like chicken period, if you invited me to dinner at your home and the oly thing to eat is chicken I will eat it for don't spect I would have a second plate, however if you invited me to dinner in a Restaurant I won't esat chicken period.
> 
> ...



Much better usage! Though wushu means martial art, so to say you don't like the chinese wushu would be more correct.   Because Kenpo and TKD are different kinds of wushu


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 25, 2010)

dianhsuhe and Manny

OK then tell me what Wushu is or point me in the direction of an example?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 25, 2010)

Manny said:


> I feel the same my friend, I like Kenpo karate but don't like wushu.
> 
> I don't like chicken period, if you invited me to dinner at your home and the oly thing to eat is chicken I will eat it for don't spect I would have a second plate, however if you invited me to dinner in a Restaurant I won't esat chicken period.
> 
> ...


 
But does not liking chicken mean yo don't like any protien?

I submit you don't know what wushu is.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 25, 2010)

dianhsuhe said:


> Manny- I am with ya! I love Kenpo but hate Wushu and if someone wants to tell me that EPAK and Wushu are even remotely similar, I am going to break out my "flask". LOL


 
Ever seen Sanda or Police military sanda or San Soo?


----------



## dianhsuhe (Feb 25, 2010)

dianhsuhe said:


> Daniel- At least say "In my opinion one cannot have a fundamental..." I say this because I totally disagree. I really do not like most Chinese styles where the moves are huge and flamboyant whatever those are called (insert Jet Li movie here> ) but I have a sincere appreciation for Kenpo.
> 
> I also enjoy 9-ball in billiards but have a deep seated dislike for the more common 8 ball game.
> 
> ...


 
Daniel-  Please check my above post for any still existing errors and let me know, in the most condescending way possible, how I can improve the post.  

You know exactly what I was writing about, why the arrogant post?  

WoW


----------



## dianhsuhe (Feb 25, 2010)

Almost forgot....When will I see you in class next?


----------



## David43515 (Feb 25, 2010)

Xue Sheng said:


> dianhsuhe and Manny
> 
> OK then tell me what Wushu is?


 
Xue, I feel for you. I teach English as a foreign language all day, every day. But they`re missing the point, so you guys are arguing about two completly different topics.

Wushu and Gungfu are NOT styles of martial arts. "Wushu" is just the Chinese term that means "martial arts". Okinawan Karate, Brazillian Capoeira, Filipino Kali, Muay Thai, TKD, boxing, wrestling, and cowboy-style gunfighting would ALL be termed "wushu" in Chinese.

What Dianhsuhe and Manny are saying isn`t really too different than saying, just an example, "I love being christian (or muslim, or buddhist), but I hate religion." It`s self contradicting.

But getting back to the original question, yeah Parker `s Kenpo was heavily influenced by Chinese styles. He learned Kenpo in Hawaii from William Chow, he was friends with Choy Lay Fut master Lau Bun (NOT a student of, Lau Bun didn`t teach non-chinese period), and I`ve heard lots of old school Kenpo people talk about the Hung Gar connection.


----------



## Xinglu (Feb 25, 2010)

dianhsuhe said:


> Daniel-  Please check my above post for any still existing errors and let me know, in the most condescending way possible, how I can improve the post.
> 
> You know exactly what I was writing about, why the arrogant post?
> 
> WoW



I had no idea what you were writing about as it was unclear in the terms used.  The best I could do was guess and hope I was interpreting you correctly. 

If the correction of misuse and abuse of language is arrogant, then forgive me for attempting to teach you about Mandarin and the proper use of it's terminology.

I assert that I was not being condescending, however if you took offense to my correction then I am curious as to why.  Perhaps you inferred tonality that was not intended?

Perhaps it is that I even presumed to make the correction in the first place?

I'm genuinely curious.



dianhsuhe said:


> Almost forgot....When will I see you in class next?


When I'm medically cleared to go back.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 25, 2010)

Manny said:


> Jajajajaja good one!!! good one. Then I habe been a Kung Fu guy for several years.
> 
> Manny


Yep!


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 25, 2010)

I like Pepsi, Coffee, and Mochas, but I don't like all that caffine. LOL
sean


----------



## dianhsuhe (Feb 26, 2010)

Xue Sheng said:


> dianhsuhe and Manny
> 
> OK then tell me what Wushu is or point me in the direction of an example?


 
No.


----------



## dianhsuhe (Feb 26, 2010)

Xue Sheng said:


> But does not liking chicken mean yo don't like any protien?
> 
> I submit you don't know what wushu is.


 
And I submit that you need to utilize the spell-check function..


----------



## dianhsuhe (Feb 26, 2010)

Xue Sheng said:


> Ever seen Sanda or Police military sanda or San Soo?


 
Yes, I have trained with some San Soo folks, not sure what "Sanda" or "Police Military Sanda" is though.


----------



## dianhsuhe (Feb 26, 2010)

David43515 said:


> Xue, I feel for you. I teach English as a foreign language all day, every day. But they`re missing the point, so you guys are arguing about two completly different topics.
> 
> Wushu and Gungfu are NOT styles of martial arts. "Wushu" is just the Chinese term that means "martial arts". Okinawan Karate, Brazillian Capoeira, Filipino Kali, Muay Thai, TKD, boxing, wrestling, and cowboy-style gunfighting would ALL be termed "wushu" in Chinese.
> 
> ...


 
I have already conceded that I misused the term "Wushu".  But it should have been abundantly clear that I was referring to the chinese styles that utilize big circles.

Not sure why I have to keep explaining this.  I do not like the larger moving chinese systems (Choy Li Fut or similar) but I do like Kempo (Kara-Ho would be an example).

I appear to be just another part of the unwashed masses so I may be a lost cause.


----------



## dianhsuhe (Feb 26, 2010)

Xinglu said:


> I had no idea what you were writing about as it was unclear in the terms used. The best I could do was guess and hope I was interpreting you correctly.
> 
> If the correction of misuse and abuse of language is arrogant, then forgive me for attempting to teach you about Mandarin and the proper use of it's terminology.
> 
> ...


 
Sent you a PM


----------



## David43515 (Feb 26, 2010)

dianhsuhe said:


> I have already conceded that I misused the term "Wushu". But it should have been abundantly clear that I was referring to the chinese styles that utilize big circles.
> 
> Not sure why I have to keep explaining this. I do not like the larger moving chinese systems (Choy Li Fut or similar) but I do like Kempo (Kara-Ho would be an example).
> 
> I appear to be just another part of the unwashed masses so I may be a lost cause.


 
Please don`t take it personally. And if you felt like everyone was piling on, I`m sorry.

I know that I`ve written things at times that I thought were perfectly clear (because I knew what I meant), but later when other people read the post they got something completely different out of it. They thought I was saying something 180 degrees different. If that`s the case, I`m sorry.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 26, 2010)

dianhsuhe said:


> Yes, I have trained with some San Soo folks, not sure what "Sanda" or "Police Military Sanda" is though.


 
Then this statement



dianhsuhe said:


> Manny- I am with ya! I love Kenpo but hate Wushu and if someone wants to tell me that EPAK and Wushu are even remotely similar, I am going to break out my "flask". LOL


 
is without merit since you have no idea what some CMA styles are



dianhsuhe said:


> And I submit that you need to utilize the spell-check function..


 
Cool, you can&#8217;t answer the question because you don&#8217;t know what you are talking about so you throw in an insult, close your account and run away ... isn't that special.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 26, 2010)

Folks, I might be about to give the vulgarity filters a bit of a workout.

I actually was thinking about this entire thread last night, which is IMO rather sad. But here is my final thought on the issue

Frankly I don't care if anyone likes CMA or not nor do care if someone, that is part of kenpo/kempo (however it is spelled) or EPAK, wants to believe that CMA and any of the plethora of styles that make up CMA (aka Wushu) have no similarities, no matter how delusional that may be. I am not going to waste anymore time in futile attempts to educate anyone.

Bottom-line is that if you buy a BMW 6 series and discover you don't like it I honestly do not think that gives you the background and knowledge to state all European cars are bad. I also do not feel that if you are driving a Chevy Camaro that you can honestly believe and state that that Camaro has no similarities to a BMW. But if that is what you want to believe then so be it, I wont take you seriously but I am sure that doesnt matter either. 


Well that wasn't so bad, I only had to edit it 6 times before posting and the vulgarity filters, in the end, didn't have to do anything at all

Later


----------



## DocWard (Feb 26, 2010)

I don't think your attempts were futile in every case, or at least my case. I can honestly say I learned something, and appreciate it.

While I am "aware" of CMA, I am not by any stretch what I would consider knowledgeable about them beyond some of the basics. For me, any chance to learn something about them, especially at a basic basic level, is a good thing.


----------



## Manny (Feb 26, 2010)

Please correct me if I am wrong afther this idea storm:

1.-I love Kung Fu, cause I work hard and put all my efforts in what I like MA for example.

2.-I love Wushu, because wushu is the meaning of martial arts in Chinese.

3.-I don't like Chinese Martial Arts in particular y like some korean martial arts, i like some japanese martial arts.

I like protein but not the one from chicken ok?

Manny


----------



## Xinglu (Feb 26, 2010)

At least it seems that most on this thread don't seem to be taking a correction of linguistic terminology as a personal assault.  Thank you for keeping open minds.

Manny, Kenpo without the influence of various TCMAs would still look much like how Mitose taught it, which (from hearing the accounts of those older and wiser then me) appeared much more like Karate. 

Considering that you like Kenpo, I bet you would also like or at least appreciate yong chun. I make this guess for several reasons.  

1. It shares Kenpo's doctrine on fast and relaxed hand strikes, thus giving it blinding speed.

2. Like Kenpo the strategies revolve around taking the center-line and then "pouncing for the kill."

3. It is huge on checks and traps which play into the strengths of any Kenpoka.

4. Your expressed admiration for the gungfu of Bruce Lee.  Bruce Lee's style was based primarily upon Yong Chun and is the basis to much of his approach to the other martial arts he blended into his personal fighting method.

Remember folks, Kenpo is not done growing/evolving.  It should never be.  We have the responsibility as Kenpoka to keep open minds to the arts around us and adapt what works and makes our Kenpo better.

My guess is that if Parker was still around today he would have continued to make changes and developed an extensive anti-grappling curriculum which would have taken him to teaching principles from various TCMA with experience in this, to include including more jujutsu then what already exist.  And he would have done it without compromising the core concepts and doctrines of Kenpo.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 26, 2010)

dianhsuhe said:


> Our system has quite a bit of kung-fu influence (tighter circles and *less* *wasted motion*) but that does not require me to "appreciate the merits" of *the other Chinese styles that do not utilize the tighter circles and a reasonable economy of motion*.


 
I see that jamey (dianhsuhe) decided to close his account here and I am sorry to see that. I think he had a lot to offer the discussions and it's too bad he has decided to not stick around. 

I don't want to take personal shots at Jamey, so please take this in stride. My following comments are not meant to be a personal assault on him, but I felt compelled to comment on his choice of language above, mainly the parts I have bolded.

These comments about tigher circles that have less wasted motion, and a more reasonable economy of motion and whatnot, I find them troubling. It really comes across as passing judgement over something that he may not have much real knowledge about. I don't have a problem with him not liking certain Chinese systems, particularly the ones that use big movements. But I don't think he can pass judgement over them and make claim to them having wasted motion and stuff. There are solid reasons for training with the big circles. They develop certain skills, tho in real life application of the technique it may not be delivered with such large movements. This big movements train for a certain kind of delivery and power that drives it. Once you get skilled with it using the large movements, you can deliver the same power with smaller movements. But you cannot have the same success with the smaller movements if you haven't progressed thru training the big movements. So, it's really a training method more than an actual technique, tho the line between the two concepts can be blurred and they are one and the same as well. Not sure if I'm making sense.

At any rate, I guess I just want to say, it's fine to not like something for whatever reason. But don't judge something that you may not understand. I hate to say this out loud, but I notice this trend among kenpoists. 

It's OK to realize something falls outside of your own personal experience and you simply don't understand it.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 26, 2010)

Manny said:


> Please correct me if I am wrong afther this idea storm:
> 
> 1.-I love Kung Fu, cause I work hard and put all my efforts in what I like MA for example.
> 
> ...


There are northern systems of Kung Fu that look just like the Korean systems just across the border; because, that's where the Koreans got their system, in the first place. Ed Parker, knowing both how to box and do Judo, wanted to teach a flavor of Wushu, or Kung Fu, or what have you that could be both effective against boxing and judo.
Sean


----------



## Manny (Feb 26, 2010)

Xinglu said:


> At least it seems that most on this thread don't seem to be taking a correction of linguistic terminology as a personal assault. Thank you for keeping open minds.
> 
> Manny, Kenpo without the influence of various TCMAs would still look much like how Mitose taught it, which (from hearing the accounts of those older and wiser then me) appeared much more like Karate.
> 
> ...


 
Thank you for the clip, it seems this sifu has a lot of training and can be said he master what he does, I have never seen a....mmmmm Wushu?? like this, it seems all ahapenes petty quick at close quaretes combat (CQB is a word we use so much about shooting a pistol defensively). As long as I see the use of the wooden dummy is great for develop accuracy and speed. I read the bruce Lee trained below the wing of Yip Man and he taught Bruce Win Chung, yo said Bruce based his style in Yong Chung can you carify me this? As long as I know Bruce studies Win Chung and he developed a system called Jeet Kun Do.

There is something I have to say, Kenpo even having certain Chinese Martial Arts influency is very good, I really like it and feel is a nice MA to learn for SD pourposes, that's why I am having Kenpo karate classes.

Manny


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 26, 2010)

Manny said:


> There is something I have to say, Kenpo even having certain Chinese Martial Arts influency is very good, I really like it and feel is a nice MA to learn for SD pourposes, that's why I am having Kenpo karate classes.
> 
> Manny


You say it like its a liability. LOL
Sean


----------



## Xinglu (Feb 26, 2010)

Manny said:


> I read the bruce Lee trained below the wing of Yip Man and he taught Bruce Win Chung, yo said Bruce based his style in Yong Chung can you carify me this? As long as I know Bruce studies Win Chung and he developed a system called Jeet Kun Do.



Yong Chun = Wing Chun.

Yong Chun is Mandarin, the official language of china.
Wing Chun is Cantonese one of the many languages in China which appears to be related to the Tibetan language.

Another TCMA you might have some appreciation for it's CQC (close quarter combat) skills would be Xingyiquan, and here is a Xingyiquan and Baguazhang countering each other (Bagua is circular, xingyi linear).  Do you see some similarities between Xingyiquan, Yong Chun, and Kenpo?  I even see some Baguazhang, however that is more likely due to EPAKS CLF influence.


----------



## MattJ (Feb 26, 2010)

Flying Crane said:


> Once you get skilled with it using the large movements, you can deliver the same power with smaller movements. But you cannot have the same success with the smaller movements if you haven't progressed thru training the big movements.


 
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but your statement appears to be incorrect to me. "Big movement" training is _not_ necessary to make "small movement" work correctly. Boxing and Wing Chun do not use "big movement", and work very well. Even in grappling terms, things like Wally Jay's (small circle) style work as well or better (IMHO). 

Can you clarify?


----------



## Xinglu (Feb 26, 2010)

Flying Crane said:


> I see that jamey (dianhsuhe) decided to close his account here and I am sorry to see that. I think he had a lot to offer the discussions and it's too bad he has decided to not stick around.


I agree.



Flying Crane said:


> There are solid reasons for training with the big circles. They develop certain skills, tho in real life application of the technique it may not be delivered with such large movements. This big movements train for a certain kind of delivery and power that drives it. Once you get skilled with it using the large movements, you can deliver the same power with smaller movements. But you cannot have the same success with the smaller movements if you haven't progressed thru training the big movements. So, it's really a training method more than an actual technique, tho the line between the two concepts can be blurred and they are one and the same as well. Not sure if I'm making sense.


Once again I concur, even the most, linear of systems utilize circles to enhance their linear techniques. I have even seen them train beginners to use larger motions until they could finally make it so small that it looked like a flick of the wrist!

Even in CLF, in the beginning you are taught to do Jong (a type of uppercut) or a Sow Chui (a type of cross that hits with the forearm) really big until you work out the mechanics of your core and how to throw the strike from your dan tien.  This is a process that takes years.  But when it is achieved the motion looks more like a whip then like big circular motions.  It is easy to watch beginners and even some intermediate levels students and walk away thinking the system uses impractical movement. 

Something else to consider, no Sifu in china is going to train you to have great gongfu in the first few years of study.  Most of these beginning years are spent working very elementary things to set up a proper foundation for later.  With the idea being that after 7-8 years of study you develop combat gongfu through technical precision. TCMA are not for the impatient (I would say the same about some of the TJMA too) and most in china do not have a formal rank structure (though many of the schools out here have adopted it).

For example, my Xingyi/Bagua Shifu has two "ranks" if that is what you want to call them.  Those who have his blessing to teach, and those who don't yet.  We do not wear sashes or uniforms we just train hard.  The same with my Taijiquan Shifu, (not the same guy).  I only have two uniforms, my Kenpo Gi and my BJJ Gi.  Since I no longer attend TSD classes (I don't count that one!).

Kenpo, if approached with this same level of patience can achieve the same level of gongfu, perfect the basics, which are never initially introduced the same way a BB is expected to do it.

Anyways, I hope my ramble was clear, I know I got a little off topic there, but I thought it help illustrate the difference in mindset that has IMHO been lost in some Kenpo schools (not that it is limited to Kenpo, it seems to be the case all over America, and probably the world too).


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 26, 2010)

MattJ said:


> Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but your statement appears to be incorrect to me. "Big movement" training is _not_ necessary to make "small movement" work correctly. Boxing and Wing Chun do not use "big movement", and work very well. Even in grappling terms, things like Wally Jay's (small circle) style work as well or better (IMHO).
> 
> Can you clarify?


 
I guess maybe the better way to state is is that according to the theory and foundation upon which these systems are built, Choy Lay Fut and Tibetan White Crane as good examples, this is how it works.  The power is based on a very large pivot and rotation of the body, sometimes twisting of the torso tho I don't want to say that too strongly because it might imply an injury-prone movement and it is not that.  At any rate, power is generatedy by rotating the body and building a huge amount of striking potential at the end of the arc, in the fist.  The big movements really capitalize on this, and it engrains the type of delivery into the muscle memory.  In some ways, it can be seen as being exaggerated, but like I said, it's a training tool and not necessarily how you would want to deliver it for real.  Altho given the right circumstances you could really land some heavy blows with it.  At any rate, once your body had really internalized this method, developed thru the use of these big movements, you can then shorten the movement while still getting the same kind of power.  This works because the movement is initiated with the feet bracing against the ground and driving up thru the torso, not in the hands that are swinging out there.  Understanding how to initiate the torso removes the necessity of using the big movements.

I don't know much about boxing, but I do have some experience with wing chun.  The development of power is different, not relying on the same kind of pivot and rotation.  My experience with wing chun is that power is developed largely by squeezing it out thru short, explosive movements, tho the training of this power can be slow, drawn out movements.  In a way, it's kind of the same thing, but with a different concept and origin of where the power comes from.  Long, drawn out movements (as practiced in Siu Nim Tao) turn into fast, explosive, powerful short range punches.

Now, getting back to the pivot and rotation that I was describing above, I know that many systems do this also, and I won't deny it.  It's a foundational part of things like the Reverse Punch found in many systems.  But, from my experience, systems like Tibetan White Crane and (as far as I can tell) Choy Lay Fut, make this a heavier focus and use a more "exaggerated" movement than I've seen anywhere else, in order to develop this.  In White Crane, which I study, we focus on that pivot and rotation in just about every single movement that we do.  The first thing that a beginner would learn is the pivot.  Just stand there and get the pivot right, the whole body moving in unison, beginning at the feet, to drive the pivot.  Later, a more advanced and probably more useful version of the pivot is learned where the feet root into the ground to drive the pivot which manifests primarily in the hips and waist, paying particular attention to the stances to be properly grounded for driving the power.

So, we use big movements to develop the technique, but once you are skilled with that, your actual delivery can be with a much smaller movement.

I'm not going to say that it's better than other methods, but it works well for us and we do deliver tremendously powerful, even frighteningly powerful, strikes.  Once I began working these strikes on a heavy bag, I felt they were significantly stronger than before I began studying this method.  Maybe my prior instruction was deficient, I dunno.  But I have seen a real difference once I began to learn White Crane, that's just my own personal experience.

So, what about other systems that use small movements, other that what I discussed above?  Can't really comment too much about them since I don't know much.  I don't know have any experience with Small Circle JJ, for example.  I'm familiar with how we use the pivot from my Tracy Kenpo background, and we actually have a few things in there that have some similarity with the Crane methods.  I personally feel that those items ought to get a heavier load of the attention in order to really develop their potential.  In some ways, this is connected to our earlier discussion of basics, and stances.  Taking the time to get the stances just right, and the timing and body-connection with the pivots, can make a huge difference.  My Crane training gives me a bit of a different perspective than most kenpo folks, so I see things a bit differently, but there ya go.

My comment about Jamey's comments was just that, the big movements in arts like Choy Lay Fut are there for a reason, and it's important to understand what the reason is, before making a judgement about them.

This is something that can be difficult to describe in writing.  It really needs to be seen and felt in order to understand it.  Hope I managed to get something across.  I'll leave it at that for now, otherwise I might end up getting a bit long-winded and it might not really clear anything up.  If you've got some more questions on it, I'll try and clarify some points.


----------



## MattJ (Feb 26, 2010)

Xinglu said:


> Something else to consider, no Sifu in china is going to train you to have great gongfu in the first few years of study.


 
Again, maybe I'm misunderstanding, as I know that martial arts skill in any style takes time. But aren't some CMA arts like Wing Chun specifically designed to impart skill quickly?

EDIT to add that my questions are coming from a general MA-use standpoint, and not a strictly CMA one.


----------



## MattJ (Feb 26, 2010)

Flying Crane said:


> This is something that can be difficult to describe in writing. It really needs to be seen and felt in order to understand it. Hope I managed to get something across. I'll leave it at that for now, otherwise I might end up getting a bit long-winded and it might not really clear anything up. If you've got some more questions on it, I'll try and clarify some points.


 
No, I get where you're coming from now. My questions were more general-use, and not style-specific. Thanks for the reply.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 26, 2010)

MattJ said:


> Again, maybe I'm misunderstanding, as I know that martial arts skill in any style takes time. But aren't some CMA arts like Wing Chun specifically designed to impart skill quickly?
> 
> EDIT to add that my questions are coming from a general MA-use standpoint, and not a strictly CMA one.


 
I don't personally know if Wing Chun was designed with quick useage in mind.  However, in my own experience with wing chun, it seemed like it could be useful fairly quickly.  However, I will qualify that by saying that I think a really high level of ability still takes a long time.  But a certain level of practical useage seemed to come fairly quickly, in my experience.  I was measuring this based on my success in chi sao with my classmates, which may or may not be a valid yardstick, and may or may not have validity outside of that specific group.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 26, 2010)

MattJ said:


> No, I get where you're coming from now. My questions were more general-use, and not style-specific. Thanks for the reply.


 
my pleasure.


----------



## Xinglu (Feb 26, 2010)

MattJ said:


> Again, maybe I'm misunderstanding, as I know that martial arts skill in any style takes time. But aren't some CMA arts like Wing Chun specifically designed to impart skill quickly?
> 
> EDIT to add that my questions are coming from a general MA-use standpoint, and not a strictly CMA one.



Not really. Not these days.  In times past when one could dedicate full days to becoming a great warrior, yes.  Keep in mind Xingyiquan was the style taught to the imperial spearmen, and was intended to make great fighters in fast amount of time.  To them "fast" meant 6 months of training every day for 8-12 hours a day. 


Going three times a week for 2 hour classes will take you years to develop powerful gongfu.  Just like any other MA out there.

Also keep in mind that the Chinese idea of "fast" (as in time) is not the same as use here in the west.  The chinese think in decades, some of us in the west are lucky enough to think in days.   Which is yet another fundamental philosophical difference between TCMAs and other MAs.

Even a western Boxer, MMAist, or Muay Thai fighter train for years before being considered good enough to take on skilled opponents.

Will they be able to take out an skilled punk on the street in 3-6 months?  Maybe, depending on how they are training.  Another skill combatant?  No way.


----------



## MattJ (Feb 26, 2010)

Xinglu said:


> Not really. Not these days. In times past when one could dedicate full days to becoming a great warrior, yes. Keep in mind Xingyiquan was the style taught to the imperial spearmen, and was intended to make great fighters in fast amount of time. To them "fast" meant 6 months of training every day for 8-12 hours a day.
> 
> 
> Going three times a week for 2 hour classes will take you years to develop powerful gongfu. Just like any other MA out there.


 
Yes, understood, and I mentioned the same thing earlier. But I was referring to arts trained to the same intensity and for the same length of time. Some will yeild results faster, IMHO.



> Even a western Boxer, MMAist, or Muay Thai fighter train for years before being considered good enough to take on skilled opponents.


 
Sure, but skilled people in some other styles........? Depends. 



> Will they be able to take out an skilled punk on the street in 3-6 months? Maybe, depending on how they are training. Another skill combatant? No way.


 
Again, I think it depends on how the others train. Are we talking about the same intensity and length of time training? That's what I meant.


----------



## Xinglu (Feb 26, 2010)

MattJ said:


> Yes, understood, and I mentioned the same thing earlier. But I was referring to arts trained to the same intensity and for the same length of time. Some will yeild results faster, IMHO.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Once again, that skill is relative. A two different people who have trained for 30 years in different arts at the same level of intensity will probably be at the same level.  I think that how quickly a novice is able to reach a suitable level of SD proficiency in todays world is irrelevant, weather it is 6 months or 9 makes little difference these days.

The results may seem faster, however they are working on opposite ends.  One spends 3-6 months on perfecting stances to root their power, the other focuses on strikes and locks for the first 3-6 months.  One my be better fighter in 6 months, but in a year, they should be equal.  See the difference?


----------



## MattJ (Feb 26, 2010)

Xinglu said:


> Once again, that skill is relative. A two different people who have trained for 30 years in different arts at the same level of intensity will probably be at the same level.
> 
> I think that how quickly a novice is able to reach a suitable level of SD proficiency in todays world is irrelevant, weather it is 6 months or 9 makes little difference these days.


 
Can't agree with you there at all, unless you are referring to _all_ MA practice being for sport/entertainment/health purposes? If someone wants to learn SD for SD purposes, then speed in utility is a significant element, yes? I certainly did not get into MA training for any purpose other than to learn how to stop people from hurting me, and that attitude continues to inform my practice. 



> The results may seem faster, however they are working on opposite ends. One spends 3-6 months on perfecting stances to root their power, the other focuses on strikes and locks for the first 3-6 months. One my be better fighter in 6 months, but in a year, they should be equal. See the difference?


 
Not exactly, sorry. The *should be*, but they often _aren't_, IME. The level of resistance in training seems to be the biggest factor in utility as far as I have seen.


----------



## Xinglu (Feb 26, 2010)

MattJ said:


> Can't agree with you there at all, unless you are referring to _all_ MA practice being for sport/entertainment/health purposes? If someone wants to learn SD for SD purposes, then speed in utility is a significant element, yes? I certainly did not get into MA training for any purpose other than to learn how to stop people from hurting me, and that attitude continues to inform my practice.
> 
> 
> 
> Not exactly, sorry. The *should be*, but they often _aren't_, IME. The level of resistance in training seems to be the biggest factor in utility as far as I have seen.



Since your throwing it out there, what is your experience with TCMA? And I'm sorry that your experience has led you to some poor instruction.  A good instructor will always put out better students, regardless of the art in question.  Since you said that we were assuming equal intensity and equal training time, I also assumed equal quality of instruction.  It seemed fair.

It takes a very low skill set to stop a "common thug" from hurting you.  That can be achieved with very little training.  In fact, I could teach a person Pi Chuan ( just one posture/movement) and then give them 20 applications of that movement.  In a week they would be able to defend themselves against most common thugs. So if that was your only goal, then I'm sure that by now you have achieved a suitable skill set to defend yourself against most common would be assailant's.

My training in CLF, Xingyi, Bagua, Taiji, and BJJ has all been against actively resisting opponents. And very physically taxing. However, my Kenpo and TSD tended not to be.  Yet even the latter two will prepare you to fend off a would be assailant in a relatively short amount of time.

So if you are wanting to defend yourself against you common street criminal you need one skill set which tends to be very low in comparison to the skill set needed to ward of another trained opponent.  Chances are, your average burglar/robber/car jacker aren't trained.


----------



## Xinglu (Feb 26, 2010)

Furthermore, even someone who has trained in Yong Chun for 5 years, is still far from having great gongfu in Yong Chun.  Especially when compared to the gongfu of those doing it 10, 20, 30 or more years.  This holds true for any MA.


----------



## MattJ (Feb 27, 2010)

Xinglu said:


> Since your throwing it out there, what is your experience with TCMA?


 
What do you mean I'm "throwing it out there"? In what sense? I was not referring to TCMA specifically, as I mentioned earlier. Thus, my experience with CMA is irrelevant, not to mention that I have already stated earlier in this thread that my formal experience with it is limited. I have had exposure through long-term sparring partners, one of whom did Tien Sem Pai (sp?) and another did animal-style, and so forth. 



> And I'm sorry that your experience has led you to some poor instruction.


 
What makes you say that? I don't recall even mentioning my training at all. Veiled insults are a pretty poor debate tactic. BTW, you never did answer my question from the previous post.



> A good instructor will always put out better students, regardless of the art in question. Since you said that we were assuming equal intensity and equal training time, I also assumed equal quality of instruction. It seemed fair.


 
I suppose that is a fair point - I should have said "average" or "common" instead of "equal", since "equal" rarely exists. 



> It takes a very low skill set to stop a "common thug" from hurting you.


 
You'll have to remind me what a "common thug" is. Anyone can be dangerous, and to over-estimate your own skills is not a good idea.



> That can be achieved with very little training. In fact, I could teach a person Pi Chuan ( just one posture/movement) and then give them 20 applications of that movement. In a week they would be able to defend themselves against most common thugs. So if that was your only goal, then I'm sure that by now you have achieved a suitable skill set to defend yourself against most common would be assailant's.


 
In a _week?_ That seems......unlikely, to me. I can't think of _any_ art - CMA, kenpo, or BJJ - that can prepare someone for SD in one week. Simply learning timing and distancing takes longer than that, no matter what you study. 



> My training in CLF, Xingyi, Bagua, Taiji, and BJJ has all been against actively resisting opponents. And very physically taxing. However, my Kenpo and TSD tended not to be. Yet even the latter two will prepare you to fend off a would be assailant in a relatively short amount of time.


 
Well, at the very least, you will have to admit that your Tai Chi training is unusual if it involved a lot of resistance. Hell, even in China it's done mostly for exercise! You can't really use an exception to prove a rule.



> So if you are wanting to defend yourself against you common street criminal you need one skill set which tends to be very low in comparison to the skill set needed to ward of another trained opponent. Chances are, your average burglar/robber/car jacker aren't trained.


 
Gosh, you make it sound so easy! LOL.


----------



## Xinglu (Feb 27, 2010)

MattJ said:


> What do you mean I'm "throwing it out there"?


 Simple, you said IME, meaning in my experience.



MattJ said:


> In what sense? I was not referring to TCMA specifically, as I mentioned earlier. Thus, my experience with CMA is irrelevant, not to mention that I have already stated earlier in this thread that my formal experience with it is limited. I have had exposure through long-term sparring partners, one of whom did Tien Sem Pai (sp?) and another did animal-style, and so forth.


  Okay, it seemed as though you implied that you had some experience in TCMA as a student.  I just wanted to clarify what experience you were referring too when you said, "In my experience." 




MattJ said:


> What makes you say that? I don't recall even mentioning my training at all. Veiled insults are a pretty poor debate tactic. BTW, you never did answer my question from the previous post.


 There was no insult veiled or otherwise. It seemed from your post that you found the approaches of some TCMA to be ineffective.  I assumed this was due to your direct exposure, and thus it must have been poor quality of instruction.  A bad instructor can make an great style ineffective.  It was a genuine statement not meant to imply anything.



MattJ said:


> Thus, my experience with CMA is irrelevant...


  Considering we were talking about CMA, I disagree.



MattJ said:


> You'll have to remind me what a "common thug" is. Anyone can be dangerous, and to over-estimate your own skills is not a good idea.


  I speak from direct experience in using my knowledge to defend myself.  None of the people that I have had to defend myself against (meaning failed to avoid the situation, or talk the situation down) had much skill at all.  Generally speaking, those with training are not seeking fights.



MattJ said:


> In a _week?_ That seems......unlikely, to me. I can't think of _any_ art - CMA, kenpo, or BJJ - that can prepare someone for SD in one week. Simply learning timing and distancing takes longer than that, no matter what you study.


 Once again, this was an example of one movement that can be applied in 20 different ways. Trained for 40 hours, it is effective.  Most students attending a regular class would not perform the reps or get 40 hours of training in 7 weeks of classes.  (consider an average of three one hour classes a week) and an average of 45 minutes solo practice a night/ 4 nights a week (this is generous practice time since MANY MAist don't practice on their own outside of class anymore). By sucessfully defend I mean stop the attack and get away/call for help.  One week, SD Seminar can easily accomplish this.  We're not talking about going into a ring against other trained fighters.  





MattJ said:


> Well, at the very least, you will have to admit that your Tai Chi training is unusual if it involved a lot of resistance. Hell, even in China it's done mostly for exercise! You can't really use an exception to prove a rule.


 I disagree, I go to China every year to train with my Shigong (Shifu's Shifu) and there are a great many Chinese that still use Tajiquan for SD and combatives.  I have also competed in very large tournaments over there where is is used combatively (sparring as well as moving step push-hands [which is much like sumo ])[/QUOTE]





MattJ said:


> Gosh, you make it sound so easy! LOL.


It's not, gongfu, by nature and definition requires hard work to develop.


----------



## Xinglu (Feb 27, 2010)

MattJ said:


> BTW, you never did answer my question from the previous post.


If that question is the following:



MattJ said:


> Can't agree with you there at all, unless you are referring to all MA practice being for sport/entertainment/health purposes?


Then my answer is simple:  
All martial arts are for health and wellness.  If you are attacked an cannot defend yourself, where is your health and wellness?

Furthermore, if you do not enjoy your training, then you won't do it long, therefore it must be entertaining to the long term student at some level, otherwise they wouldn't do it.

Even sport type MAs can prepare you for SD.  Boxing, Muay Thai, Greco-Roman Wrestling, Sanda/San Shou, TKD, and sport Karate can all be effective against those who are trying to hurt you.

There is no superior MA.  It is all about the practitioner (read mindset) and instructors (read training).


----------

