# Lack of lower body protection in Kung Fu?



## Twombles_62 (Jun 2, 2007)

From what i have noticed, in my very brief time training in Hung Gar, is that there is very little blocking concerned with the lower half of the body. Especially the groin region. I understand that traditionally, most of the attacks were to the body as kung fu was more 'honorable.' Considering that most fighters on the streets will kick to the groin the first opportunity they see does this make Hung Gar, and Kung Fu in general impractical?


----------



## Sukerkin (Jun 2, 2007)

I can't speak to Hung Gar as I trained in Lau Gar but I'm thinking that perhaps a little more time in harness, so to speak, will reveal that defences are there after all.

For example, many of our groin protection techniques were integral with changes of stance and body posture, a deflection being a part of the movement for good measure.

As ever with style specific questions like this tho', the stock fora answer of "Ask your sensei" is the one that applies.  After all, we're well meaning in our replies but we may be leading you astray .


----------



## qi-tah (Jun 2, 2007)

Twombles_62 said:


> From what i have noticed, in my very brief time training in Hung Gar, is that there is very little blocking concerned with the lower half of the body. Especially the groin region. I understand that traditionally, most of the attacks were to the body as kung fu was more 'honorable.' Considering that most fighters on the streets will kick to the groin the first opportunity they see does this make Hung Gar, and Kung Fu in general impractical?


 
I don't know about Hung Gar, but the ba gua i am learning (Cheng style) has stacks of attacks to the legs - sweeps, rakes, knee strikes etc. I've seen a few hand strikes to the groin in various forms too, including one in the short Liu her form called "Ringing the dragon's bell" (!!) So it makes sense that there would be various defences and escapes from those attacks as well, generally, as Sukerkin says, as footwork and transitions in stance, with the limbs only coming into play as part of another counterattack.


----------



## Nebuchadnezzar (Jun 2, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> I can't speak to Hung Gar as I trained in Lau Gar but I'm thinking that perhaps a little more time in harness, so to speak, will reveal that defences are there after all.
> 
> For example, many of our groin protection techniques were integral with changes of stance and body posture, a deflection being a part of the movement for good measure.
> 
> As ever with style specific questions like this tho', the stock fora answer of "Ask your sensei" is the one that applies. After all, we're well meaning in our replies but we may be leading you astray .


 
From what little I know, Lau Gar is Hung Gar and vice versa.  If you look at the forms they are both based on the Five Animals and come from Shaolin.  They are for lack of better words, cousins.

Anyone with more knowlege than me care to elaborate?


----------



## HG1 (Jun 2, 2007)

Twombles_62 said:


> EDIT - From what i have noticed, in my very brief time training in Hung Gar, is that there is very little blocking concerned with the lower half of the body. Does this make Hung Gar, and Kung Fu in general impractical?


 
 Your question earns you my favorite quote "_There's a method to the_ _madness"_. You've been training Hung-Ga for a 'very brief' time so not all the answer will be immediately apparent, give it some more time. 

As for protecting the lower half of the body - legs block legs.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 2, 2007)

Twombles_62 said:


> From what i have noticed, in my very brief time training in Hung Gar, is that there is very little blocking concerned with the lower half of the body. Especially the groin region. I understand that traditionally, most of the attacks were to the body as kung fu was more 'honorable.' Considering that most fighters on the streets will kick to the groin the first opportunity they see does this make Hung Gar, and Kung Fu in general impractical?


 
*HUH???*







 WARNING MINOR RANT TO FOLLOW

I don't know about Hung Gar but I believe you should spend a little more time training any style of Kung Fu before you start labeling anything impractical based on a false pretense such as "most of the attacks were to the body as kung fu was more 'honorable." Kung fu fights are down right nasty if they go all out and there is nothing off limits. Look at any Qinna or Shuaijiao and you will see that whole "honorable" thing go right out the window. And almost ALL CMA styles have a little of both in them. 

Knee kicks are big in MOST kung fu styles as are groin kicks. Heck even Taiji blocks the lower body, but mostly with legs and kicks to block incoming kicks. And it attacks the lower body too. Xingyiquan also is BIG on Leg kicks, especially to the ankle and the knee. Bagua, Long Fist, Sanda, Tongbeiquan, etc are no different they all protect the lower body as well as attack it. GO off and fight a Xingyi guy thinking he won't attack the lower body and it WILL get you hurt.. really bad. Or for that matter go off and spar just about any CMA stylist and you will get the same resault. 

I am not sure exactly what you are after here but you really need to do a bit more research before you start labeling entire arts based on a little experience in one southern style. 

I could do that same with Karate, but it would be VERY wrong but I was INCREDIBLY unimpressed by what I learned in the month (1 whole month) I spent in a Villari Shaolin Kempo Karate school many years ago. But Im not going off saying Japanese styles are ineffective based on that nor am I saying Karate is ineffective based on that because a month in ONE style does not make me an expert or a judge.

RANT OVER


----------



## Nobody (Jun 2, 2007)

Twombles_62 said:


> From what i have noticed, in my very brief time training in Hung Gar, is that there is very little blocking concerned with the lower half of the body. Especially the groin region. I understand that traditionally, most of the attacks were to the body as kung fu was more 'honorable.' Considering that most fighters on the streets will kick to the groin the first opportunity they see does this make Hung Gar, and Kung Fu in general impractical?


 
Well to start Hung Gar, does not approach fighting based on how honorable you are. It bases fight on the view what would happen in the street using this.  Most application in Kung Fu's are more based on how to apply this to harm someone fast an not try to develop so much speed or power like karate will do with one technique.  Kung Fu's tend to focus on have a very combine both power an speed are need to be effective in the fight.  Here is a simple logic Karate focus on fighting in the school an tells them to never fight for fun cause it is dangerous, most kung fu's say never fight with your fellow brother for it is dangerous in the school but once the student leaves the school an is no longer under the teacher there often are still tournament that kill an maim still to this day in China. Also, not done based on Honor!  Fighting is based on how the corporal soul feels in that person not on how someone else thinks of them.  Kung Fu's from my experience is more based on how to street fight.

Though my instructor said not to fight in the school he did not mean do not play.  So, as any student wanting to test the idea we regularly kick punched and because we learned how to do proper things like took certain types of hit medicine we were able to fight very close to reality.  Unlike Karate they have removed most methods of rending flesh an fajing practices. 

At least in my opinion the applied is much easier to see an get from kung fu than a karate system this is probably why there is a lot of bunkia in karate an no need for it in kung fu.


----------



## mrhnau (Jun 2, 2007)

Xue, could this be a result of his self-proclaimed limited time in Hung Gar? I assume given enough time he will be learning those things?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 2, 2007)

mrhnau said:


> Xue, could this be a result of his self-proclaimed limited time in Hung Gar? I assume given enough time he will be learning those things?


 
Could be, could be I am overly sensitive when it comes to blanket statements too, particullarly about the style (General - Kung Fu) I have been doing for so long


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jun 2, 2007)

Twombles_62 said:


> From what i have noticed, in my very brief time training in Hung Gar, is that there is very little blocking concerned with the lower half of the body. Especially the groin region. I understand that traditionally, most of the attacks were to the body as kung fu was more 'honorable.' Considering that most fighters on the streets will kick to the groin the first opportunity they see does this make Hung Gar, and Kung Fu in general impractical?


Perhaps dropping your guard is impractical.
Sean


----------



## Nobody (Jun 3, 2007)

Twombles_62 said:


> From what i have noticed, in my very brief time training in Hung Gar, is that there is very little blocking concerned with the lower half of the body. Especially the groin region. I understand that traditionally, most of the attacks were to the body as kung fu was more 'honorable.' Considering that most fighters on the streets will kick to the groin the first opportunity they see does this make Hung Gar, and Kung Fu in general impractical?


 
The thing is you need to figure that out for yourself an study for a bit longer an see if it has no lower blocks.


----------



## Tames D (Jun 3, 2007)

Xue Sheng said:


> *HUH???*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Good rant. And one I agree with totally.


----------



## Nebuchadnezzar (Jun 3, 2007)

Breath Xue, breath. I know he transgressed, but he's not ready to receive the Rod of Correction over the head.  At least not this time.


----------



## Rabu (Jun 3, 2007)

I think you got a decent answer to your question.

Think of the body, when upright fighting, as divided at the waist.  Legs below, hands above. 

Thats really general.  But for upright fighting, the legs defend the waist and down better than dropping a hand or arm.

Positioning and timing will also offer protection and create openings.  Striking to joints and kicking to points on the legs and lower abdomen are normal in the practices I have seen and practiced.

Reality of fighting changes many dynamics from the classroom training regimen.  Being grabbed, falling down, slipping and losing balance...practice what you are doing for a while.  Make a list of what your questions are.  See if you have an older brother or sister in the school who can offer you some guidence as you progress and when you have doubts about techniques.

Remember to make your questions honest, sincere and respectful.  Best of luck in your training.


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jun 4, 2007)

1) &#21151;&#22827; (Gongfu - "Kung fu") is not a style, nor even a system, but the whole extent of martial traditions in the third largest country in the world. Styles are many and varied. The principles of fighting will not be so different in any region where fighting commonly occurs, assuming that the conditions are similar and that both societies have "evolved" to the same niveau.

2) Modern day MA teaching is lacking in many ways, but it cannot be said that the original styles were also lacking (Unless 3 and 5 apply).

3) Half of Chinese MAs are over-exaggerated and were created mostly to scare off attackers, rather than actually fight them.

4) The original founders of the arts first mastered the foundation training, afterwhich they could generally kick **** with or without the proper techniques.

5) Many styles of martial arts were never all that great to begin with and survived only because of the hype and legend that surrounded them.

6) Hand to hand combat (Sanda) was the last possible choice for any fighter. It was the most low regarded of 18 fighting disciplines that all warriors were to study and aim to master.

7) Modern China has less fighters than other regions. Fighting is frowned upon and studying worshipped. Honour is when your paycheck is higher than your neighbours and you have enough money to bribe the government into having more children and finally moving to another country. There are fighters, but they are by no means the pinacle of Chinese gongfu and have more or less copied other countries' styles because of ESPS (Eastern Sick Patient Syndrome). The rest of them are practising with flimsy swords and martial dancing, which is not to be confused with combat.

8) As far as I am concerned, protecting your balls is nothing more than footwork.


----------



## clfsean (Jun 4, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> 8) As far as I am concerned, protecting your balls is nothing more than footwork.


 
And there it is folks... the truth is now out! 

Move your feet, turn your waist, protect the jewels.

It really gets no simpler than that & in Southern CMA is a basic that is never overlooked or underworked. Move your feet to attack. Move your feet to defend. Move your feet to evade.

Just move your feet...


----------



## pete (Jun 4, 2007)

Xue Sheng said:


> *...* Heck even Taiji blocks the lower body,


 curious to why this would be worded so?  in my reading it implies that if Tai Chi is doing it, certainly all arts would be... sorta like Tai Chi is the least common denominator, or the absolute minimum in terms of martial application.  if i implied too much with this, please explain...

i know that my Tai Chi experience has expanded the usage and improved the application of fighting technques learned in advanced levels of 'other arts', while also exposing new methods within striking, kicking, grappling, and takedown maneuvers. i may be fortunate in this regard, yet i do not think that i am alone in my experience.

pete


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 4, 2007)

pete said:


> curious to why this would be worded so? in my reading it implies that if Tai Chi is doing it, certainly all arts would be... sorta like Tai Chi is the least common denominator, or the absolute minimum in terms of martial application. if i implied too much with this, please explain...
> 
> i know that my Tai Chi experience has expanded the usage and improved the application of fighting technques learned in advanced levels of 'other arts', while also exposing new methods within striking, kicking, grappling, and takedown maneuvers. i may be fortunate in this regard, yet i do not think that i am alone in my experience.
> 
> pete


 
Curious that of all the things said in this post and the topic of this post that you pick out this out statement from me to question.

And speaking of your taiji "expanded" experience I am still waiting for an answer as to what that is exactly is and what style you train.

And if you did actually train and understand real taiji there is not much expansion necessay, just a thought


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jun 4, 2007)

clfsean said:


> And there it is folks... the truth is now out!
> 
> Move your feet, turn your waist, protect the jewels.
> 
> ...


 
And here I was with the impression that it was common sense. =P


----------



## pete (Jun 4, 2007)

Xue Sheng said:


> Curious that of all the things said in this post and the topic of this post that you pick out this out statement from me to question.


 pretty much another non-response, huh? without clarifying your words, i can only imply your intent from my initial read.



Xue Sheng said:


> And speaking of your taiji "expanded" experience I am still waiting for an answer as to what that is exactly is and what style you train.


 your web-fu skills are stong, as evidenced on this and other fora. the answers you are looking for are out there if YOU do the work. 



Xue Sheng said:


> And if you did actually train and understand real taiji there is not much expansion necessay, just a thought


 here again, you are implying without knowing, and using innuendo and passive aggressive behavior to flame. you obviously do not know me, what i do and how i train, and obviously don't care enough to find out. yet, you make an unfounded assumption based on your lack of knowledge. 

if you get a chance, you still may want to explain your position to the title of this thread and original question relative to why you feel the need to say that 'even tai chi' doesn't lack lower body protection...

pete


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 4, 2007)

pete said:


> pretty much another non-response, huh? without clarifying your words, i can only imply your intent from my initial read.
> 
> your web-fu skills are stong, as evidenced on this and other fora. the answers you are looking for are out there if YOU do the work.
> 
> ...


 
And yet you still do not answer my question as a matter of fact you have never answered any question I have asked (although admittedly I have not asked you that many) as to what style of taiji you actually train...and I have asked at least twice now....that is if you do in fact train taiji and to be honest I doubt you do. And if you do I can only guess you have combined your "Karate" I see you are again claiming to train in your profile with it to make your "expanded" version that would in fact not be taiji at all now would it?

Now as to the work to find this info, to be honest you are not worth the time, since I do fully believe you are a troll based on your "contributions" to many posts in the CMA section and I see no reason to feed into your issues any longer nor are you worth my time explaining anything to. 

See ya pete, respond if you will but I have nothing further to say to you.


:feedtroll


----------



## Sukerkin (Jun 4, 2007)

Chaps, if you don't get along, isn't it better just not to 'talk' to each other, or correspond via PM, rather than do your 'laundry' out in public?

After all, one of the base tenets of almost every internet fora is that 'personal attacks/remarks' are not in line with the code of conduct that we all agree too when we sign up.


----------



## pete (Jun 4, 2007)

Xue Sheng said:


> And yet you still do not answer my question as a matter of fact you have never answered any question I have asked (although admittedly I have not asked you that many) as to what style of taiji you actually train...and I have asked at least twice now....that is if you do in fact train taiji and to be honest I doubt you do. And if you do I can only guess you have combined your "Karate" I see you are again claiming to train in your profile with it to make your "expanded" version that would in fact not be taiji at all now would it?
> 
> Now as to the work to find this info, to be honest you are not worth the time, since I do fully believe you are a troll based on your "contributions" to many posts in the CMA section and I see no reason to feed into your issues any longer nor are you worth my time explaining anything to.
> 
> ...


 
If i were a troll, perhaps i'd be asking you 3 questions. but i don't i ask one, and again one that is on topic with this particular thread and relavant to the overall tone. if your choice of phrasing was poor, be a man and admit to it.  if i mis-read or mis-interpreted, please clarify.  if i was on the mark, and that is what you meant, please explain so that i can further contrast my positive experiences with what you may be lacking.

i do not see why i should have to answer to your inquistion, or unfounded doubts regarding my training, my art, and how i teach... yes i teach and i have students that are members on this very board. 

Surprising, for someone with such accusations, I for one have never seen pictures or video clips of YOU in action.  best you can do is quote from others, droll on and on about your peaks and valleys and switching of styles, teachers, ad nauseum.  but with all that, i've never made any unfounded accusations relative to your practice, or lack there of.  even if i did have doubts that you ever actually climbed away from your keyboard to practice ANY of the arts you obviously have read about and watched on youtube,  well, i'd keep them to myself as we never met, i do not know you and any conclusions would be purely supposition and presumption.  

I am not presumptuous. Are you?  what facts do you have to back up any of the accusations you are slandering me here with in your written word? 

Or are you just projecting your own insecuritues, and lack of training onto a name on a forum?  maybethe whole troll-calling thing is the pot calling the kettle black. huh?

So you can answer these questions, or answer the question i first raised on topic to the thread... or put up or shut up.  if you want to stand as grand inquisitor to those you do not know, at least build yourself as a basis for being in such a position. share with us some pics, videos, etc of YOU.

my guess is that you will shut up rather than put up, but i'd rather that you prove me wrong.

pete


----------



## pete (Jun 4, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> Chaps, if you don't get along, isn't it better just not to 'talk' to each other, or correspond via PM, rather than do your 'laundry' out in public?
> 
> After all, one of the base tenets of almost every internet fora is that 'personal attacks/remarks' are not in line with the code of conduct that we all agree too when we sign up.


 
yeah, i don't get it.  i ask a question in line with the topic and he comes back with false accusations and slander...


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 4, 2007)

pete said:


> If i were a troll, perhaps i'd be asking you 3 questions. but i don't i ask one, and again one that is on topic with this particular thread and relavant to the overall tone. if your choice of phrasing was poor, be a man and admit to it. if i mis-read or mis-interpreted, please clarify. if i was on the mark, and that is what you meant, please explain so that i can further contrast my positive experiences with what you may be lacking.
> 
> i do not see why i should have to answer to your inquistion, or unfounded doubts regarding my training, my art, and how i teach... yes i teach and i have students that are members on this very board.
> 
> ...


 
Well I guess I lied, I will respond one more time.

Still no answer...hmmm.. interesting.

Nice use of defensive accusation and attacks against ones manhood, not very taiji now is it? However you over estimate your importance to me in such that I would feel the need to prove anything to you and prove my point as well as reinforce my beliefs about you at the same time.

There are a lot of people that say they teach taiji and have students when in fact not teaching real Taiji at all.

Now to do the moderators a favor.

I know I once told you that you were going to be the first person on my ignore list and I regret I did not keep that promise, you are however the second 

Bye.


----------



## pete (Jun 4, 2007)

well, i've already done the mods a favor and reported your post as an unfounded accusation and direct personal attack, i hope the mods return the favor by taking appropriate disciplinary action.

i will do the other board members and readers a favor by extending to them an invitation to PM or email me for information, weblinks, pictures, and soon to be uploaded video clips of me relative to my tai chi practice.  MT members can base their judgement of me on this material, and if there is any interest or opportunity to hook up in-person.

i do NOT hold out that same invitation to you (xue sheng) at this time, as you have shown lack of respect for me and the art you claim to practice.

finally, i will do myself a favor and leave this thread as-is.  i will not pursue an answer regarding this particular thread, as obviously in your last 3 posts you Failed to address it, prefering to make me and my practice the topic of discussion. I will NOT however put you on IGNORE. I will NOT play PEEK-a-BOO with your posts, just in case you choose to again disrespect me and the art i love.

pete


----------



## Jade Tigress (Jun 4, 2007)

_*ATTENTION ALL USERS

*_*Please keep the conversation polite and respectful. If there is a member whose posts you do not wish to read, feel free to put that member on your ignore list. Continuning to post in this manner could result in the issuance of an Infraction Card, suspension, or ban.

Pamela Piszczek
MT Super Moderator 
*_

_


----------



## exile (Jun 4, 2007)

Twombles_62 said:


> From what i have noticed, in my very brief time training in Hung Gar, is that there is very little blocking concerned with the lower half of the body. Especially the groin region. I understand that traditionally, most of the attacks were to the body as kung fu was more 'honorable.' Considering that most fighters on the streets will kick to the groin the first opportunity they see does this make Hung Gar, and Kung Fu in general impractical?



I'd like to go back to the OP and make explicit something that seems to have been implicit in a number of the responses. If, as you say, _most fighters on the streets will kick to the groin the first opportunity they see_, and if, as you seem to be assuming, _most of the attacks [in Hung Gar] were to the body as kung fu was more 'honorable'_, then the conclusion&#8212;assuming it were really true that HG didn't teach ways to defend the lower body&#8212;would have to be that Hung Gar existed simply for `dueling' purposes between Hung Gar practitioners (since only under those conditions would an MA form be effective in spite of not protecting the lower body from what `most fighters on the street' will do)! Now how likely is that scenario in the case of a (possibly extremely) old traditional, family-lineage MA form? Does it make any sense at all? Certain modern developments of particular TMAs under pressure from sport competition may have developed systems of artificial dueling-style combat, but is there any reason to believe that this would have been the case in people who had the difficult life of country villagers of China in the past several centuries? Under those conditions, people are unlikely to have the luxury of developing elaborate dueling-style martial sport-type systems, I would think.

So you have to take the default to be that HG was an all-business, serious, street-effective MA, and _look_ for the ways in which lower body defense might have been effective. There are all kinds of ways, as people have suggested, to ensure that a strike at the lower body does not connect, apart from upper body blocks; actually, the latter is probably one of the less effective approaches in general to protecting the lower body...


----------



## dmax999 (Jun 4, 2007)

pete said:


> curious to why this would be worded so? in my reading it implies that if Tai Chi is doing it, certainly all arts would be... sorta like Tai Chi is the least common denominator, or the absolute minimum in terms of martial application. if i implied too much with this, please explain...


 
The implication here I believe was that Tai Chi done correctly, using the "minimum" to defend yourself you would not need to protect the groin. I disagree if that is what you are meaning. When doing Tai Chi it is best to target specific "weak spots" on opponents and that is one of the best ones. Seperate foot would be a perfect example. Because that is one of your targets it is also one of the parts of yourself you guard. There are not necessarly any "low blocks" showing this, but it is full of techniques to pull opponents off balance or move your feet/legs in ways to not let it be a target. I believe most of Northern Shaloin styles are very similar in this manner.

As for it was never a target for "honorable fights" I don't buy that for a second. Kung-Fu was not developed for tournaments, but for the battlefield where you would get killed if you fought someone better. Why would you ever limit what you allow yourself to do in that case. Some styles may have "bread it out" because it is not a useful strike in tournaments or competitions, but I assure you it was there at one point or still is and you just are not taught it for whatever reason.

As a side note... the version of Wing Chun I did in the past, that would be your primary target if it presented itself.  We practiced specific kicks just for that for hours at a time on a bag rigged up horozontally.  We didn't target it for damage, it was a speed kick designed to make oppenents hands suddenly reach down after being kicked allowing us to have a clear target to their face to finish the fight.


----------



## Em MacIntosh (Jun 6, 2007)

Low defense isn't just about the groin.  I find I'm usually tripped or kicked from behind and rarely attacked face-on.  To put one of your legs at the mercy of two of his is a bad idea.  I'm assuming we're talking about more of a snap kick to whip the sack than a field goal.  The snap kick is harder to defend against with stance but is still the most viable option rather than using your hands which have their own problems to worry about.


----------

