# Material arts and tricking



## Knevelsvej

Hi

I have a kid which have been doing material for many years now.

He combine it with tricking, and try to spread the interest for materials art using youtube. 

I like the combination - not for fighting, but for shows. 

Example:





Chanel:
Lukas VOL

Do any of you have your own YouTube channel?

Best Regards

K


----------



## Xue Sheng

His athleticism is impressive, but to be honest it is nothing new, it is pretty much Modern Wushu that is found in the majority of Martial arts competitions in China


----------



## Buka

Tricking with a stick does not Material Arts make.....or, can cacography lead to the disambiguation of the human popsicle?

Inquiring minds want to know.


----------



## wab25

Before I got into martial arts, I thought the cool flashy stuff (trick stuff) was incredible and where it was at. As I got into martial arts, I learned that most of the cool flashy stuff only actually works in movies. Lately I have been rethinking a bit.

I have been recalling my soccer playing days. Every coach I had, made us do a bit of ball juggling (keeping the ball in the air, with everything except hands and arms). Every one of them had us spend some time learning fancy dribbling patterns and every one of them wanted us to dribble the ball everywhere we went. Doing these drills and exercises made us very familiar with the ball. I learned how it behaved, how to touch it, how to spin it, how to remove spin how to catch it... And I wasn't even that good at the juggling / dribbling. I got a lot from it that I would not have gotten any other way. 

Now, there was always these guys that were amazing at the fancy dribbling and the juggling. They spent a ton of time practicing it. But, that didn't always translate to you wanting that guy on your team. The game of soccer is a lot bigger than ball handling skills. If you do not know where you need to be, and where the ball needs to be, it does not matter if you can put the exact spin you want on it. However, if you do know where you need to be and where the ball needs to be, the more touch you have with the ball, means you can be much more effective on the field. 

If you want to be a ball juggler, thats what you need to practice. If that is all you practice and you try to play soccer, you will quickly become a liability to your team. So, what is the right balance to practicing ball juggling verses learning the game of soccer? All my coaches, used the juggling to warm us up before practice and fancy dribbling to cool us down after practice... and made us dribble the ball every where went between practice.

At this point in my training... I think that is about right for martial arts. Doing some of the flashy, fancy stuff can help you learn things, and get a better feel for things. If you want to be a "street effective" martial artist, there are some things you can learn and perfect through some of the fancy stuff. But I think that fancy stuff should be as a part of a quick warm up or cool down and an "in between practice type of thing." Your main practice should be effective, practical basics of your art. (unless your goal is to become part of one of the fancy, flashy demo teams... martial arts juggling does take a lot of practice, skill and commitment... it just is not the game of soccer)


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Knevelsvej said:


> I like the combination - not for fighting, but for shows.



I feel like this part of the OP is being missed


----------



## drop bear

Still looks more practical that a lot of martial arts training.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Just watched the video..looked pretty cool IMO.


----------



## Knevelsvej

Hi

Thanks for your time and reply. 

Just to clarify - not all are in to tournaments or MMA fights. I my sons case he's more into pushing limits for his physical abilities, and have never chosen Material arts to be able to kick *** on the streets or in the ring.

There are by no means anything wrong with tournaments - there are just also other thing in material arts than that......

He's like the material arts training, for compared with weight lifting, he's training the whole body including the "small" muscles in a harmonic way.

Best Regards

K


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Knevelsvej said:


> Hi
> 
> Thanks for your time and reply.
> 
> Just to clarify - not all are in to tournaments or MMA fights. I my sons case he's more into pushing limits for his physical abilities, and have never chosen Material arts to be able to kick *** on the streets or in the ring.
> 
> There are by no means anything wrong with tournaments - there are just also other thing in material arts than that......
> 
> He's like the material arts training, for compared with weight lifting, he's training the whole body including the "small" muscles in a harmonic way.
> 
> Best Regards
> 
> K


Just a quick note, K - you've consistently misspelled "martial arts" as "material arts". Your English is pretty good overall, so I thought you might want to know.


----------



## Headhunter

Knevelsvej said:


> Hi
> 
> I have a kid which have been doing material for many years now.
> 
> He combine it with tricking, and try to spread the interest for materials art using youtube.
> 
> I like the combination - not for fighting, but for shows.
> 
> Example:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chanel:
> Lukas VOL
> 
> Do any of you have your own YouTube channel?
> 
> Best Regards
> 
> K


Good on him. This isn't my type of thing but respect for him for doing it


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Headhunter said:


> Good on him. This isn't my type of thing but respect for him for doing it


Definitely more than I can do in that concept.


----------



## Headhunter

gpseymour said:


> Just a quick note, K - you've consistently misspelled "martial arts" as "material arts". Your English is pretty good overall, so I thought you might want to know.


Yeah first I thought it was a typo then I thought he was talking about something completely different lol


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Headhunter said:


> Yeah first I thought it was a typo then I thought he was talking about something completely different lol


Well, at least he wasn't posting about "marital arts". That's a whole different evening.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Knevelsvej said:


> have never chosen Material arts to be able to kick *** on the streets or in the ring.


You don't need to train MA to kick someone's ***. You train MA so others cannot kick your ***.

For example, someone tries to

- punch your head 20 times and miss all punches.
- kick your body 20 times and miss all kicks.
- take you down 20 times and you can still standing.
- mount on top of you and end with you mount on top of him.
- ...

When I was 5, a hung Mongolian girl always took me down, mounted on top of me, and punched on my head daily. I started to train MA since then so I would never allow any girl to mount on top of me for the rest of my life.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Kung Fu Wang said:


> You don't need to train MA to kick someone's ***. You train MA so others cannot kick your ***.
> 
> For example, someone tries to
> 
> - punch your head 20 times and miss all punches.
> - kick your body 20 times and miss all kicks.
> - take you down 20 times and you can still standing.
> - mount on top of you and end with you mount on top of him.
> - ...
> 
> When I was 5, a hung Mongolian girl always took me down, mounted on top of me, and punched on my head daily. I started to train MA since then so I would never allow any girl to mount on top of me for the rest of my life.


Only if that's your reason to train. People have different reasons for training, and some actually do train for the purpose of 'kicking people's a**'


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

kempodisciple said:


> Only if that's your reason to train. People have different reasons for training, and some actually do train for the purpose of 'kicking people's a**'


This is why we have online discussion. People all express their different opinions. There is no right or wrong but different.

I taught Taiji to a group of old people. Before I taught them a move, I would explain the application first. One old guy asked me, "Do you expect us to fight in our age?" My answer to them was the MA application is the only guideline that can keep the MA on the right track. Without it, MA can be changed beyond recognition.

MA can be trained for

1. combat,
2. performance,
3. health,
4. self-cultivation, inner peace, ...

No matter what's your purpose to train MA, you still have to hold your fist the right way, punch/kick the right way, and ...


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This is why we have online discussion. People all express their different opinions. There is no right or wrong but different.
> 
> I taught Taiji to a group of old people. Before I taught them a move, I would explain the application first. One old guy asked me, "Do you expect us to fight in our age?" My answer to them was the MA application is the only guideline that can keep the MA on the right track. Without it, MA can be changed beyond recognition.
> 
> MA can be trained for
> 
> 1. combat,
> 2. performance,
> 3. health,
> 4. self-cultivation, inner peace, ...
> 
> No matter what's your purpose to train MA, you still have to hold your fist the right way, punch/kick the right way, and ...


If they aren’t training for combat, the “right way” might be quite different. Once combat effectiveness isn’t the aim, smooth motion or fluid grace might be more important.


----------



## Kinetic Anomaly

gpseymour said:


> If they aren’t training for combat, the “right way” might be quite different. Once combat effectiveness isn’t the aim, smooth motion or fluid grace might be more important.



"If they aren't training for combat ... " you kick their *** and then move on with the combat training. Then they can teach their grandkids and children some manners after a year of it, and probably beat you up in a group or something too. That's a good thing to teach old people actually: Mob beatings. A group of elderly can kung pow a mugger or young rooster that way.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Kinetic Anomaly said:


> "If they aren't training for combat ... " you kick their *** and then move on with the combat training. Then they can teach their grandkids and children some manners after a year of it, and probably beat you up in a group or something too. That's a good thing to teach old people actually: Mob beatings. A group of elderly can kung pow a mugger or young rooster that way.


I'm not sure what this has to do with my post, actually.


----------



## pdg

gpseymour said:


> posting about "marital arts". That's a whole different evening





Kung Fu Wang said:


> I started to train MA since then so I would never allow any girl to mount on top of me for the rest of my life



Oh dear, I appear to have wandered into this thread with _totally_ the wrong head on...


----------



## Gerry Seymour

pdg said:


> Oh dear, I appear to have wandered into this thread with _totally_ the wrong head on...


Then you'll fit right in. Welcome to Martial Talk (or "Marital Talk", sometimes).


----------



## Swanson

Looks cool to me


----------



## KenpoMaster805

awesome tricking im gonna do kali stick tricking on my tournament this year on showmanship


----------



## Claire3kr

I used to do tricking when I was in middle and high school for fun, and I'd throw in some kickboxing-like moves into the mix at times. People said it looked badass

I like what he's doing! Tell him to keep it up!


----------



## Professor Random

Knevelsvej said:


> Hi
> 
> I have a kid which have been doing material for many years now.
> 
> He combine it with tricking, and try to spread the interest for materials art using youtube.
> 
> I like the combination - not for fighting, but for shows.
> 
> Example:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chanel:
> Lukas VOL
> 
> Do any of you have your own YouTube channel?
> 
> Best Regards
> 
> K


I was actually captivated more by his video editing skills :') 

Still some cool stuff.  I think we all wish we could do some of that stuff.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Professor Random said:


> I was actually captivated more by his video editing skills :')
> 
> Still some cool stuff.  I think we all wish we could do some of that stuff.



Not me. I've had a life long passion for martial arts, but I've never had any interest at all in gymnastics.


----------



## Professor Random

Dirty Dog said:


> Not me. I've had a life long passion for martial arts, but I've never had any interest at all in gymnastics.


Well, I don't think you'd complain if you could do a standing backflip lol


----------



## Dirty Dog

Professor Random said:


> Well, I don't think you'd complain if you could do a standing backflip lol



Except I'd never waste the time and energy learning to do so.

A few years ago, we had some silly kid come by the dojang for one of the free classes. He had lots of stories about his training and his plans for the future. And he thought tricking was just Da Bomb. He particularly liked running up a wall and flipping off it. I said I thought doing that was a good way to get hurt. He did it again. When he landed, my foot was in front of his totally exposed face. He was also fond of those big spinning turns (like the silly 720 stuff). I stepped in while he was spinning in the air and did nothing but cover up and bump into him. Splat. Down he goes.
Gymnastics are fine and dandy. They're not martial arts.


----------



## Jaeimseu

Dirty Dog said:


> Except I'd never waste the time and energy learning to do so.
> 
> A few years ago, we had some silly kid come by the dojang for one of the free classes. He had lots of stories about his training and his plans for the future. And he thought tricking was just Da Bomb. He particularly liked running up a wall and flipping off it. I said I thought doing that was a good way to get hurt. He did it again. When he landed, my foot was in front of his totally exposed face. He was also fond of those big spinning turns (like the silly 720 stuff). I stepped in while he was spinning in the air and did nothing but cover up and bump into him. Splat. Down he goes.
> Gymnastics are fine and dandy. They're not martial arts.



I don’t think I’d consider learning a new skill a waste of time and energy. If the martial arts standard is only what’s really good in a fight, I’d say we waste our time a lot. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Dirty Dog

Jaeimseu said:


> I don’t think I’d consider learning a new skill a waste of time and energy. If the martial arts standard is only what’s really good in a fight, I’d say we waste our time a lot.



There is a continuum of usefulness, with "really useful" on one end and "stupid" on the other. Feel free to spend your time learning any part of it you like. My comment was in reply to the statement that we "all" wish we could do this stuff. And the answer is no, some of us really do not.
It doesn't bother me if you want to do backflips. But I personally have better things on which to spend my limited training time.
And if you try to show off with them in a MA setting, I have no problem demonstrating why backflips are not martial arts.


----------



## Martial D

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When I was 5, a hung Mongolian girl always took me down, mounted on top of me, and punched on my head daily. I started to train MA since then so I would never allow any girl to mount on top of me for the rest of my life.



That really sucks for Mrs.Wang.


----------



## dowz

Dirty Dog said:


> Except I'd never waste the time and energy learning to do so.
> 
> A few years ago, we had some silly kid come by the dojang for one of the free classes. He had lots of stories about his training and his plans for the future. And he thought tricking was just Da Bomb. He particularly liked running up a wall and flipping off it. I said I thought doing that was a good way to get hurt. He did it again. When he landed, my foot was in front of his totally exposed face. He was also fond of those big spinning turns (like the silly 720 stuff). I stepped in while he was spinning in the air and did nothing but cover up and bump into him. Splat. Down he goes.
> Gymnastics are fine and dandy. They're not martial arts.



i hope the kid isn't hurt by flying straight into a leg. I think tricking is like the demonstrations aspects of Martial arts, and it could serve to increase interest. different facets of MA


----------



## JowGaWolf

kempodisciple said:


> I feel like this part of the OP is being missed



I think so too.  I was actually happy that he was honest about that and didn't try to make it into something that it wasn't.


----------



## Dirty Dog

dowz said:


> i hope the kid isn't hurt by flying straight into a leg.



Unlike the kid, I have enough skill and control that there was no contact with the kick. Just the clear opportunity to completely flatten him if I'd wanted to do so.



> I think tricking is like the demonstrations aspects of Martial arts, and it could serve to increase interest. different facets of MA



Tricking is a lot of things, but it's not martial arts.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Tricking can be _based on _martial arts, and I can see where a martial art (or, more accurately, martial arts training) could include some (either for fun, or for the sake of learning some new ways to control the body, with no direct application). But tricking, in and of itself, is not part of martial arts IMO.


----------



## JowGaWolf

gpseymour said:


> Tricking can be _based on _martial arts, and I can see where a martial art (or, more accurately, martial arts training) could include some (either for fun, or for the sake of learning some new ways to control the body, with no direct application). But tricking, in and of itself, is not part of martial arts IMO.


Personally I think of Martial Arts along the similar lines as Dirty Dog.   But I understand and accept that the term Martial Arts often includes things that I wouldn't consider as a martial arts.    For me it's just a issue with the definition of Martial. If we look up the definition of of Martial, we will see that there's nothing about "Tricking" that would fit that definition of Martial.

I also think people get the wrong definition of Art as it applies to Martial.  People tend to look at the Art portion as an creative artistic performance.   The best definition of Art in terms of Martial Arts is this one - "4. A skill at doing a specified thing, typically one acquired through practice."   source: art | Definition of art in English by Oxford Dictionaries

This is something that seems to have always existed with martial arts (the fighting arts)





Boxing
Wrestling
Cowboys
Soldiers
Warriors

have all fascinated cultures from an artistic and creative non-fighting performance that is used to represent the (real fighting).  All have made their way into movies and theater.  I have grown over the years because what is happening is that my skill sets are becoming something that's rare and will eventually be more valuable than those used for performance and entertainment. 

I'm one of the few (in comparison to all martial artists) that would fit in a bucket labeled "Practitioner of the Lost Art of Fighting."

Edit:  I'm not saying that martial arts can't be other things.  For me it's only one type of thing, but I accept that my view and understanding of Martial Arts is not how everyone sees it.  I have one path for me and see the paths that others take.  But we both call it a Path


----------



## drop bear

Dirty Dog said:


> Unlike the kid, I have enough skill and control that there was no contact with the kick. Just the clear opportunity to completely flatten him if I'd wanted to do so.
> 
> 
> 
> Tricking is a lot of things, but it's not martial arts.



Unless you rate athleticism as a martial skill.


----------



## JowGaWolf

I would also like to highlight.  
Martial arts  is now starting to be known as Martial Combat in an effort to separate it from Performance Martial Arts.  There is an acknowledgement of the different perspective of Martial arts.  Sort of like Karate Combat.


----------



## Dirty Dog

drop bear said:


> Unless you rate athleticism as a martial skill.



Ballerinas are both flexible and extremely fit. I not worry in the slightest that I'm going to get beat up by a ballerina.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

gpseymour said:


> But tricking, in and of itself, is not part of martial arts IMO.


When I was young, I loved to jump off from the roof top and landed on the ground. I asked my CMA teacher how to reduce the shock during landing. My teacher told me that I had to do forward flip. Why the forward flip can reduce the shocking during landing, I still don't have scientific proof for it.

Should this be part of the MA training? It's good skill to have in order to escape from fat cops chasing.


----------



## Brian King

LOL Master Ken and tricking


----------



## JowGaWolf

Kung Fu Wang said:


> My teacher told me that I had to do forward flip. Why the forward flip can reduce the shocking during landing, I still don't have scientific proof for it.


Forward flip or forward roll?


----------



## drop bear

Dirty Dog said:


> Ballerinas are both flexible and extremely fit. I not worry in the slightest that I'm going to get beat up by a ballerina.



There is a reason football players do ballet.

Has to do with athleticism.

I mean how many times have we heard the argument that the reason a pro MMA fighter can beat a TMAer is because he is more athletic. Yet where do we prioritize this sort of training?

Apparently this game changing ability isn't even martial arts.

It is amazing what we can convince ourselves of isn't it.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> Unless you rate athleticism as a martial skill.


That makes it something that can contribute to MA ability, but doesn’t really make it part of MA - unless we also include kettlebell, jogging, push-ups, and box jumps as MA skills. I’d willingly include those in a list of potentially useful training tools, but wouldn’t classify them as part of MA, per se.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

JowGaWolf said:


> Forward flip or forward roll?


Forward flip in the air as the 1st guy did in this clip. The forward roll is like the break fall. That's easy to understand. But why forward flip can reduce the landing shocking?


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> That makes it something that can contribute to MA ability, but doesn’t really make it part of MA - unless we also include kettlebell, jogging, push-ups, and box jumps as MA skills. I’d willingly include those in a list of potentially useful training tools, but wouldn’t classify them as part of MA, per se.



That's fine but then you can't use athleticism as a reason someone may be a better martial artist.

I mean if you are purely looking at martial arts in terms of efficiency. (And for self defence you would want to be leaning in that direction.) You really need to rate your training in terms of what wins fights.

Running, jogging, push ups, kettle bells win fights.

So if athleticism is a major factor in winning. And you are not engaging in acquiring athleticism. You are not training martial arts.

If people are banging on about the individual not the style and the style is not training the individual.

Then there is your disconnect.


----------



## JowGaWolf

Kung Fu Wang said:


> But why forward flip can reduce the landing shocking?


Does it really reduce the landing shock?  Have you ever tried it or asked someone who does forward flips?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

JowGaWolf said:


> Does it really reduce the landing shock?  Have you ever tried it or asked someone who does forward flips?


I could jump off from the roof top. But I was afraid to add flip into it. My high jump gave me a big trouble once. One time I got on the ski lift, one of my ski fell down. It was about 15 feet high. I jumped down but my hard ski boots gave me big trouble. My left leg nerve got damaged. It took me 3  years to recover. Not sure if flip could prevent that problem from happening.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> That's fine but then you can't use athleticism as a reason someone may be a better martial artist.
> 
> I mean if you are purely looking at martial arts in terms of efficiency. (And for self defence you would want to be leaning in that direction.) You really need to rate your training in terms of what wins fights.
> 
> Running, jogging, push ups, kettle bells win fights.
> 
> So if athleticism is a major factor in winning. And you are not engaging in acquiring athleticism. You are not training martial arts.
> 
> If people are banging on about the individual not the style and the style is not training the individual.
> 
> Then there is your disconnect.


No disconnect. Training athleticism improves the ability to use the skills that are MA. Strength is not MA, but it makes MA more effective. Ditto for other general traits like agility, speed, etc. Mind you, there's no stark line between them. Much of what I do when teaching is designed to help general mobility and agility. That's inherent to the overall system, as is a strength component (which the MA training teaches them to use properly). But Turkish get-ups aren't MA, any more than squats (or whatever leg strength exercise they use) is Olympic long jumping.

I think it's a useful to draw a distinction between what is "martial arts" and what is "training for martial arts", but probably only from an intellectual standpoint and as a matter of understanding. In practice, strength training should come into MA training, as should cardio training, etc. And maybe, from time to time, something that resembles tricking.


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> No disconnect. Training athleticism improves the ability to use the skills that are MA. Strength is not MA, but it makes MA more effective. Ditto for other general traits like agility, speed, etc. Mind you, there's no stark line between them. Much of what I do when teaching is designed to help general mobility and agility. That's inherent to the overall system, as is a strength component (which the MA training teaches them to use properly). But Turkish get-ups aren't MA, any more than squats (or whatever leg strength exercise they use) is Olympic long jumping.
> 
> I think it's a useful to draw a distinction between what is "martial arts" and what is "training for martial arts", but probably only from an intellectual standpoint and as a matter of understanding. In practice, strength training should come into MA training, as should cardio training, etc. And maybe, from time to time, something that resembles tricking.



I think the distinction cripples you.I get the impression that people think strong athletic people with a fighting spirit are created through magic.It is the individual not the system.

I mean if you want to train martial arts for its cultural benifit then fine. Turkish get ups art not martial arts. If you are looking to crack skulls then they definateley are.


----------



## drop bear

JowGaWolf said:


> Does it really reduce the landing shock?  Have you ever tried it or asked someone who does forward flips?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> I think the distinction cripples you.I get the impression that people think strong athletic people with a fighting spirit are created through magic.


I've never gotten that impression from anyone. 



> I mean if you want to train martial arts for its cultural benifit then fine. Turkish get ups art not martial arts. If you are looking to crack skulls then they definateley are.


Again, if we go back to the definition of "martial arts":

martial (1st definition at martial | Definition of martial in English by Oxford Dictionaries): "Relating to fighting or war."
art: (4th definition at art | Definition of art in English by Oxford Dictionaries): "A skill at doing a specified thing, typically one acquired through practice."
That means martial arts is about the skills acquired through practice that are related to fighting. A Turkish get-up is distantly related to fighting - skill at it is not, really. The result of it (the strength) is what's related. I can use other methods to develop that skill, and I'm not changing my MA approach - just a shift in my training. I don't see anything in that distinction that cripples anyone. It's when people buy into the marketing that strength and size are irrelevant in MA (they aren't and never have been) that they cripple themselves.

Mind you, people don't all have the same kinds of thought processes - you and I tend to approach things very differently in our minds. A distinction that is intellectually useful to me may be so much rubbish in your approach to the topic.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


>


If that's what KFW's instructor meant, there's some good evidence for it. But it sounded like he meant doing a flip in the jump, which I can't see being helpful. In fact, it should accelerate the legs even more.


----------



## JowGaWolf

drop bear said:


>


That's the forward roll.  I was referring to doing a forward flip in the air then land.


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> I've never gotten that impression from anyone.
> 
> 
> Again, if we go back to the definition of "martial arts":
> 
> martial (1st definition at martial | Definition of martial in English by Oxford Dictionaries): "Relating to fighting or war."
> art: (4th definition at art | Definition of art in English by Oxford Dictionaries): "A skill at doing a specified thing, typically one acquired through practice."
> That means martial arts is about the skills acquired through practice that are related to fighting. A Turkish get-up is distantly related to fighting - skill at it is not, really. The result of it (the strength) is what's related. I can use other methods to develop that skill, and I'm not changing my MA approach - just a shift in my training. I don't see anything in that distinction that cripples anyone. It's when people buy into the marketing that strength and size are irrelevant in MA (they aren't and never have been) that they cripple themselves.
> 
> Mind you, people don't all have the same kinds of thought processes - you and I tend to approach things very differently in our minds. A distinction that is intellectually useful to me may be so much rubbish in your approach to the topic.



Strength is a skill.


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> If that's what KFW's instructor meant, there's some good evidence for it. But it sounded like he meant doing a flip in the jump, which I can't see being helpful. In fact, it should accelerate the legs even more.



Yeah. But to do the flip you need that forward jump maybe?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> Strength is a skill.


At the technical neurological level, that’s true. It’s not really what most folks mean they speak of skills. I’d argue it’s a component of many skills, rather than a skill in and of itself. Not really a distinction worth an argument.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> Yeah. But to do the flip you need that forward jump maybe?


I don’t follow.


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> At the technical neurological level, that’s true. It’s not really what most folks mean they speak of skills. I’d argue it’s a component of many skills, rather than a skill in and of itself. Not really a distinction worth an argument.



Ok so is chi sou martial arts? What does it teach? Kata?

What would people say a skill is?


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> At the technical neurological level, that’s true. It’s not really what most folks mean they speak of skills. I’d argue it’s a component of many skills, rather than a skill in and of itself. Not really a distinction worth an argument.



Ok so is chi sou martial arts? What does it teach? Kata?

What would people say a skill is?


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> I don’t follow.



The video suggests that the more forwards your jump the better off you are. (You can try it. I am just going to take their word for it) A forward flip launches you forwards.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> Ok so is chi sou martial arts? What does it teach? Kata?
> 
> What would people say a skill is?


Kata are also training tools. As is chi sau. Kata specifically (are supposed to) train fighting movement, so are at the other side of that grey divider - more part of MA. Take out the fighting moves, and they are closer to dance.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> The video suggests that the more forwards your jump the better off you are. (You can try it. I am just going to take their word for it) A forward flip launches you forwards.


It would do that. Without the roll, that forward momentum can be detrimental, as it’s more force for your legs to oppose upon landing.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Dirty Dog said:


> Ballerinas are both flexible and extremely fit. I not worry in the slightest that I'm going to get beat up by a ballerina.



 I dated an ex-ballerina who was studying Shaolin Long Fist...so you might get beat up by a ballerina 

Actually watching a trained ballerina do a long fist form, as compared to watching a trained martial artist do a long fist form.....there is a difference. Both can produce powerful strikes and both can be fast, but one of them is a bit more bendy and can actually be defined as beauty in motion...I will leave it to you to figure out which one that is....


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> It would do that. Without the roll, that forward momentum can be detrimental, as it’s more force for your legs to oppose upon landing.



Yeah but again, according to the video the more forwards you get the higher you can jump from. Because you can deal with forward momentum easier than downward.


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> Kata are also training tools. As is chi sau. Kata specifically (are supposed to) train fighting movement, so are at the other side of that grey divider - more part of MA. Take out the fighting moves, and they are closer to dance.



Kata doesn't train movement any closer to fighting than tricking. Except you might actually see tricking movement in a fight. Where you never see kata.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> Yeah but again, according to the video the more forwards you get the higher you can jump from. Because you can deal with forward momentum easier than downward.


If you don’t roll, I can’t see any advantage to that added speed and momentum. Remember that it is added - the down force of the plain jump is still there in both cases. No roll means you either face-plant, run it out (maybe possible), or oppose that forward force on landing.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> Kata doesn't train movement any closer to fighting than tricking. Except you might actually see tricking movement in a fight. Where you never see kata.


Every kata I’ve seen (obviously not all in existence) includes weight transitions used in sparring and/or grappling, punches and/or grappling movements, kicks, etc. Which part of that doesn’t exist in fighting?


----------



## Dirty Dog

Xue Sheng said:


> I dated an ex-ballerina who was studying Shaolin Long Fist...so you might get beat up by a ballerina



Well, no, I'be be getting beaten up by a martial artist.


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> Every kata I’ve seen (obviously not all in existence) includes weight transitions used in sparring and/or grappling, punches and/or grappling movements, kicks, etc. Which part of that doesn’t exist in fighting?



The dropping in to deep stance punching from the hip stuff. 

You transition your weight with kettle bells as well. Which are not martial arts.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

drop bear said:


> The dropping in to deep stance punching from the hip stuff.


This is one of the best counters to deal with "double leg" or "bear hug".

- Your opponent moves in for "double leg", or "bear hug" (while his head is up).
- You drop into a low horse stance, use both of your hands to push his forehead back, and apply pressure on his neck.


----------



## drop bear

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This is one of the best counters to deal with "double leg" or "bear hug".
> 
> - Your opponent moves in for "double leg", or "bear hug" (while his head is up).
> - You drop into a low horse stance, use both of your hands to push his forehead back, and apply pressure on his neck.



I don't have video at the moment. Look up a breakdancing move called the duck dive.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> The dropping in to deep stance punching from the hip stuff.
> 
> You transition your weight with kettle bells as well. Which are not martial arts.


The kettlebell transitions aren’t the same ones as used in fighting, while many of the transitions in kata mimic (often exaggerated) those used in application. And sometimes the deep stances do happen in fighting. I agree they are far over-represented in kata, and I think that’s because kata is part training drill and part exercise. I didn’t claim all movement in kata was similar to something used in fighting.

My point was that your post implied that non of the movement in kata was similar to fighting - in fact, that tricking movement was closer.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Dirty Dog said:


> Well, no, I'be be getting beaten up by a martial artist.



Just admit it. you would have been beaten up by a ballerina


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> The kettlebell transitions aren’t the same ones as used in fighting, while many of the transitions in kata mimic (often exaggerated) those used in application. And sometimes the deep stances do happen in fighting. I agree they are far over-represented in kata, and I think that’s because kata is part training drill and part exercise. I didn’t claim all movement in kata was similar to something used in fighting.
> 
> My point was that your post implied that non of the movement in kata was similar to fighting - in fact, that tricking movement was closer.



Tornado kicks have knocked guys out. Horse stance punching has done what again?


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> Kata doesn't train movement any closer to fighting than tricking




That would be because it doesn't train fighting but self defence. If you don't use the right tools for the job then of course it's a botch. 




drop bear said:


> Horse stance punching has done what again?



In Wado Ryu 'horse stance' ( Kibadachi) is used to train the leg muscles, and it really does. If you don't know what things are for why make up their uses and then state they don't work?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> Tornado kicks have knocked guys out. Horse stance punching has done what again?


The horse stance might just be exercise added to the punch. You seem to keep forgetting I didn’t say every move in kata was fighting movement. That, or you’re just trying to find an argument.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> That would be because it doesn't train fighting but self defence. If you don't use the right tools for the job then of course it's a botch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In Wado Ryu 'horse stance' ( Kibadachi) is used to train the leg muscles, and it really does. If you don't know what things are for why make up their uses and then state they don't work?



Lol. If you follow the conversation that is exactly what I am saying kata does.

Except for the self defence bit. That just made no sense. I mean what does kata produce that is specifically applicable to self defence?


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> The horse stance might just be exercise added to the punch. You seem to keep forgetting I didn’t say every move in kata was fighting movement. That, or you’re just trying to find an argument.



I don't have to try when you are not being consistent in your reasoning.

Roman get ups with the kettle bell might be exercise added to your punch. But roman get ups are not used in fighting. It is changed to be aplicable. Like horse stance punching.

You have drawn a romantic line in the sand because you perceive kata a martial arts and exercise as non martial arts.

But perception is not reality.

The most amazing thing about this discussion is that although you will stubbornly argue kata as aplication over tricking. I will find more direct links from tricking to fighting.






And you will not be able to proccess that in an intelectual way.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> I don't have to try when you are not being consistent in your reasoning.
> 
> Roman get ups with the kettle bell might be exercise added to your punch. But roman get ups are not used in fighting. It is changed to be aplicable. Like horse stance punching.
> 
> You have drawn a romantic line in the sand because you perceive kata a martial arts and exercise as non martial arts.
> 
> But perception is not reality.
> 
> The most amazing thing about this discussion is that although you will stubbornly argue kata as aplication over tricking. I will find more direct links from tricking to fighting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you will not be able to proccess that in an intelectual way.


You want this to be an argument - I started by saying the distinction was useful but not terribly important. Not sure why you've decided to make it a major deal - you're back in one of your mood swings where you have a need to "beat" me in some discussion.

Nothing romantic about the distinction, nor the stark line you claim I've drawn. I've actually said more than once that it's a grey distinction. It's a bit like drawing a distinction between gymnastics and dance, in some cases.

And you're still stuck on a single item. Ignoring, again, that I never said every part of a kata is movement used in fighting. Keep up, would you?


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> Except for the self defence bit. That just made no sense. I mean what does kata produce that is specifically applicable to self defence?




Ah well we could tell you but then we'd have to kill you. Why do you expect kata to 'produce' anything, it's not a chicken laying eggs. You don't do kata so don't worry about it, but you can't criticise something you know nothing about, it's just hot air if you try. I would be like me criticising Aussie Rules, I've seen it on television but don't know the rules, players, teams etc so of course I don't say anything, you should consider doing the same about kata.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Ah well we could tell you but then we'd have to kill you. Why do you expect kata to 'produce' anything, it's not a chicken laying eggs. You don't do kata so don't worry about it, but you can't criticise something you know nothing about, it's just hot air if you try. I would be like me criticising Aussie Rules, I've seen it on television but don't know the rules, players, teams etc so of course I don't say anything, you should consider doing the same about kata.



Because the idea that nobody understands the true mystery of a thing unless they have been initiated is a line of bull generally.

Aussie rules is the best art for self defence. Have you done it? Then you can't argue.

Oh you have done it? Well you need to have done it for ten years to fully understand its depth.

Oh. You did it for ten years? Well you have to be Australian. So you would not understand.

It is a con. And it is one used pretty widely in martial arts.

So when someone make a statement like kata is specifically for self defence. There has to be some actual reason why. Or the people making that statement really don't understand kata.


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> You want this to be an argument - I started by saying the distinction was useful but not terribly important. Not sure why you've decided to make it a major deal - you're back in one of your mood swings where you have a need to "beat" me in some discussion.
> 
> Nothing romantic about the distinction, nor the stark line you claim I've drawn. I've actually said more than once that it's a grey distinction. It's a bit like drawing a distinction between gymnastics and dance, in some cases.
> 
> And you're still stuck on a single item. Ignoring, again, that I never said every part of a kata is movement used in fighting. Keep up, would you?



As I said you don't have the tools to separate your perception from reality. You can't show kata used effectively in fights. I can show tricking. Your argument that kata is closer to fighting than tricking becomes undefendable.

And yet like a true believer you fall back on this idea the the more evidence I supply. The more logical links I make to support my case the more wrong I become because I am disagreeing with you?

Have you supplied evidence? Have you supported your statements? Have you really looked at both and independently thought about it without 20 years of baggage whispering in your ear?

Now the issue and the base of all my mean arguing is this.

Your distinction is what puts cardio and conditioning on a secondary level of importance to technique. Rather than integrating them as martial arts.

This is what produces this notion that some people are fit, strong and athletic and some are not.

Of course this happens in your environment because there is nothing done in your training to change that.

If I did jujitsu that never trained any grappling. There would be some guys who can grapple and some that couldn't. As if by magic the individual would have more effect than the art.

But it would just be silly.

Now if I train for self defence. I would want to train the skills that work for self defence.

Strength is a skill.

Sheesh.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> As I said you don't have the tools to separate your perception from reality. You can't show kata used effectively in fights. I can show tricking. Your argument that kata is closer to fighting than tricking becomes undefendable.
> 
> And yet like a true believer you fall back on this idea the the more evidence I supply. The more logical links I make to support my case the more wrong I become because I am disagreeing with you?
> 
> Have you supplied evidence? Have you supported your statements? Have you really looked at both and independently thought about it without 20 years of baggage whispering in your ear?
> 
> Now the issue and the base of all my mean arguing is this.
> 
> Your distinction is what puts cardio and conditioning on a secondary level of importance to technique. Rather than integrating them as martial arts.
> 
> This is what produces this notion that some people are fit, strong and athletic and some are not.
> 
> Of course this happens in your environment because there is nothing done in your training to change that.
> 
> If I did jujitsu that never trained any grappling. There would be some guys who can grapple and some that couldn't. As if by magic the individual would have more effect than the art.
> 
> But it would just be silly.
> 
> Now if I train for self defence. I would want to train the skills that work for self defence.
> 
> Strength is a skill.
> 
> Sheesh.


You really do want this to be a big thing. All I said was that kata includes movement that is used in fighting. A pretty simple statement based upon my own observation. You’ve tried to take shots at that statement by referring to things in kata you don’t think are related to fighting. Okay, there are things like that. Hell, I purposely put some things like that in kata I designed - those movements have a purpose that’s less direct. Bot sure what you’ve gotten in a wad over. 

This all started with a distinction that doesn’t really matter. You seem to think it’s VERY IMPORTANT. It isn’t. It’s a useful distinction for discussion, but doesn’t really make a tinker’s dam worth of difference in practice. 

Let. It. Go.


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> You really do want this to be a big thing. All I said was that kata includes movement that is used in fighting. A pretty simple statement based upon my own observation. You’ve tried to take shots at that statement by referring to things in kata you don’t think are related to fighting. Okay, there are things like that. Hell, I purposely put some things like that in kata I designed - those movements have a purpose that’s less direct. Bot sure what you’ve gotten in a wad over.
> 
> This all started with a distinction that doesn’t really matter. You seem to think it’s VERY IMPORTANT. It isn’t. It’s a useful distinction for discussion, but doesn’t really make a tinker’s dam worth of difference in practice.
> 
> Let. It. Go.



The issue is that you are exhibiting a whole bunch of flat earth theories about martial arts 

And what you call little distinctions  turn in to big ones when every time I try to explain a concept I then also have to upset you by suggesting the earth is round.

A lot of these concepts just don't work with a flat earth premis.

Strength and conditioning as a separate entity sounds good if you don't want to spend time working out but also still want to call yourself a martial artist OK at this point not a big deal.

But then you have to ajust  your reasoning to fit some guy who has worked out. Because you can't just get cleaned up by a guy because you spent 20 years focusing on the wrong thing. So we have to invent a whole batch of theories that don't work. Like it is the individual not the style. That a pro fighter has more time to train. That there is a specific kind of person born with the mental tools to fight, That there is some other cause other than what is inefficient training.

(And I have been there myself and had to work through that)

But the issue is the more you disconnect yourself from these basic ideas the harder it is to be able to see what is and what isn't.

And this is ultimately when guys like Steve say you don't get it. It is because you have all these basic disconnects that you work from.

Like making the distinction between fitness and martial arts. 

Now if I don't make the distinction I can look at tricking, look at kata and weigh up the pros and cons towards what activity would enhance my training more.

My suggestion is pretty simple. Everything in kata is contained in tricking. But tricking requires me to be more athletic. 

So bang for buck tricking wins out. Unless there is some actual factor about kata I a missing.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> The issue is that you are exhibiting a whole bunch of flat earth theories about martial arts


This is a conclusion you draw from me saying the hazy grey line I use for distinguishing what is within the term "martial art" doesn't include what you want in there? You're taking this WAAAAAAAY too seriously.


----------



## FriedRice

wab25 said:


> Before I got into martial arts, I thought the cool flashy stuff (trick stuff) was incredible and where it was at. As I got into martial arts, I learned that most of the cool flashy stuff only actually works in movies. Lately I have been rethinking a bit.



The guy in the video will crack the hell out of someone's head with that staff. That is legit skills that he's displaying as well as high levels of athleticism. Swinging a stick around is not the same as most of the flowery forms being drawn with short limbs.


----------



## drop bear

FriedRice said:


> The guy in the video will crack the hell out of someone's head with that staff. That is legit skills that he's displaying as well as high levels of athleticism. Swinging a stick around is not the same as most of the flowery forms being drawn with short limbs.



Yeah. Has ties to that thread on the old tai chi guy and his ability to utilize athleticism.


----------

