# Awesome Kung Fu Kick used in MMA



## JowGaWolf (Oct 4, 2016)

I finally found the correct application of the kick that I'm talking about in another in another posts and I feel this technique deserves a post of it's one.. There are two kicks that I see here.  One is a stomp, the other is the shin kick that I was talking about about.  I won't call it an "oblique kick" because it's not called The irony of the kick that is it's a TMA kick straight out of Kung Fu.  Joe Rogan says kung fu doesn't work, but you can't get anymore kung fu than this kick.  Joe Rogan gave it a name, but 





Rampage made this comment _"It should be called the illegal kick. It should be banned and it shows a lot about the fighter's character that he would throw it. How would he like it if somebody threw it at him and stopped him working for a year? I thought it was an illegal move. I think spinning elbows should be illegal too because they land on the back of the head. But I appreciate a good fight, a good scrap, I just wonder which rule fighters will bend next."_

Irony about that statement is that Kung Fu practitioners for years have been talking about the dangers of Kung Fu Techniques.  As damaging this kick is. Jon Jones is fairly accurate with this kick and if he really wanted to break the knee then he could.  I remember topics about the importance of stance training and I can tell you this is one of the valid reasons why someone should practice stances.  If a person takes a boxer stance then they are asking for a broken knee and the end of their career.  I often use this kick to demonstrate the importance of the stances by letting students kick my knee.  Yep.  You heard me.  I let them kick my knee and I can come out of the kick with no injury other than a normal bruise if that much. 

Fighting a fighter like this means that you have to fight in a TMA fighting stance failure to do so is like failure to blocking.  The TMA stance protects the knees but the kick will still destroy the shin.  The impact from receiving this kick to the shine causes the calf muscle to shoot off the shin causing damage to the front shin and the the calf muscle where it connects to the bone.  Jon Jones is good with it, but it doesn't look like he knows how to connect power to it because it can be strong enough to break a shin especially if enough weight is on the front leg.

The kick below is also a Traditional Kung Fu kick.  The title says it's a flying kick to the knee but it's not a flying kick.  It's a falling one which is why it's so devastating when it lands.





A lot of kicks that MMA people call stomps are modified front kicks and side kicks. Personally I wish they give Kung Fu the credit or at the very least the credit to another TMA that uses the same kick and call it by the appropriate name. The other part of me doesn't care, because as long as they think of the technique as a stomp, they'll fail to actually do the technique with real power.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 4, 2016)

Other videos and pictures with this kick
Hung gar kung fu. 1:49 





Wing Chun











Another Kung Fu School 
Low kicks during Shaolin class basic training
Fall 1998, Cupertino, CA  Source AHKFS Photo Gallery





General kung fu picture showing kick with foot turn outward 





My thought about kung fu techniques in general is that the more effective the techniques were, the more we'll see them not only in Kung Fu but also in other martial arts systems.  The problem with many TMA schools is that they demo themselves to death or they only do forms, which is actually good, because those who are big on forms help to keep the technique alive and those who are willing to fight help keep the application of those techniques alive.   Unfortunately there are very few  TMA practictioners that actually risks the punches to the face and failing with the techniques, which means that people like this (and their are a lot of them) get the technique and application wrong. By the way there is no way in the work you can do this type of kick to the shin and then suddenly turn it to a side kick.  It's stuff like this that gives kung fu a bad name.





This type of shin kick is a power kick and is one of the kicks that I often see WC practitioners incorrectly deploy


----------



## drop bear (Oct 5, 2016)

And yet you don't find mma guys hobbling around with broken knees.


They are probably doing it wrong.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Oct 5, 2016)

drop bear said:


> And yet you don't find mma guys hobbling around with broken knees.
> 
> 
> They are probably doing it wrong.


Or not trying to hobble their opponents.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 5, 2016)

drop bear said:


> And yet you don't find mma guys hobbling around with broken knees.
> 
> 
> They are probably doing it wrong.


That's not why.  The kicks are targeted above the knee where the thigh and knee connect and on the shin and not actually on the knee. If you watch the videos you will see this very clearly. Rampage Jackson's concern is actually a valid one, because all it takes is for someone with no control to do the kick to break the knee. It's similar to not letting kids and adults practice this move on each other because many lack the control.  Just recently in my school the instructor told an adult student to heel kick him in the stomach.  When she tried the kick struck him in his groin. No Control.  Now imagine someone with no control of that technique trying to kick the top of the knee on a moving target with force. 

The validity is simple, would you let kids train this kick on each other or an adult with no control practice this technique with force on your leg while moving?  Even when I tell students to kick my knee, I always stay stand still and get into the proper stance that protects me from injury.
"Some fighters, like Jacob Volkmann, state that the strike causes no serious injury and that it only serves to irritate the opponent. He believes that the only risk to a straight knee would be to the spraining posterior capsule or straining poplateal muscle. Frank Trigg, who carries an expert opinion as a pioneer, believes it is not dangerous nor dirty." Source same as below.

MMA Push kicks to the knee should be banned Source Why Push Kicks to the Knees Should Be Banned
"To be fair to both of these legends, they have never hurt an opponent with it and often seem to be aiming for the lower thigh above the knee which would not hyper-extend the knee backwards."

The kick is powerful enough to break a bat so breaking a knee that's held by tendons and ligaments wouldn't be a problem. I have personal experience with this kick both on the receiving and giving end. 





A person has no clue until they receive one of these kicks.  There's 2 things I won't do anymore in my kung fu class because of the damage the techniques cause.  That small punch to the stomach that a took a few months back and these kicks.  We will still train these kicks but not with force like I did when I was testing to see if the shin pads offered enough protection.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 5, 2016)

This is an example of how fragile a knee is.










In both cases the force that cause the hyperextension was far less than someone kicking your knee in.


----------



## Buka (Oct 5, 2016)

I'm sorry, I just don't get it. It's a leg kick. Sometimes used as a check. Like any other kick done properly at the right time, it' works really well. I like it, but I like everything that works.


----------



## KangTsai (Oct 5, 2016)

The oblique kick used in MMA is derived from muay Thai and flying kicks generally come from people with heavy taekwondo backgrounds. You really can't wish for credit when it's a relatively shared move across different arts. There are almost no MMA fighters deriving their methods from king fu, with some very big exceptions (Michael "Venom" Page - kung fu, taekwondo and freestyle kickboxing background; spectacular finishes).

Also, in many cases, I block the oblique kick by raising my knee.


----------



## Midnight-shadow (Oct 5, 2016)

Buka said:


> I'm sorry, I just don't get it. It's a leg kick. Sometimes used as a check. Like any other kick done properly at the right time, it' works really well. I like it, but I like everything that works.



The leg is quite a large area with lots of different targets to choose from. A low kick to the thigh is likely to give your opponent a dead leg for maybe an hour and then they are fine. Do that same kick to the knee and they may not be able to ever walk again.


----------



## Buka (Oct 5, 2016)

Midnight-shadow said:


> The leg is quite a large area with lots of different targets to choose from. A low kick to the thigh is likely to give your opponent a dead leg for maybe an hour and then they are fine. Do that same kick to the knee and they may not be able to ever walk again.



I couldn't agree more.

I confess, I have a thing about knees. I won't spar, compete or train with anyone or anything that involves kicks to the knees. I have of course, far to often actually, and have always trained everyone in everything having to do concerning strikes to the knees. But if you kick my knees I'm just going to kill you, plain and simple. So won't anyone I've trained. Yes, I know it's wrong, I don't care, I really don't. I consider it the same thing as if you pulled a gun.

What can I say, I'm an A-hole. But if you kick my knees, even once, you're a dead A-hole. And, yes, I make that point quite clear before anything having to do with sparring, training or fighting. And, I am, if nothing else, a man of my word.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 5, 2016)

KangTsai said:


> The oblique kick used in MMA is derived from muay Thai and flying kicks generally come from people with heavy taekwondo backgrounds. You really can't wish for credit when it's a relatively shared move across different arts. There are almost no MMA fighters deriving their methods from king fu, with some very big exceptions (Michael "Venom" Page - kung fu, taekwondo and freestyle kickboxing background; spectacular finishes).
> 
> Also, in many cases, I block the oblique kick by raising my knee.


I agree with this part "You really can't wish for credit when it's a relatively shared move across different arts", but disagree with the rest. For certain fighters, the oblique kick used in MMA is derived from Muay Thai, but as you stated in your next sentence "You can't really wish for credit when it's a relatively shared move across different arts". And there are plenty of fighters who use some form of kung fu/san shou or another.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 5, 2016)

Midnight-shadow said:


> The leg is quite a large area with lots of different targets to choose from. A low kick to the thigh is likely to give your opponent a dead leg for maybe an hour and then they are fine. Do that same kick to the knee and they may not be able to ever walk again.



You can crank a knee with a round kick. It still puts torque on the knee. Potentually more than an oblique kick.

People will throw both at me and everyone I train with.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 5, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> That's not why.  The kicks are targeted above the knee where the thigh and knee connect and on the shin and not actually on the knee. If you watch the videos you will see this very clearly. Rampage Jackson's concern is actually a valid one, because all it takes is for someone with no control to do the kick to break the knee. It's similar to not letting kids and adults practice this move on each other because many lack the control.  Just recently in my school the instructor told an adult student to heel kick him in the stomach.  When she tried the kick struck him in his groin. No Control.  Now imagine someone with no control of that technique trying to kick the top of the knee on a moving target with force.
> 
> The validity is simple, would you let kids train this kick on each other or an adult with no control practice this technique with force on your leg while moving?  Even when I tell students to kick my knee, I always stay stand still and get into the proper stance that protects me from injury.
> "Some fighters, like Jacob Volkmann, state that the strike causes no serious injury and that it only serves to irritate the opponent. He believes that the only risk to a straight knee would be to the spraining posterior capsule or straining poplateal muscle. Frank Trigg, who carries an expert opinion as a pioneer, believes it is not dangerous nor dirty." Source same as below.
> ...



It is targeted above the knee because in bare feet you are more likely to break your foot than their knee.

We even face a version of that tackle.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 5, 2016)

Buka said:


> I couldn't agree more.
> 
> I confess, I have a thing about knees. I won't spar, compete or train with anyone or anything that involves kicks to the knees. I have of course, far to often actually, and have always trained everyone in everything having to do concerning strikes to the knees. But if you kick my knees I'm just going to kill you, plain and simple. So won't anyone I've trained. Yes, I know it's wrong, I don't care, I really don't. I consider it the same thing as if you pulled a gun.
> 
> What can I say, I'm an A-hole. But if you kick my knees, even once, you're a dead A-hole. And, yes, I make that point quite clear before anything having to do with sparring, training or fighting. And, I am, if nothing else, a man of my word.



I am the same with punches to the face. Actually as I cant kill everyone in the room. I don't really have that luxury.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 5, 2016)

Joe Rogan is right, Kung Fu doesn't work in MMA, and one kick that is also present in several martial arts doesn't change that.

When I start seeing someone using the Mantis grip, the Bagua Palm strikes, Crane Beak, or even fighting from those extreme Kung Fu stances, I'll believe that Kung Fu works in the cage.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 5, 2016)

Of course it doesnt work in the cage or mma...it wasn't design for sports like the mma. It was designed to cripple people or as a stop. If it works in the ring or sport. I try not to focus to much on it. I have no desire to water down my ability.

But thats just me.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 5, 2016)

Guthrie said:


> Of course it doesnt work in the cage or mma...it wasn't design for sports like the mma. It was designed to cripple people or as a stop. If it works in the ring or sport. I try not to focus to much on it. I have no desire to water down my ability.
> 
> But thats just me.



And yet when those non-sport arts end up actually utilizing their abilities in a fighting format, they end up looking almost exactly like the more sportive styles (only worse).


----------



## RTKDCMB (Oct 5, 2016)

drop bear said:


> It is targeted above the knee because in bare feet you are more likely to break your foot than their knee.


Ypu would have to do it really wrong to do that.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 5, 2016)

KangTsai said:


> The oblique kick used in MMA is derived from muay Thai and flying kicks generally come from people with heavy taekwondo backgrounds.


 It's not derived from Muay Thai the kick is found in systems older than Muay Thai same as the "flying kick" that he's doing.  Both those kicks are in systems that are older than Taekwondo and Muay Thai.



KangTsai said:


> Also, in many cases, I block the oblique kick by raising my knee.


This kick is extremely fast and doesn't give you a chance to raise your leg when it's done.  It's not a kick that you want to just throw out there when you feel like it.  It's a  kick that takes weight distribution of the opponent into consideration.  You can't raise the leg that you are standing on and because of that you won't get a chance to raise your leg to block it.



drop bear said:


> It is targeted above the knee because in bare feet you are more likely to break your foot than their knee.


 You only will hurt your foot if the knee is bent and it requires that the knee have some significant bend in it.  In addition the kick is done using the heel.  In the the picture I posted with the group of students doing the kick the kick is targeting the shin. You can also see the distinctive way the foot is turn. The reason why the foot is turned this way is that the heel of the foot strikes the target. Most people you see on youtube trying to do this kick tend to kick the shin the same way that one would kick a soccer ball with the inside of the foot.   The same kick can be targeted as high as the kicker's waist. Most people stand in a high stance because it allows it's easier to move around,  that same highstance does not have enough bend in the knee to protect it. 



Hanzou said:


> When I start seeing someone using the Mantis grip, the Bagua Palm strikes, Crane Beak, or even fighting from those extreme Kung Fu stances, I'll believe that Kung Fu works in the cage.


You have already seen me use successfully use the extreme kung fu stances during free sparring to defend against a possible shoot.  I don't do mantis nor bagua so I can't help you there.  I do Crane beak, but the one I practice is a groin strike so I can't use that during sparring (we don't spar with cups unless it's intense sparring).  We already have Buka, Rampage Jackson complaining about kicks to the knee. I'm sure a Crane beak to the privates wouldn't be welcomed.



Hanzou said:


> And yet when those non-sport arts end up actually utilizing their abilities in a fighting format, they end up looking almost exactly like the more sportive styles (only worse).


Everyone doesn't look like this guy.  If a TMA practitioner looks and performs like the sportive styles instead of the style that he trains then it's because that person doesn't train the techniques in a free sparring context.  My sparring doesn't look like the sportive styles that you speak of.  Out of all of the Martial Arts practitioners out there, I'm not the only one that trains the techniques in free sparring.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 5, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> And yet when those non-sport arts end up actually utilizing their abilities in a fighting format, they end up looking almost exactly like the more sportive styles (only worse).


Poor example.  


Hanzou said:


> And yet when those non-sport arts end up actually utilizing their abilities in a fighting format, they end up looking almost exactly like the more sportive styles (only worse).


Which one is the mma guy and which is the Kung fu guy. They both look like crap.

Look, mma was designed for sport, and came from sport. Thats what it will always be. I have yet to see proper structure when an mma guy fights. Basically, its kickboxing with a lot of ground fighting and grappling added. Its nothing new.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 5, 2016)

Just my opinion, and only matters to me.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 5, 2016)

Guthrie said:


> Just my opinion, and only matters to me.



Yeah but deciding the effectiveness of something based on sport is about as applicable as basing it on the colour of a guys pants. 

Running is very successful in a lot of sports. Do you discount that as a self defence application?


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 5, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> You have already seen me use successfully use the extreme kung fu stances during free sparring to defend against a possible shoot.  I don't do mantis nor bagua so I can't help you there.  I do Crane beak, but the one I practice is a groin strike so I can't use that during sparring (we don't spar with cups unless it's intense sparring).  We already have Buka, Rampage Jackson complaining about kicks to the knee. I'm sure a Crane beak to the privates wouldn't be welcomed.



No offense, but free sparring in your swoon isn't a MMA match. Just like rolling in my Bjj gym isn't a MMA match. We're talking about MMA here, not general sparring. I would love to see the stuff you do and the more exotic aspects of CMA emerge within the MMA sphere. Unfortunately after 20+ years of active MMA in America and worldwide, they have yet to emerge.



> Everyone doesn't look like this guy.  If a TMA practitioner looks and performs like the sportive styles instead of the style that he trains then it's because that person doesn't train the techniques in a free sparring context.  My sparring doesn't look like the sportive styles that you speak of.  Out of all of the Martial Arts practitioners out there, I'm not the only one that trains the techniques in free sparring.



Then that must be fairly widespread within the traditional styles, because the vast majority of TMA practitioners are coming out looking like sloppy kick boxers when they get into competitive style vs style, or MMA matches.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 5, 2016)

Guthrie said:


> Poor example.



Maybe you'd prefer an example straight from the motherland?








> Which one is the mama guy and which is the Kung fu guy. They both look like crap.



They're both Kung Fu. One is supposed to be "legit" while the other is supposed to be a fraud.

Yes, they both look like crap, as does the two WC fighters above. An MMA fighter (even at amateur level) would decimate both sets of fighters.



> Look, mama was designed for sport, and came from sport. Thats what it will always be. I have yet to see proper structure when an mma guy fights. Basically, its kickboxing with a lot of ground fighting and grappling added. Its nothing new.



Yes, and that combination (of what actually works) makes a brutally efficient and effective system of fighting. It's so effective that traditional styles have to find answers for it within their own system.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 5, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> No offense, but free sparring in your swoon isn't a MMA match. Just like rolling in my Bjj gym isn't a MMA match. We're talking about MMA here, not general sparring.


No offense taken.  If you can do it during quality free sparring half power and half speed then you'll be able do it at full intensity.  I'll be honest with you, I find it easier to do CMA techniques at full speed than at 50% speed and 50% power.  Every system does light free sparring including BJJ and they don't question their ability to do it at full speed. If you can't do a CMA technique at 50% speed-50%power during free sparring then there's no way that you'll be able to do it at full speed - full power - and high intensity. We see proof of this in Point Sparring where the participants aren't going full power and some aren't even going full speed.



Hanzou said:


> Then that must be fairly widespread within the traditional styles, because the vast majority of TMA practitioners are coming out looking like sloppy kick boxers when they get into competitive style vs style, or MMA matches


Yes it's wide spread but that doesn't have anything to do with the validity of the fighting system.  That's a fighter issue and an issue with his training or better yet a lack of it.   I can't claim to be doing Jow Ga if I come out doing sloppy kickboxing because Jow Ga doesn't look like kick boxing.  If it looks like I'm doing kick boxing then I'm not using Jow Ga techniques and the only techniques that can be legitimately discussed are my lack of Jow Ga ability and my sloppy kickboxing skills.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 5, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Maybe you'd prefer an example straight from the motherland?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not me, I would never degrade my ability with sport training. It only makes a brutal(half ***) sport. At least in my observation. I have no use for it. I believe it is, what it is, a sport. 

By the way, the WWE looks a little more brutal. But hey, thats entertainment arts for you.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 5, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Yeah but deciding the effectiveness of something based on sport is about as applicable as basing it on the colour of a guys pants.
> 
> Running is very successful in a lot of sports. Do you discount that as a self defence application?


Yes, its a training regiment. It can be applied to save your butt from a fire as well.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 5, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> No offense taken.  If you can do it during quality free sparring half power and half speed then you'll be able do it at full intensity.  I'll be honest with you, I find it easier to do CMA techniques at full speed than at 50% speed and 50% power.  Every system does light free sparring including BJJ and they don't question their ability to do it at full speed. If you can't do a CMA technique at 50% speed-50%power during free sparring then there's no way that you'll be able to do it at full speed - full power - and high intensity. We see proof of this in Point Sparring where the participants aren't going full power and some aren't even going full speed.
> 
> Yes it's wide spread but that doesn't have anything to do with the validity of the fighting system.  That's a fighter issue and an issue with his training or better yet a lack of it.   I can't claim to be doing Jow Ga if I come out doing sloppy kickboxing because Jow Ga doesn't look like kick boxing.  If it looks like I'm doing kick boxing then I'm not using Jow Ga techniques and the only techniques that can be legitimately discussed are my lack of Jow Ga ability and my sloppy kickboxing skills.


I've got to say, I actually don't care what my white crane looks like in application, as long as I'm using the fundamental principles in my techniques.  

I'm a proponent of: real life application usually does not look like what training looks like.  This is because training often uses exaggerated movement in order to ingrain the principles into the technical mechanics.  But once you have developed skill with the principles, then the exaggeration diminishes and goes away, and it can look like anything, or nothing, or even slop.  As long as the principles are underneath and driving it, it doesn't matter. An educated eye can still see it.  An inexperienced eye will not.

I know a lot of people feel that their kung fu ought to look a certain way.  I agree in the context of training.   I disagree in the context of application.

I also know that for a lot of people who do not train Kung fu, this is difficult or impossible to understand.

I also agree with you that I rarely see what I would consider to be optimal mechanics, in the (admittedly very little) MMA that I have watched (I find myself monumentally disinterested in it, and have only accidentally caught a few bouts on tv.).  But that doesn't mean they cannot be effective.  I've said many times here in the forums, you don't need perfect technique or high skill, or a superior system to hurt someone.  Hurting someone is easy.

However, I do agree that mechanically, there is a lot of room for improvement with a lot of what happens in MMA.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 5, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> No offense taken.  If you can do it during quality free sparring half power and half speed then you'll be able do it at full intensity.  I'll be honest with you, I find it easier to do CMA techniques at full speed than at 50% speed and 50% power.  Every system does light free sparring including BJJ and they don't question their ability to do it at full speed. If you can't do a CMA technique at 50% speed-50%power during free sparring then there's no way that you'll be able to do it at full speed - full power - and high intensity. We see proof of this in Point Sparring where the participants aren't going full power and some aren't even going full speed.



This has little to do with full speed vs half speed. I'm talking about your training methodology to counter something specific versus someone whose entire training methodology revolves around that which you're trying to counter. Just because something works within the confines of free sparring doesn't mean that it's going to work against a trained martial artist trying to take your head off.

For example, I'm sure you guys are quite good at doing wrestling-style takedowns and what not, but I'd wager that someone training in MMA is far better at them than you are. Because of this, your spot training of TD defense is inferior to the MMA exponent's ability to take you down. This is especially the case since the MMA exponent's training demands that they have the practical knowledge to pull off effective takedowns.

BTW, your shortcoming is no different than us in Bjj defending against someone hitting us while we're in guard. Yeah, we train to defend against strikes in Guard, however, a MMA fighter is going to be better at hitting us while in Guard than we're going to be at defending against the strikes. Why? Because an integral part of MMA training is learning how to strike while in someone's Guard, while learning to defend yourself from strikes in Bjj is (sadly) an ancillary practice.

In Bjj we mainly counter takedowns and fighting off grapplers on top with the Guard. The Guard has been proven to be an effective counter to grapplers (and strikers) in MMA for decades.

A wide Kung Fu stance has not.



> Yes it's wide spread but that doesn't have anything to do with the validity of the fighting system.  That's a fighter issue and an issue with his training or better yet a lack of it.   I can't claim to be doing Jow Ga if I come out doing sloppy kickboxing because Jow Ga doesn't look like kick boxing.  If it looks like I'm doing kick boxing then I'm not using Jow Ga techniques and the only techniques that can be legitimately discussed are my lack of Jow Ga ability and my sloppy kickboxing skills.



Well again, we're only talking about the validity of the fighting system as it applies to MMA, not overall. The simple fact of the matter is that there is a stark absence of Chinese Martial Arts within MMA. There's plenty of reasons for this, but none of them are because CMAs are somehow "too deadly" for MMA, or can not be modified for sport fighting.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 5, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> I've got to say, I actually don't care what my white crane looks like in application, as long as I'm using the fundamental principles in my techniques.
> 
> I'm a proponent of: real life application usually does not look like what training looks like.  This is because training often uses exaggerated movement in order to ingrain the principles into the technical mechanics.  But once you have developed skill with the principles, then the exaggeration diminishes and goes away, and it can look like anything, or nothing, or even slop.  As long as the principles are underneath and driving it, it doesn't matter. An educated eye can still see it.  An inexperienced eye will not.
> 
> ...


if you train white crane application in free sparring then it will look like what you train and you fellow classmates will not only see the technique they will recognize that it's found in there form.  Karate looks like karate, boxing looks like boxing, muay thai looks like muay thai. White crane will look like white crane. If it doesn't then you aren't doing white crane.

If train to do sprints then you'll look it when you do sprint.  the only difference as far as kungfu application is that it's not exaggerated.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 5, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> if you train white crane application in free sparring then it will look like what you train and you fellow classmates will not only see the technique they will recognize that it's found in there form.  Karate looks like karate, boxing looks like boxing, muay thai looks like muay thai. White crane will look like white crane. If it doesn't then you aren't doing white crane.
> 
> If train to do sprints then you'll look it when you do sprint.  the only difference as far as kungfu application is that it's not exaggerated.



Just a case in point:






I'll let the Kung Fu people determine whether that's a display of good CMA technique or not.

To me, it doesn't look very impressive.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 5, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> if you train white crane application in free sparring then it will look like what you train and you fellow classmates will not only see the technique they will recognize that it's found in there form.  Karate looks like karate, boxing looks like boxing, muay thai looks like muay thai. White crane will look like white crane. If it doesn't then you aren't doing white crane.
> 
> If train to do sprints then you'll look it when you do sprint.  the only difference as far as kungfu application is that it's not exaggerated.


if technique is being driven with the proper principles, then that part looks like white crane.  Outside of that, in terms of the large movement it very well should not. But it most definitely is white crane.

Except for some exceptional circumstances, to try and apply white crane technique in a fight in the same manner it is done in training is quite a bad idea.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 5, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Just a case in point:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is actually an example of exactly what I was talking about.  His punching relied upon the principles, but did not look like punching done in training.  I could see the principles in action, while the shape of the technique was modified from the training method.  Exactly what I was talking about.

There were times when he did a better job of holding it together, and that was when he was dominant in the match.  There were other times when he abandoned his principles, ignored his root and swung from the shoulders instread of from the feet, and that is when he became susceptible to the other guys quick shots. 

I was more impressed with this than I expected to be.  But I also know what I am looking at.  CLFSEAN might have the background to understand it as well, since he trains in a sister method to white crane, but I doubt anyone else here would.  It's a rare system. At any rate, the kid has potential.

Whether or not you are impressed with it is immaterial.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 5, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> This is actually an example of exactly what I was talking about.  His punching relied upon the principles, but did not look like punching done in training.  I could see the principles in action, while the shape of the technique was modified from the training method.  Exactly what I was talking about.
> 
> There were times when he did a better job of holding it together, and that was when he was dominant in the match.  There were other times when he abandoned his principles, ignored his root and swung from the shoulders instread of from the feet, and that is when he became susceptible to the other guys quick shots.
> 
> ...



You think any of that was based on sound fighting principles?

Interesting.

Anyway, the point is that that fighting display is a far cry from this;






Or this;






It looked like a broken form of kickboxing.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 5, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> I'm talking about your training methodology to counter something specific versus someone whose entire training methodology revolves around that which you're trying to counter. Just because something works within the confines of free sparring doesn't mean that it's going to work against a trained martial artist trying to take your head off.


 If all this was true then no body would practice boxing, MMA, swimming, tennis, basketball, baseball or any other sport.  Just because something works in practice with in the confines of practice doesn't mean that it's going to work in the game.  If that's true then why bother practice.  You might as well just stop training BJJ.



Hanzou said:


> I'm sure you guys are quite good at doing wrestling-style takedowns and what not, but I'd wager that someone training in MMA is far better at them than you are.


I don't do wrestling, I do Jow Ga and as far as I know, there are no MMA fighters that take Jow Ga so they aren't going to be able to do Jow Ga techniques better than I can.  They can't be good in a system they don't train.  As for the take downs that we do in the school they aren't wrestling-style takedowns.

Just because Anderson Silva is good in MMA doesn't mean he's can do Wing Chun better than a wing chun practitioner.







Hanzou said:


> Because of this, your spot training of TD defense is inferior to the MMA exponent's ability to take you down


 This is also an assumption that MMA is superior to other things. 



Hanzou said:


> A wide Kung Fu stance has not


 I've shown a video of me using a wide kung fu stance to successfully prevent take downs.  I used it against a BJJ practitioner and he looked puzzled because no one had ever used a wide stance against him to prevent the take down.  During that time we literally told him.  "Show me how you would take me down."  He got low, I got lower, when he raised his stance I raised my but always at a point where I was lower.  His statement was that he couldn't do the takedown that he planned on using on me because of the height of my stance.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 5, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> His punching relied upon the principles, but did not look like punching done in training. I could see the principles in action, while the shape of the technique was modified from the training method.


  This is what I was talking about as well. What you train in free sparring is how it will look in application It was something you recognized. It didn't look anything like Jow Ga.  The only thing I could pickout in terms of kung fu was the loss of structure that you pointed out.

One of the techniques (that walking shuffle punch combo) looks similar to one of the techniques that in Jow Ga has, I don't know what the function of it in White Crane but for Jow Ga our similar technique is a close quarters technique and not a chase down technique.

The thing I like the video is that he's actually trying to learn how to use Kung Fu techniques (that's how everyone looks when learning how to correctly apply techniques in free sparring) and as long as he keeps trying he'll figure out when is the best time to use that technique. His stance was also better in comparison to his opponent. Had sweeping been allowed and if he knows how to sweep correctly, then his opponent would have taken more than one trip to the ground.  This is what a person looks like when they are learning how to use Kung Fu

The guy below is definitely not using kung fu. He definitely didn't look like basic kickboxing.  The difference is clear to see when I look at this guy from the same school (I assume)


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 5, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> I've shown a video of me using a wide kung fu stance to successfully prevent take downs. I used it against a BJJ practitioner and he looked puzzled because no one had ever used a wide stance against him to prevent the take down. During that time we literally told him. "Show me how you would take me down." He got low, I got lower, when he raised his stance I raised my but always at a point where I was lower. His statement was that he couldn't do the takedown that he planned on using on me because of the height of my stance.



Well said and I don't believe many mma practioners understand that experience in traditional arts, teach exactly these concepts.

It is also interesting to note, that Hanzou, is pointing out a subject that exist in all arts, techniques never look the same in combat as they do in practice yet doesn't seem to understand that mma, is quilty of this as well.

I think it brings up the point, that it always depends on the individual and not the art.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 5, 2016)

We simply gravitate towards that which makes us feel safe.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 5, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> You think any of that was based on sound fighting principles?
> 
> Interesting.
> 
> ...


  If I had to guess I would say that you picked the wrong technique.  you have to look for a the technique that has that shuffle walk and then compare that.

Then you showed Jake Mace who is not the best person to use to show kung applications.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 5, 2016)

Guthrie said:


> We simply gravitate towards that which makes us feel safe.


Very true


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 5, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> If all this was true then no body would practice boxing, MMA, swimming, tennis, basketball, baseball or any other sport.  Just because something works in practice with in the confines of practice doesn't mean that it's going to work in the game.  If that's true then why bother practice.  You might as well just stop training BJJ.



Of course they would. You train boxing to box. You train basketball to play basketball. You train swimming in order to swim. However, a basketball player, a boxer, and a swimmer doesn't believe that they can stop a MMA takedown. Only you TMA guys believe that malarkey.

I train Bjj because I enjoy the art. However, I don't believe that I could participate in MMA with my skill set. I would have to train specifically in MMA in order to stand a chance. That said, my Bjj training would allow me to enter a MMA competition more quickly than someone who had a background in any style of Kung Fu.



> I don't do wrestling, I do Jow Ga and as far as I know, there are no MMA fighters that take Jow Ga so they aren't going to be able to do Jow Ga techniques better than I can.  They can't be good in a system they don't train.  As for the take downs that we do in the school they aren't wrestling-style takedowns.



That's my point; You're not as good at takedowns as a wrestler or a MMA exponent, so your takedown defenses are going to be inferior to their takedown attempts. The fact that you aren't doing wrestling style takedowns reinforces that belief because wrestlers have the best takedowns in the game, AND you're more likely to encounter a wrestling-style takedown than anything else. Just about every form of grappling utilizes some level of wrestling-style takedowns. If your goal is to counter a MMA takedown, you probably should be learning wrestling-style takedowns.

Again, the point of this discussion is Kung Fu's effectiveness in MMA.



> Just because Anderson Silva is good in MMA doesn't mean he's can do Wing Chun better than a wing chun practitioner.



I agree with that. What's your point?



> This is also an assumption that MMA is superior to other things.



MMA is superior to certain things. For example, I have no doubt that a MMA fighter with my level of experience is better at striking within the Guard than I am defending strikes while in my Guard (However, I'm personally closing that gap by cross-training with MMA fighters). Additionally, I have no doubt that a MMA fighter is better at takedowns than a TMA practitioner is at takedown defenses that originate from ancient China or Japan.



> I've shown a video of me using a wide kung fu stance to successfully prevent take downs.  I used it against a BJJ practitioner and he looked puzzled because no one had ever used a wide stance against him to prevent the take down.  During that time we literally told him.  "Show me how you would take me down."  He got low, I got lower, when he raised his stance I raised my but always at a point where I was lower.  His statement was that he couldn't do the takedown that he planned on using on me because of the height of my stance.



Did he pull Guard?


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 5, 2016)

Guthrie said:


> Well said and I don't believe many mma practioners understand that experience in traditional arts, teach exactly these concepts.
> 
> It is also interesting to note, that Hanzou, is pointing out a subject that exist in all arts, techniques never look the same in combat as they do in practice yet doesn't seem to understand that mma, is quilty of this as well.
> 
> I think it brings up the point, that it always depends on the individual and not the art.



Techniques in Boxing, Muay Thai, Bjj, Judo, and other "sport" styles do resemble their practice form in combat.

For example, Williams Guard in practice:






Williams Guard in MMA and Bjj competition:






The difference is that "sport" styles don't have kata to muck up the training regimen.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 5, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> You think any of that was based on sound fighting principles?
> 
> Interesting.
> 
> ...


Oh sweet Jeezuz.  
Ok, the first clip here is Fujian white crane.  The system that I train, and the guy with the red shirt in the tournament video was doing, is Tibetan white crane.  These are two completely separate systems, with different history and technique and methodology.  That they are both called crane is coincidence.  So, no, they do not look similar.

The second video is Jake somebody, who broke away from the Shaolin-do group of Sin The, the notorious Malaysian kuntao method that tried to pretend to be everything Shaolin.  Once again, an entirely different method with zero shared history.

Gee whiz, see how much you don't know?

Yup, that kid in the red shirt in the tournament, he is getting it. Yup, sound fighting principles.  

I did not expect you to understand it.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 5, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> No offense taken. If you can do it during quality free sparring half power and half speed then you'll be able do it at full intensity. I'll be honest with you, I find it easier to do CMA techniques at full speed than at 50% speed and 50% power. Every system does light free sparring including BJJ and they don't question their ability to do it at full speed. If you can't do a CMA technique at 50% speed-50%power during free sparring then there's no way that you'll be able to do it at full speed - full power - and high intensity. We see proof of this in Point Sparring where the participants aren't going full power and some aren't even going full speed.



Not really. the rules change a bit at full speed full power. There is still training at half speed but it is something to be aware of.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> Oh sweet Jeezuz.
> Ok, the first clip here is Fujian white crane.  The system that I train, and the guy with the red shirt in the tournament video was doing, is Tibetan white crane.  These are two completely separate systems, with different history and technique and methodology.  That they are both called crane is coincidence.  So, no, they do not look similar.
> 
> The second video is Jake somebody, who broke away from the Shaolin-do group of Sin The, the notorious Malaysian kuntao method that tried to pretend to be everything Shaolin.  Once again, an entirely different method with zero shared history.
> ...



Thank you for that clarification.

So this is Tibetan White crane form:






Tibetan White Crane form application:






And Tibetan crane fighting (again):






The form and the fighting still don't resemble each other.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 6, 2016)

They do if you understand the method and know what you are looking at.

Once again, this is outside your realm of experience and understanding.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> The form and the fighting still don't resemble each other.


 I think the advancing shuffle punch technique that the guy in the red shirt is using can be seen at 0:54 In the Pak Hok Pai form video that you posted.  The front heel kick can be seen at 0:47  The jabs that go with the shuffle are at 1:25.  The long back hand is at 0:20

This is what people mean when they say that "application doesn't look like the form."  The applications look like techniques that are in the form.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 6, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> I think the advancing shuffle punch technique that the guy in the red shirt is using can be seen at 0:54 In the Pak Hok Pai form video that you posted.  The front heel kick can be seen at 0:47  The jabs that go with the shuffle are at 1:25.  The long back hand is at 0:20
> 
> This is what people mean when they say that "application doesn't look like the form."  The applications look like techniques that are in the form.



It depends how much ideology you attach to your training. Some people start with what should work. (like oblique kicks should break knees) and then wear themselves out trying to make the reality meet their preconceptions. So then they train in a manner that requires their art to look and behave a certain way regardless of the actual results. Their training starts to stray from their fighting.

Other arts take what they have been successful with and make that the core of their training.  So their training looks very similar to their fighting.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> I think the advancing shuffle punch technique that the guy in the red shirt is using can be seen at 0:54 In the Pak Hok Pai form video that you posted.  The front heel kick can be seen at 0:47  The jabs that go with the shuffle are at 1:25.  The long back hand is at 0:20
> 
> This is what people mean when they say that "application doesn't look like the form."  The applications look like techniques that are in the form.



Jabs, shuffle punches, and heel kicks can be found in a multitude of styles. Hell, they're found in kickboxing! There was nothing distinctively "Kung Fu" about anything that kid was doing except keeping his hands down. A tactic btw that would get him KO'd in just about any MMA-based striking system.

Again, if the end result of years of practice is sloppy kickboxing, why not simply avoid all of those elaborate forms and pseudo-scientific concepts and simply learn proper kickboxing?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> I've got to say, I actually don't care what my white crane looks like in application, as long as I'm using the fundamental principles in my techniques.
> 
> I'm a proponent of: real life application usually does not look like what training looks like.  This is because training often uses exaggerated movement in order to ingrain the principles into the technical mechanics.  But once you have developed skill with the principles, then the exaggeration diminishes and goes away, and it can look like anything, or nothing, or even slop.  As long as the principles are underneath and driving it, it doesn't matter. An educated eye can still see it.  An inexperienced eye will not.
> 
> ...


I think the key here is in the "experienced eye". Most of us would be much better at spotting the principles and movements of our own art than of any other. I, for instance, would have a very difficult time figuring out if someone was using appropriate kung fu movement and principles (of any style), but would be able to recognize better the principles and movements of those arts more closely related to my primary art, so Judo, much of Japanese Jujutsu/Aiki-Jujutsu, Aikido, Shotokan Karate, etc. In between are arts I can comprehend, but have a harder time recognizing outside the iconic moves (BJJ comes to mind), so I can see the principles, but won't recognize the art much better than anyone else.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Of course they would. You train boxing to box. You train basketball to play basketball. You train swimming in order to swim. However, a basketball player, a boxer, and a swimmer doesn't believe that they can stop a MMA takedown. Only you TMA guys believe that malarkey.
> 
> I train Bjj because I enjoy the art. However, I don't believe that I could participate in MMA with my skill set. I would have to train specifically in MMA in order to stand a chance. That said, my Bjj training would allow me to enter a MMA competition more quickly than someone who had a background in any style of Kung Fu.
> 
> ...


There's a solid point here. We are all better at what we practice for. I'm probably better at staying off the ground than Hanzou, because he's better on the ground than me. He's probably better at ending up in a strong position at the end of being taken down, so he does that in some cases where I'd work to prevent the takedown. We're practicing different things, so we have different strengths. I may be better at protecting against strikes on the ground than someone who only trains BJJ, because I deal with more strikes in my training (not sure about that one - that's a guess, following on your train of thought, Hanzou).

An MMA fighter is training specifically to handle trained MMA fighters and damned well ought to be better at that than I am, and better than Hanzou is. Hanzou is probably better equipped to deal with an MMA fighter than me because he is in BJJ (which covers most of the ground work the MMA guy would use, so better familiarity) and has worked out with more MMA fighters.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> There was nothing distinctively "Kung Fu" about anything that kid was doing except keeping his hands down.


Once again, wrong.

You simply lack the education to understand what you are even looking at.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 6, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> I think the key here is in the "experienced eye". Most of us would be much better at spotting the principles and movements of our own art than of any other. I, for instance, would have a very difficult time figuring out if someone was using appropriate kung fu movement and principles (of any style), but would be able to recognize better the principles and movements of those arts more closely related to my primary art, so Judo, much of Japanese Jujutsu/Aiki-Jujutsu, Aikido, Shotokan Karate, etc. In between are arts I can comprehend, but have a harder time recognizing outside the iconic moves (BJJ comes to mind), so I can see the principles, but won't recognize the art much better than anyone else.


Yup.  The problem is that those with the uneducated eye want to go on and on.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 6, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> I think the advancing shuffle punch technique that the guy in the red shirt is using can be seen at 0:54 In the Pak Hok Pai form video that you posted.  The front heel kick can be seen at 0:47  The jabs that go with the shuffle are at 1:25.  The long back hand is at 0:20
> 
> This is what people mean when they say that "application doesn't look like the form."  The applications look like techniques that are in the form.


Charging punch is a fundamental tactic.  I am looking more deeply than that however.  I an see how he uses his root and drives rotation in his waist.  It is done in a very specific way, and that is what white crane is built on.  The tactics are part of it, but without the foundational principles, the tactics don't get you very far.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Techniques in Boxing, Muay Thai, Bjj, Judo, and other "sport" styles do resemble their practice form in combat.
> 
> For example, Williams Guard in practice:
> 
> ...


I don't think you realize that crosstraining has existed long before mma came about. Mma was designed for a specific purpose, fighting in a ring or cage. It was not designed for self defense or street combat. Its specifics are sport inspired. You saud it yourself, modern boxing, (sport), modern judo(sport), moderm maui tai, (sport) modern bjj(sport). 

All of these that you mentioned, have been designed or reformulated for sport or competition.That is why they work in mma. But still, its nothing new.

Simulating combat by using and training in a sport aspect, makes it a sport. Not real combat.

I get the fact that you are pointing out that kung fu wont work for mma competitions, but mma will not work in a Kung fu competition.

Will either of them work on the street, who knows, that depends on the individual not the art.

There is a reason why you do not do a mauy tai round kick in the streets, you will expose your back, your legs, your crotch and a dozen other openings. It was known in the late 80's that it is a foolish kick to use in street combat.

Boxing is exactly the same way, thats why people focused on kicking in the early nineties.

Wrestling worked some what in street fighting, as long as whomever you were fighting didnt have friends or simply a knife to stick you with.

The realities of the street have proven time and time again, that combat sports are only partially effective in the street and most of that centers around endurance. 

These things are great for sport sure, but like traditional arts, can be lacking in a real violent situation. 

But to say that mma is better than any traditional martial art for actual defense. Is just a simple lack of experience in real world scenerios.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 6, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> The guy below is definitely not using kung fu. He definitely didn't look like basic kickboxing.  The difference is clear to see when I look at this guy from the same school (I assume)


I actually didn't look and read closely enough to realize that this is a different video from the one posted earlier.

This poor fellow hasn't got it.  He falls back into sloppy kickboxing and he doesn't have the white crane principles in place.  He is playing the same game that most people play, it's not terribly useful.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 6, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> Charging punch is a fundamental tactic.  I am looking more deeply than that however.  I an see how he uses his root and drives rotation in his waist.  It is done in a very specific way, and that is what white crane is built on.  The tactics are part of it, but without the foundational principles, the tactics don't get you very far.


that's how I was looking at it as well.  It's just there's a lot that can be discussed in relation to the root and the technique.  I don't think Hanzou would be interested in knowing it at that level so I just tried to point out the easy stuff that someone from another system would understand.

But I guess I was wrong with that because Hanzou he stated


Hanzou said:


> Jabs, shuffle punches, and heel kicks can be found in a multitude of styles. Hell, they're found in kickboxing! There was nothing distinctively "Kung Fu" about anything that kid was doing except keeping his hands down.


 which misses the entire point.  It's not about jabs, shuffles punches, and heel kicks, it's how it's done.  Heel kicks in kung fu are not the same heel kicks that are done in kickboxing.
This is a kick boxing front heel kick.  A kung fu heel kick in kung fu isn't taught like this. This would be more like a thrust kick in kick in Kung fu  The mechanics of the kick is different. 





This is a front heel kick from Wing Chun





In Jow Ga the front heel kick is is done differently than both kickboxing and Wing Chun.  For us our front heel kick is like the kick at 7:30





You may think that these kicks are the same but they aren't.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

Guthrie said:


> I don't think you realize that crosstraining has existed long before mma came about. Mma was designed for a specific purpose, fighting in a ring or cage. It was not designed for self defense or street combat. Its specifics are sport inspired. You saud it yourself, modern boxing, (sport), modern judo(sport), moderm maui tai, (sport) modern bjj(sport).
> 
> All of these that you mentioned, have been designed or reformulated for sport or competition.That is why they work in mma. But still, its nothing new.
> 
> ...




None of what you typed above has anything to do with what I was talking about. You said that no martial art looks the way it trains in combat mode. I gave you several martial arts that do look like the way they train when they fight.

BTW, several of those martial art sports work just fine in a self defense scenario.



> But to say that mma is better than any traditional martial art for actual defense. Is just a simple lack of experience in real world scenerios.



Who was saying that?


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> Once again, wrong.
> 
> You simply lack the education to understand what you are even looking at.



While I'm unfamiliar with the psuedo-science principles of white crane Kung Fu, I am familiar with good striking versus poor striking.

There's a reason why people who make a living fighting people avoid those outmoded principles and embrace more modern ones backed by actual evidence and common sense. BTW, this includes the Chinese themselves who abandoned traditional Chinese martial arts for western boxing when they created Chinese MMA.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> None of what you typed above has anything to do with what I was talking about. You said that no martial art looks the way it trains in combat mode. I gave you several martial arts that do look like the way they train when they fight.
> 
> BTW, several of those martial art sports work just fine in a self defense scenario.
> 
> ...


Obviously you are talking sport. Which I do not do and will not do. If your speaking in a sport arena...then yes. Some will look the same. But why waste your time in a sport art? If you enjoy it great...but none of them will look the same in a real situation.

Experience will teach you that.

I don't do sport martial arts so, I will no longer comment on them.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> which misses the entire point.  It's not about jabs, shuffles punches, and heel kicks, it's how it's done.  Heel kicks in kung fu are not the same heel kicks that are done in kickboxing.
> This is a kick boxing front heel kick.  A kung fu heel kick in kung fu isn't taught like this. This would be more like a thrust kick in kick in Kung fu  The mechanics of the kick is different.
> 
> 
> ...



Which isn't the point that I was making. My point is that while Kung Fu may have its own crazy method of doing things, that doesn't change the fact that when the rubber meets the road they're looking like sloppy kickboxers and very unlike the forms from which they're supposed to be pulling their techniques from. So essentially you're going in a roundabout way in order to reach the same destination versus someone simply going in a straight line (and coming out worse as a result).In the end, would you rather look like the sloppy kickboxer, or the crisp kickboxer?

The choice is pretty clear among the MMA crowd who actively seeks the most effectve striking and grappling techniques for their sport, and they seemingly aren't pulling from traditional CMA.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

Guthrie said:


> Obviously you are talking sport. Which I do not do and will not do. If your speaking in a sport arena...then yes. Some will look the same. But why waste your time in a sport art? If you enjoy it great...but none of them will look the same in a real situation.
> 
> Experience will teach you that.
> 
> I don't do sport martial arts so, I will no longer comment on them.



You do know that this thread is about MMA right? You do know that MMA is a sport right?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 6, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> An MMA fighter is training specifically to handle trained MMA fighters and damned well ought to be better at that than I am, and better than Hanzou is. Hanzou is probably better equipped to deal with an MMA fighter than me because he is in BJJ (which covers most of the ground work the MMA guy would use, so better familiarity) and has worked out with more MMA fighters.


Only if the MMA fighter is actually better than you.  Not all MMA fighters are actually good at it even if they are trained. 
These guys are trained MMA fighters.  Here's a video of someone's son having their first MMA fight.  It may or may not be the other guy's first fight. 3rd and 4th fights don't look any different. A person may or may not learn the lessons from the previous fights.





Here's an adult fight





So not everyone is a top of the line MMA fighter.   Not all MMA fighters who train MMA have the capability of performing at a professional level.  How many people train and play football, but aren't good enough to make it to the Pros?  Fighting is just like that.  Everyone that trains MMA isn't going to be at that professional level that.  Not everyone that trains MMA or BJJ have the ability to perform at that level.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> While I'm unfamiliar with the psuedo-science principles of white crane Kung Fu, I am familiar with good striking versus poor striking.
> 
> There's a reason why people who make a living fighting people avoid those outmoded principles and embrace more modern ones backed by actual evidence and common sense. BTW, this includes the Chinese themselves who abandoned traditional Chinese martial arts for western boxing when they created Chinese MMA.


Yup, there is a reason.  They get acceptable results more quickly.  People interested in sports fighting have a limited number of years to have an active career, so they need to get a moving.  They don't have time to invest in a method that yields results that are better than acceptable, because those methods do take more time and more thought and, yes, they are more tricky and often people never really grasp them.

Poor chaps like you are in the downstream of it, and never even understand that other approaches exist, how they work, and that they can yield better results.  It's because your predecessors made a calculated decision that "good enough" is good enough. And given the context of what is desired in sports fighting, it was the right decision.

But the result is that you come on here and repeatedly look like an idiot because you go on and on about stuff for which you are ignorant.

You should really limit your discussions to BJJ because that is the one field where you apparently have some actual knowledge.  I say "apparently" because I have minimal knowledge of BJJ, so I can't actually assess if you know anything or not.  You'll also notice, if you are perceptive, which I doubt, that I don't come on here and engage in discussions about BJJ.  It's because I know that I don't know much about it.  I'm smart enough to recognize that, and to not try to present myself as an expert in something I am not.

You, unfortunately, lack even that level of intelligence.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> You do know that this thread is about MMA right? You do know that MMA is a sport right?


Ya think...what you dont know is that the actual forms and applications are completely different in there execution. Thats why the points you are making show that you are experienced in sport but not reality. At least from my perspective. I could be wrong but, I dont think so. 

And you said it best ...MMA. is a sport. Which makes it a sport based competition...not an art or even self defense. A sport.

Most traditional arts were not based on sport. War, war is where they found their creation.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Only if the MMA fighter is actually better than you.  Not all MMA fighters are actually good at it even if they are trained.
> These guys are trained MMA fighters.  Here's a video of someone's son having their first MMA fight.  It may or may not be the other guy's first fight. 3rd and 4th fights don't look any different. A person may or may not learn the lessons from the previous fights.
> 
> 
> ...


In all cases of these comparisons, I assume a similar level of training and physical ability (except that I allow that MMA fighters generally have a higher fitness level than those casually training in MA, whatever our focus).


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> So essentially you're going in a roundabout way in order to reach the same destination versus someone simply going in a straight line (and coming out worse as a result).In the end, would you rather look like the sloppy kickboxer, or the crisp kickboxer?


This is what you fail to understand.  It's not a round about way.  It's a different kick and it's used differently than the front kick of a kick boxer.  I can generate enough power with that "sloppy front kick" to break a rib. I can also throw that "sloppy front kick" in a situation where it would be impossible to throw the kickboxer's front kick.

I have shown multiple videos of me throwing this type of kick effectively land it.  I'm better with this type of kick than the white crane guy sparring video and it doesn't look sloppy.  



Hanzou said:


> The choice is pretty clear among the MMA crowd who actively seeks the most effectve striking and grappling techniques for their sport, and they seemingly aren't pulling from traditional CMA


I put up pictures of people doing the shin kick technique long before MMA and UFC was even a distant idea and marketing campaign.

The technique can be found in CMA forms that older than 200 years.  How old is MMA?  How old is UFC. Many of us are older than that. So the MMA guys aren't just pulling these kicking techniques from thin air.  Just because you see an MMA do a new kick to MMA doesn't mean that the kick is actually something new and born from MMA.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> Yup, there is a reason.  They get acceptable results more quickly.  People interested in sports fighting have a limited number of years to have an active career, so they need to get a moving.  They don't have time to invest in a method that yields results that are better than acceptable, because those methods do take more time and more thought and, yes, they are more tricky and often people never really grasp them.



And yet no evidence exists to show that an extended learning curve within external CMA styles yields any benefit over other styles. Again that entire argument is pseudo science conjured up by the Chinese (though they aren't alone) peddling their martial arts to ignorant western enthusiasts. A front kick is just a front kick. That front kick doesn't become more "magical" because it took you ten years longer to perfect it.



> Poor chaps like you are in the downstream of it, and never even understand that other approaches exist, how they work, and that they can yield better results.  It's because your predecessors made a calculated decision that "good enough" is good enough. And given the context of what is desired in sports fighting, it was the right decision.



What a hilarious assumption. Given that my entire MA career is made up of some level of cross-training, I have no choice but to understand other approaches. In fact I have a pretty extensive history in striking systems (including my current practice of boxing and MMA), which is why I know piss-poor striking when I see it.

One thing that I do find interesting is how many of those traditional CMAs were originally designed for wars and revolutions, so by design they had to be learned quickly, but suddenly when they arrived in the west it took years (sometimes decades) to learn how to properly throw a punch. 

Again, a fascinating development....



> But the result is that you come on here and repeatedly look like an idiot because you go on and on about stuff for which you are ignorant.
> 
> You should really limit your discussions to BJJ because that is the one field where you apparently have some actual knowledge.  I say "apparently" because I have minimal knowledge of BJJ, so I can't actually assess if you know anything or not.  You'll also notice, if you are perceptive, which I doubt, that I don't come on here and engage in discussions about BJJ.  It's because I know that I don't know much about it.  I'm smart enough to recognize that, and to not try to present myself as an expert in something I am not.
> 
> You, unfortunately, lack even that level of intelligence.



Well in case you weren't paying attention, this is about MMA, from which Bjj is a huge part of.

Kung fu? Not so much.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> And yet no evidence exists to show that an extended learning curve within external CMA styles yields any benefit over other styles. Again that entire argument is pseudo science conjured up by the Chinese (though they aren't alone) peddling their martial arts to ignorant western enthusiasts. A front kick is just a front kick. That front kick doesn't become more "magical" because it took you ten years longer to perfect it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Wallow in your ignorance.  I remember your early discussions about your experience with striking methods.  I also remember it being clear to me that either you had poor instruction, or the method was not a good match for you.  Meaning: you would be better served doing something else.  I remember pointing that out to you.

The thread is about traditional kung fu technique seen in MMA.  I really don't care what MMA does, but you just can't help yourself from taking cheap and insulting shots at Chinese martial arts.  So I simply pointed out that, once again, you are wrong.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 6, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> In all cases of these comparisons, I assume a similar level of training and physical ability (except that I allow that MMA fighters generally have a higher fitness level than those casually training in MA, whatever our focus).


This is definitely true, I find that cardio endurance is lacking for most people who casually train in MA.  Sometimes I think the desire to be efficient with movement and technique causes us to forget to pay attention to our cardio.   Then there's that time issue that most classes are an hour long which in honesty is short in terms of training, so if anything is going to be cut out it'll be the cardio.

My first time sparring with a Sanda school was an eye opener for me on just how bad our school neglected our cardio.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> This is what you fail to understand.  It's not a round about way.  It's a different kick and it's used differently than the front kick of a kick boxer.  I can generate enough power with that "sloppy front kick" to break a rib. I can also throw that "sloppy front kick" in a situation where it would be impossible to throw the kickboxer's front kick.



Are we really going to pretend that similar kicks don't exist in other striking systems? Are we seriously going to pretend that Wing Chun or your style doesn't have a kick similar to the kick thrown by the kick boxer?

When I said "roundabout way" I'm talking about the time in which it takes for a person to gain proficiency in a MA system. If the goal is to throw effective kicks and punches and we have a MT practicioner and a Kung Fu practicioner, who do you think will reach proficiency more quickly? It's more than likely going to be the MT  practicioner. 

Hence roundabout way to the destination versus the straight line.



> I put up pictures of people doing the shin kick technique long before MMA and UFC was even a distant idea and marketing campaign.



And Shin kicks have existed in Muay Thai for centuries. I'm simply not seeing your point here. Kung Fu doesn't have a monopoly on shin or oblique kicks.



> The technique can be found in CMA forms that older than 200 years.  How old is MMA?  How old is UFC. Many of us are older than that. So the MMA guys aren't just pulling these kicking techniques from thin air.  Just because you see an MMA do a new kick to MMA doesn't mean that the kick is actually something new and born from MMA.



Again, CMA isn't the only source of striking arts known to man. A wonderful source for sure, but far from the only one. However for the sake of argument, even if a MMA fighter or coach flipped through some old CMA book and found that strike, it was the MMA method that applied the technique.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2016)

To the original point in the thread, I think there is some inherent bias against some arts when viewing MMA derivations. It doesn't much matter whether the kick was originally derived from Muay Thai or Kung Fu - it exists in both, and the fact that it shows up in MMA fights is evidence that the particular strike works in that setting. When we watch MMA, we're more likely to say, "That's Muay Thai", but if we saw someone wearing a traditional CMA uniform doing it, we'd probably say, "That's Kung Fu." Since it's in both, we are reasonably right in both cases, though the people in each example could reasonably have sourced it from the other art.

The same goes for folks who say nothing of Aikido makes it in (there's plenty I see in MMA that's probably sourced from Judo but which also exists in Aikido). I've heard people make the same mistake when talking about ground work, hearing them say nearly all of the ground work is BJJ and not seeing the Judo (many of the techniques are also found in Judo). No art or style finds all of its traditional moves making it into MMA, not even the styles that seem to be most representative (BJJ, boxing, kickboxing, Muay Thai, etc.). Those arts seem to have translated the best into that format (I'll leave the argument as to why for other threads - not the point here), but most arts can find some of "their" techniques and principles showing up in MMA, because many of those techniques show up in multiple arts. In fact, there's a reasonable argument that the techniques showing up in multiple arts makes them more likely to show up in MMA.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> Wallow in your ignorance.  I remember your early discussions about your experience with striking methods.  I also remember it being clear to me that either you had poor instruction, or the method was not a good match for you.  Meaning: you would be better served doing something else.  I remember pointing that out to you.



Ah yes, my 8 years of Shotokan karate from which I earned the rank of shodan.

However in the years since I left karate I've also taken up boxing, MMA, and an extremely brief stint of TSD. I still practice boxing, and I occasionally cross train with MMA guys.



> The thread is about traditional kung fu technique seen in MMA.  I really don't care what MMA does, but you just can't help yourself from taking cheap and insulting shots at Chinese martial arts.  So I simply pointed out that, once again, you are wrong.



Since Kung Fu is all but nonexistent in MMA, this IS a MMA thread.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 6, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> This is definitely true, I find that cardio endurance is lacking for most people who casually train in MA.  Sometimes I think the desire to be efficient with movement and technique causes us to forget to pay attention to our cardio.   Then there's that time issue that most classes are an hour long which in honesty is short in terms of training, so if anything is going to be cut out it'll be the cardio.
> 
> My first time sparring with a Sanda school was an eye opener for me on just how bad our school neglected our cardio.


Very true, and this is where a professional competitor excels.  A professional athlete needs to be in peak physical condition in order to succeed.  And that conditioning very often can make up for other deficiencies.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Ah yes, my 8 years of Shotokan karate from which I earned the rank of shodan.
> 
> However in the years since I left karate I've also taken up boxing, MMA, and an extremely brief stint of TSD. I still practice boxing, and I occasionally cross train with MMA guys.
> 
> ...


None of which impresses me, to be honest.  

But if those are things that you feel better meet your needs, well I'm glad to see you took my advice.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> To the original point in the thread, I think there is some inherent bias against some arts when viewing MMA derivations. It doesn't much matter whether the kick was originally derived from Muay Thai or Kung Fu - it exists in both, and the fact that it shows up in MMA fights is evidence that the particular strike works in that setting. When we watch MMA, we're more likely to say, "That's Muay Thai", but if we saw someone wearing a traditional CMA uniform doing it, we'd probably say, "That's Kung Fu." Since it's in both, we are reasonably right in both cases, though the people in each example could reasonably have sourced it from the other art.
> 
> The same goes for folks who say nothing of Aikido makes it in (there's plenty I see in MMA that's probably sourced from Judo but which also exists in Aikido). I've heard people make the same mistake when talking about ground work, hearing them say nearly all of the ground work is BJJ and not seeing the Judo (many of the techniques are also found in Judo). No art or style finds all of its traditional moves making it into MMA, not even the styles that seem to be most representative (BJJ, boxing, kickboxing, Muay Thai, etc.). Those arts seem to have translated the best into that format (I'll leave the argument as to why for other threads - not the point here), but most arts can find some of "their" techniques and principles showing up in MMA, because many of those techniques show up in multiple arts. In fact, there's a reasonable argument that the techniques showing up in multiple arts makes them more likely to show up in MMA.



Well if you're seeing that kick being performed in a MMA setting, its more than likely coming from a kickboxing source. In fact, MMA coaches have been known to discourage more exotic looking kicks from non MMA styles like the CMA styles. There's a fairly hilarious video of Wing Chun practicioner Shawn Obasi having a mental breakdown because a MMA coach told him to stop throwing Wing Chun kicks because they were viewed as ineffective compared to the Muay Thai or TKD kicks found in standard MMA.

In any case, I've practiced the kick in OP before. However, when I did the kick I was utilizing my Shotokan background, not some ancient Chinese source that I never trained in.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Are we really going to pretend that similar kicks don't exist in other striking systems? Are we seriously going to pretend that Wing Chun or your style doesn't have a kick similar to the kick thrown by the kick boxer?


 You are still missing the point.  I'm talking about the "sloppy" heel kick that you pointed out in the White Crane sparring video.  My only reason for posting the kick shown by the kickboxer is to show that even though all of those are front heel kicks, they are not the same and that the kick will differ with systems. Traditionally many kung fu systems don't have that kickboxer's front kick because it's over extended which makes it easier to counter or to pull the kicking leg (This goes back to the importance of root). 










Just so you know it happens outside of demo and training





This is why you don't see the kickboxer's heel kick in many CMAs.  You have to remember that many CMAs are self-defense based so in that context, if I catch your kickboxer's heel kick then I'm not going to sweep you.  I'm going to kick the knee of your standing leg so I can try to end the fight as soon as possible.  If I'm a jerk then I'm going to kick you in the groin before I kick your knee.



Hanzou said:


> When I said "roundabout way" I'm talking about the time in which it takes for a person to gain proficiency in a MA system.


Everything takes time.  Learning how to sing takes time unless you use autotune.  But if you want your want to have an Autotune fighting system then be my guess go for it.  If you truly want to be good at something then you'll need to put in the time and effort that's required to be good at it.  So if Kung Fu takes longer to learn to be good at it then so be it. A person will just have to do what's required to be good at it.  If they just want bits and pieces then they can Autotune their training and have gaps in their understanding.



Hanzou said:


> If the goal is to throw effective kicks and punches and we have a MT practicioner and a Kung Fu practicioner, who do you think will reach proficiency more quickly?


 Being proficient isn't a race.  It took me longer to learn how to jab using Jow Ga techniques then it took my brother to learn Muay Thai jab techniques.  But like I said, it's not race.  If Jow Ga jab techniques take longer to learn then so be it.  Even though my brother learned his Muay Thai jab faster than I learned my Jow Ga jab, my Jow Ga jab is actually stronger than his jab.  His jab is general and focuses on hitting the  general areas of the face and the body.  My is specific, I'm trying to hit specific spots on the face and the head.  I can throw my jab from a leaning position or kneeling position. I can throw my jab will blocking at the same time.  I can throw my jab in a way that it shaves and redirects your punch while allowing my punch to travel straight. I can jab with a horizontal fist or a vertical fist.  My jab can be used downward or horizontally or upward.  
So now to your question about proficiency?  When the Muay Thai fighter reaches proficiency of the Jab before the Kung Fu practictioner.  At what level of proficiency is he truly  at.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Again, CMA isn't the only source of striking arts known to man. A wonderful source for sure, but far from the only one. However for the sake of argument, even if a MMA fighter or coach flipped through some old CMA book and found that strike, it was the MMA method that applied the technique.


In here is my problem and the reason I made the thread in the first place.  The "MMA method."  just because someone does a technique in MMA doesn't mean it's "The MMA Method"


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> You are still missing the point.  I'm talking about the "sloppy" heel kick that you pointed out in the White Crane sparring video.  My only reason for posting the kick shown by the kickboxer is to show that even though all of those are front heel kicks, they are not the same and that the kick will differ with systems. Traditionally many kung fu systems don't have that kickboxer's front kick because it's over extended which makes it easier to counter or to pull the kicking leg (This goes back to the importance of root).
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So to make a long story short, you're arguing that the Chinese Martial Arts method to striking is *superior* to the methods found in Karate, TKD, Boxing, Muay Thai, and MMA?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> So to make a long story short, you're arguing that the Chinese Martial Arts method is *superior* to the methods found in Karate, TKD, Muay Thai, and MMA?


  Show me where I have said this.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Show me where I have said this.



You said that the standard karate/MMA/MT/etc. front kick is bad because it can be caught. You said that your martial art and other CMAs had learned a superior kicking method that prevents your front kicks from being caught.

You then told the story about your Muay Thai pracitcing brother learning the jab faster than you did, but in the end your Kung Fu-based jab came out better with far more applications.

Finally you called Karate, TKD, MMA, and other fast learning arts "autotune" martial arts. A method of singing where you have to use the aid of a machine because you lack a decent singing voice. In other words, we're just faking it, while you guys are doing the "real" stuff.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 6, 2016)

How long does it take to get a black belt in BJJ?

There is your answer.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 6, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> There's a solid point here. We are all better at what we practice for. I'm probably better at staying off the ground than Hanzou, because he's better on the ground than me. He's probably better at ending up in a strong position at the end of being taken down, so he does that in some cases where I'd work to prevent the takedown. We're practicing different things, so we have different strengths. I may be better at protecting against strikes on the ground than someone who only trains BJJ, because I deal with more strikes in my training (not sure about that one - that's a guess, following on your train of thought, Hanzou).
> 
> An MMA fighter is training specifically to handle trained MMA fighters and damned well ought to be better at that than I am, and better than Hanzou is. Hanzou is probably better equipped to deal with an MMA fighter than me because he is in BJJ (which covers most of the ground work the MMA guy would use, so better familiarity) and has worked out with more MMA fighters.



Providing all methods of training have a fundamentally equal result. Which I personally dont accept as a constant as that is story based. Not really evidence based.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 6, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> To the original point in the thread, I think there is some inherent bias against some arts when viewing MMA derivations. It doesn't much matter whether the kick was originally derived from Muay Thai or Kung Fu - it exists in both, and the fact that it shows up in MMA fights is evidence that the particular strike works in that setting.


 Exactly.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 6, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Only if the MMA fighter is actually better than you.  Not all MMA fighters are actually good at it even if they are trained.
> These guys are trained MMA fighters.  Here's a video of someone's son having their first MMA fight.  It may or may not be the other guy's first fight. 3rd and 4th fights don't look any different. A person may or may not learn the lessons from the previous fights.
> 
> 
> ...



The existence of people who are at that top level. Has an influence on the everyones training though. If you are trained by top guys. You really should get better results. So if old mate opened a school. You could look up you tube and discern that he is not very good. And go train with someone who is good.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 6, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> In here is my problem and the reason I made the thread in the first place.  The "MMA method."  just because someone does a technique in MMA doesn't mean it's "The MMA Method"



what do you think the MMA method is?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> You said that the standard karate/MMA/MT/etc. front kick is bad because it can be caught. You said that your martial art and other CMAs had learned a superior kicking method that prevents your front kicks from being caught.


Show me where I said any of this. The only thing I said is that the kicks is easy to catch, I actually train to catch and counter the kickboxer's front heel kick.  Do you?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> You then told the story about your Muay Thai pracitcing brother learning the jab faster than you did, but in the end your Kung Fu-based jab came out better with far more applications.


How many ways do you know how to effectively apply a jab.  Feel free to share your skill set.



Hanzou said:


> Finally you called Karate, TKD, MMA, and other fast learning arts "autotune" martial arts.


 Show me where I said that they were autotune. To be proficient in Karate and TKD takes significantly longer to do than to learn how to fight in MMA.  If you want to be proficient in using Karate, and TKD techniques beyond the kicks then then you'll need to have deep understanding of the techniques.  This takes times and is not a fast process.  Even recently on the discussion posts here, people have stated that the real learning of karate doesn't come until the student reaches black belt.  While the system that I train isn't like that, it still takes time to be proficient in the techniques.  It's not fast process, just like learning how to be proficient in Karate, TKD, aren't fast processes.

MMA on the other is different.  If you can throw fists, decent elbows, and throw kicks and make it hurt then you can do MMA.  Here's Kimbo Slice proving that point.  Wait he didn't kick.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 6, 2016)

drop bear said:


> The existence of people who are at that top level. Has an influence on the everyones training though. If you are trained by top guys. You really should get better results. So if old mate opened a school. You could look up you tube and discern that he is not very good. And go train with someone who is good.


I totally agree with this.  The quality of instruction is vital.



drop bear said:


> what do you think the MMA method is?


I personally don't believe in an MMA method. But people like Hanzou seem to think that there is one that's separate from actually doing a technique. They believe that a technique isn't valid unless it's done in MMA and that the only reason a traditional martial art technique works is because it was done "The MMA Way."  It's sort of like how some people thought that TKD kicks wouldn't work in MMA and then they started showing up in MMA, but the TKD kick was only valid because someone pulled it off in MMA.  The reality is that the kick was valid before MMA hence that's the reason the fighter was able to pull it off in an MMA match.  

That low kick "oblique kick" that Jon Jones does was valid before MMA which is why it worked in MMA. But some people like Hanzou think that MMA is what made it valid.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Show me where I said any of this. The only thing I said is that the kicks is easy to catch, I actually train to catch and counter the kickboxer's front heel kick.  Do you?



You also said that your "Kung Fu kick" is hard to catch, which is essentially saying that your Kung Fu front kick is better than the standard front kick taught in the arts I mentioned.



JowGaWolf said:


> Traditionally many kung fu systems don't have that kick boxer's front kick because it's over extended which makes it easier to counter or to pull the kicking leg (This goes back to the importance of root).



You continued;



JowGaWolf said:


> This is why you don't see the kick boxer's heel kick in many CMAs. You have to remember that many CMAs are self-defense based so in that context, if I catch your kickboxer's heel kick then I'm not going to sweep you. I'm going to kick the knee of your standing leg so I can try to end the fight as soon as possible. If I'm a jerk then I'm going to kick you in the groin before I kick your knee.



So essentially the kick boxer is throwing out a flawed front kick that is ripe for destruction, while the CMA folks have trained a better front kick that can avoid getting caught and getting kicked in the sack.



JowGaWolf said:


> How many ways do you know how to effectively apply a jab.  Feel free to share your skill set.



What does my ability to throw a jab have to do with you saying that the Jow Ga jab is superior to the Muay Thai jab?



> Show me where I said that they were autotune.





JowGaWolf said:


> Everything takes time.  Learning how to sing takes time unless you use autotune.  *But if you want your want to have an Autotune fighting system then be my guess go for it.*  If you truly want to be good at something then you'll need to put in the time and effort that's required to be good at it.  So if Kung Fu takes longer to learn to be good at it then so be it. A person will just have to do what's required to be good at it. * If they just want bits and pieces then they can Autotune their training and have gaps in their understanding.*



Essentially you're saying that we're in an "autotune fighting system" because we're becoming proficient at a quicker pace than a traditional stylist.

Let me know if I missed anything.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> However, when I did the kick I was utilizing my Shotokan background, not some ancient Chinese source that I never trained in.


The kick is older than Shotokan. which is was created around 1936.  The founder would have learned the technique sooner before the creation of Shotokan.  Japanese martial arts share many techniques that are similar to Chinese martial arts because that's where Japanese martial arts come from.

Jow Ga Kung Fu is older than Shotokan, and the technique was taught in other systems such as Hung Gar, Choy Gar and some shaolin styles before Jow Ga was created.  Shotokan from what I read was also made of various martial arts systems which means. The founder was taught techniques from another system which were likely to contain the same kick.  Like all system founders.  They tend to keep techniques that they like and could use well.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Well if you're seeing that kick being performed in a MMA setting, its more than likely coming from a kickboxing source. In fact, MMA coaches have been known to discourage more exotic looking kicks from non MMA styles like the CMA styles. There's a fairly hilarious video of Wing Chun practicioner Shawn Obasi having a mental breakdown because a MMA coach told him to stop throwing Wing Chun kicks because they were viewed as ineffective compared to the Muay Thai or TKD kicks found in standard MMA.
> 
> In any case, I've practiced the kick in OP before. However, when I did the kick I was utilizing my Shotokan background, not some ancient Chinese source that I never trained in.


My point is that it's an effective technique, and is found in several arts. Which one it was sourced from is not terribly important - it's much the same in several arts. Thus, when JGW calls it a Kung Fu kick, he's not wrong, nor would you be wrong to call it a Shotokan kick or a kickboxing kick.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> You also said that your "Kung Fu kick" is hard to catch, which is essentially saying that your Kung Fu front kick is better than the standard front kick taught in the arts I mentioned.


 The kick is harder to catch which is not the same as better than something else.  If I catch your kick and break your standing knee then it doesn't matter how powerful your kick was because the problem was that I was able to catch it and break your knee.

As a martial artist you need to think beyond hitting and kicking as hard as you can as the only side of fighting that makes a difference. If you try to thrust kick me and I catch your leg and break your standing leg then how valuable was your kick that you could only do once?  But if you did a front kick that returned quickly which made it difficult for me to catch and break your leg, then you can use that same kick over and over because I wouldn't be able to catch it.

One thing that traditional martial arts instructors tell all students is to not leave that kicking leg hanging out there.



Hanzou said:


> So essentially the kick boxer is throwing out a flawed front kick that is ripe for destruction, while the CMA folks have trained a better front kick that can avoid getting caught and getting kicked in the sack.


  For self-defense purposes the high front kick that they use in Muay Thai sporting is dangerous. to do because it leaves them open for a sweep and easy counters.  I'll have to see if I can find that traditional Muay Thai video to see if I can see if the front kick is done lower.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> The kick is older than Shotokan. which is was created around 1936.  The founder would have learned the technique sooner before the creation of Shotokan.  Japanese martial arts share many techniques that are similar to Chinese martial arts because that's where Japanese martial arts come from.
> 
> Jow Ga Kung Fu is older than Shotokan, and the technique was taught in other systems such as Hung Gar, Choy Gar and some shaolin styles before Jow Ga was created.  Shotokan from what I read was also made of various martial arts systems which means. The founder was taught techniques from another system which were likely to contain the same kick.  Like all system founders.  They tend to keep techniques that they like and could use well.



Um okay....

My striking background is Shotokan, so I learned to kick via Shotokan. I saw Jon Jones' kick in a MMA bout a few years ago, and thought it would be a nice kick to add to my stand up game. I picked up the kick very quickly, probably got it about the second time I did it. However, the mechanics I was using in order to make the kick work were from Shotokan, not from whatever martial void the kick actually came from.

Its no different than someone with a wrestling background becoming more proficient more quickly in grappling arts due to their wrestling skill.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Providing all methods of training have a fundamentally equal result. Which I personally dont accept as a constant as that is story based. Not really evidence based.


Because you don't like evidence that's not from sport competition.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> The kick is harder to catch which is not the same as better than something else.  If I catch your kick and break your standing knee then it doesn't matter how powerful your kick was because the problem was that I was able to catch it and break your knee.



LoL! 

If you have two kicks, and one kick is prone to getting caught, and the other isn't, the latter is the superior kick.



> As a martial artist you need to think beyond hitting and kicking as hard as you can as the only side of fighting that makes a difference. If you try to thrust kick me and I catch your leg and break your standing leg then how valuable was your kick that you could only do once?  But if you did a front kick that returned quickly which made it difficult for me to catch and break your leg, then you can use that same kick over and over because I wouldn't be able to catch it.





> One thing that traditional martial arts instructors tell all students is to not leave that kicking leg hanging out there.
> 
> For self-defense purposes the high front kick that they use in Muay Thai sporting is dangerous. to do because it leaves them open for a sweep and easy counters.  I'll have to see if I can find that traditional Muay Thai video to see if I can see if the front kick is done lower.



So again, are you or are you not saying that you have a superior kicking method to a kick boxer? It certainly sounds like you are.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> My point is that it's an effective technique, and is found in several arts. Which one it was sourced from is not terribly important - it's much the same in several arts. Thus, when JGW calls it a Kung Fu kick, he's not wrong, nor would you be wrong to call it a Shotokan kick or a kickboxing kick.



Well in the MMA context he is wrong since we have yet to see anyone with a Kung fu background utilize that kick in MMA.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 6, 2016)

Oh boy.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 6, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Because you don't like evidence that's not from sport competition.



I dont like dogma.  And there is too much of it in martial arts.  Every one got told oblique kicks will put your knee straight out. Usually with that 9 pounds of force will break a knee rubbish.

It plainly doesn't. And that messes with people.

I love evidence that is not from sport.  But nobody ever presents that either. 

Just stories.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> If you have two kicks, and one kick is prone to getting caught, and the other isn't, the latter is the superior kick.


On that measure, yes. But the other may have other advantages - more power, faster, more vulnerable targets, sets up a second move, etc. Lower catchability is only one measure of a strike's effectiveness.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Well in the MMA context he is wrong since we have yet to see anyone with a Kung fu background utilize that kick in MMA.


That doesn't change the fact that it's a kick in Kung Fu. That's the point of my earlier post. We can't discount that link just because that's not the source for the user. It's still a valid Kung Fu technique that shows up in MMA.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2016)

drop bear said:


> I dont like dogma.  And there is too much of it in martial arts.  Every one got told oblique kicks will put your knee straight out. Usually with that 9 pounds of force will break a knee rubbish.
> 
> It plainly doesn't. And that messes with people.
> 
> ...


That's a valid point about things like the knee kick. I know a knee kick can do damage (plenty of relevant similar impacts in other sports that produced injury), but it seems less likely than most of us were told (plenty of relevant impacts in other sports that didn't).

The issue with non-sport evidence, as I mentioned earlier, is that there's simply too small a sample to call anything statistically valid. We have plenty of evidence, but we have to do some analysis to draw conclusions. There simply aren't enough muggings of martial artists to get any statistically valid samples. Nonetheless, as with psychology and medical science, we can draw some information by combining case studies and related evidence from other sources (in some cases, from sport). I would dearly love to have some sport evidence about some techniques, but that evidence would be a bunch of broken bones, and that's not very sporting. So, I work with a combination of real-world use, seeing the reactions it causes in the dojo (the least trustworthy source, but information to work with, nonetheless), and injuries incurred in both cases.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> That doesn't change the fact that it's a kick in Kung Fu. That's the point of my earlier post. We can't discount that link just because that's not the source for the user. It's still a valid Kung Fu technique that shows up in MMA.



It may be a kick in Kung Fu, but that doesn't mean that Jon Jones is performing Kung Fu when he uses that technique.



gpseymour said:


> On that measure, yes. But the other may have other advantages - more power, faster, more vulnerable targets, sets up a second move, etc. Lower catchability is only one measure of a strike's effectiveness.



Jow Ga made no indication that the kick they do is deficient in any way.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> It may be a kick in Kung Fu, but that doesn't mean that Jon Jones is performing Kung Fu when he uses that technique.


That's a distinction that serves no purpose, Hanzou. If we look only at where the user got the information, we fail to recognize other potential sources. That Jon Jones got it from somewhere else doesn't change the fact that if someone looked at that particular technique in Kung Fu, they'd get a similar technique. This is the issue people have when looking at other arts and MMA, too. There are arts that are popular within MMA circles, so the techniques that cross many styles get attributed to those arts. That doesn't change the fact that those techniques are also found in other arts. Thus, when people say there's no Aikido in MMA, they're missing hip throws, arm drags, and other techniques that are found within Aikido. When they say the ground game is BJJ, they miss that many of the same techniques are (or at least WERE) found in Judo's ground game. We can't ask any art to be present only in what's unique to that art, or there would be scarcely any BJJ, Muay Thai, etc. in there, either.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 6, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Every one got told oblique kicks will put your knee straight out. Usually with that 9 pounds of force will break a knee rubbish.


If you saw the video of me of doing the kick on a heavy bag then you would see that the kick easily has more than 9 pounds of force. This is why I offered to show you the video so that you could see the reality of the kick. That way you don't have to base your knowledge on inaccurate stuff like that.



drop bear said:


> I love evidence that is not from sport. But nobody ever presents that either.


I have a video of me using the technique against a heavy bag laying down on the floor. Would the sound of the impact and the distance the bag moves from the kick be enough evidence as to how much force is generated?  If that's not good enough, then you can always volunteer your knee for an actual knee break.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 6, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Jow Ga made no indication that the kick they do is deficient in any way.


 I didn't think that I had to.  Fighting techniques usually only have deficiency when you try to use them outside of the context and purpose of which there were developed.  If I used the technique within it's limits and purpose then it doesn't have any deficiencies.   If I try to kick you in the face with the kick then it's going to be extremely deficient.  

If you actually took the time to understand the stuff you train then you would have a better understanding of kicks.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 6, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> I would dearly love to have some sport evidence about some techniques, but that evidence would be a bunch of broken bones, and that's not very sporting. So, I work with a combination of real-world use, seeing the reactions it causes in the dojo (the least trustworthy source, but information to work with, nonetheless), and injuries incurred in both cases.


I solved the problem of this.  People who don't believe can donate that body part so that a martial artist can use the technique at full force.  If they don't think the technique is useless or that the knee won't break then they won't have anything to lose.  It's a guaranteed win.  But if they have the slightest chance that the knee will break or at a minimum  they will be severely injured, then the logical assumption is that they won't allow the technique be performed on them.  I'll even give them a chance to try to defend against it so they can say that "there was resistance" 

I'm now accepting applications lol.  I have a couple of kung fu techniques to demonstrate.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> That's a distinction that serves no purpose, Hanzou. If we look only at where the user got the information, we fail to recognize other potential sources. That Jon Jones got it from somewhere else doesn't change the fact that if someone looked at that particular technique in Kung Fu, they'd get a similar technique. This is the issue people have when looking at other arts and MMA, too. There are arts that are popular within MMA circles, so the techniques that cross many styles get attributed to those arts. That doesn't change the fact that those techniques are also found in other arts. Thus, when people say there's no Aikido in MMA, they're missing hip throws, arm drags, and other techniques that are found within Aikido. When they say the ground game is BJJ, they miss that many of the same techniques are (or at least WERE) found in Judo's ground game. We can't ask any art to be present only in what's unique to that art, or there would be scarcely any BJJ, Muay Thai, etc. in there, either.



Well for starters we don't know where Jones got the kick. It's fully possible that he simply developed it on his own and it simply looks similar to a Kung fu or Karate kick.

Further, saying that the kick is "kung fu" is silly. Jon Jones has never trained Kung Fu his entire life. He's using MMA tactics and principles, thus any technique he's doing is coming from that sphere of influence. For example, I'm not suddenly doing Hung Gar (sp?) because I'm doing a reverse punch. I'm not suddenly doing Aikido because I'm performing a wrist lock.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 6, 2016)

Here is the truth of the matter.

There is a huge amount of overlap, in terms of what techniques are found in one system to the next.  They may not be exact or identical, but they are similar or variants.  Punches,kicks, elbows, knees, joint locks and manipulations, throws, takedowns, immobilizations, grapplings, breaks, rips, pokes, etc.  lots of systems have lots of these, in some shape or other.  Very few techniques are found exclusively in only one system.  That is a rarity.

It is a mistake to think this or that technique is from this or that system.  It is also a mistake to think it is not.

A martial system really defines a training methodology, more than a body of techniques.  I think many people focus on the techniques, and fail to recognize the training methodology underneath.  And so we have arguments over whether Jon Jones is doing Kung fu or something else when he throws a certain kick.  What he is doing with that kick depends on the context in which he learned it.  But someone else doing the same, or a variant on the same kick, is doing it from whatever context he learned it.

People need to stop thinking about a martial system as techniques, and start recognizing it as the methodology used to learn and develop and train and practice skill with those techniques.  It is mostly a shared body of techniques.  But the methodology can be quite different from one system to another.  That is where the real difference lies.

Once you can recognize that, most debates like this one become pretty meaningless.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> I didn't think that I had to.  Fighting techniques usually only have deficiency when you try to use them outside of the context and purpose of which there were developed.  If I used the technique within it's limits and purpose then it doesn't have any deficiencies.   If I try to kick you in the face with the kick then it's going to be extremely deficient.
> 
> If you actually took the time to understand the stuff you train then you would have a better understanding of kicks.



They day I see a real Kung Fu stylist enter a MMA tournament and perform well is the day I will buy the notion that Kung Fu striking is on par or better than MMA striking. 

Until then.....

Again, even the Chinese themselves don't believe what you're saying here.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> They day I see a real Kung Fu stylist enter a MMA tournament and perform well is the day I will buy the notion that Kung Fu striking is on par or better than MMA striking.
> 
> Until then.....
> 
> Again, even the Chinese themselves don't believe what you're saying here.


What Chinese?  The ones who practice traditional Kung fu?  Those Chinese?

Oh I forgot, some Chinese have embraced MMA style competitions.  Imagine that.

They are Chinese.  They are not THE Chinese.

Seriously. What a nonsensical statement to make.


----------



## kuniggety (Oct 7, 2016)

I studied TCMA for awhile. I really enjoyed it. It helped me develop my athleticism: calisthenic strength, flexibility, speed, etc. I built up reflexes and "feel" by doing sticky hands. However, you can look to the famous '70s match where 5 top kung fu fighters traveled to Bangkok and fought bare knuckle against 5 Muay Thai fighters. Everyone single one got KO'd or TKO'd by the MT stylists in the first round. They just weren't as brutal as they thought they were.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 7, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> If you saw the video of me of doing the kick on a heavy bag then you would see that the kick easily has more than 9 pounds of force. This is why I offered to show you the video so that you could see the reality of the kick. That way you don't have to base your knowledge on inaccurate stuff like that.
> 
> I have a video of me using the technique against a heavy bag laying down on the floor. Would the sound of the impact and the distance the bag moves from the kick be enough evidence as to how much force is generated?  If that's not good enough, then you can always volunteer your knee for an actual knee break.



Sorry the 9 pounds of force is not true. Just a made up number.

A bag dosent hit back.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 7, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> What Chinese?  The ones who practice traditional Kung fu?  Those Chinese?
> 
> Oh I forgot, some Chinese have embraced MMA style competitions.  Imagine that.
> 
> ...



The Chinese who have chosen MMA over their own traditional styles, leading to a massive decline in traditional CMAs in China.

And the Chinese who created their own system of MMA, yet chose to utilize western boxing over traditional CMA methods.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 7, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> That's a valid point about things like the knee kick. I know a knee kick can do damage (plenty of relevant similar impacts in other sports that produced injury), but it seems less likely than most of us were told (plenty of relevant impacts in other sports that didn't).
> 
> The issue with non-sport evidence, as I mentioned earlier, is that there's simply too small a sample to call anything statistically valid. We have plenty of evidence, but we have to do some analysis to draw conclusions. There simply aren't enough muggings of martial artists to get any statistically valid samples. Nonetheless, as with psychology and medical science, we can draw some information by combining case studies and related evidence from other sources (in some cases, from sport). I would dearly love to have some sport evidence about some techniques, but that evidence would be a bunch of broken bones, and that's not very sporting. So, I work with a combination of real-world use, seeing the reactions it causes in the dojo (the least trustworthy source, but information to work with, nonetheless), and injuries incurred in both cases.



That knee kick is thrown as hard as you can to do as much damage as you can.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Well for starters we don't know where Jones got the kick. It's fully possible that he simply developed it on his own and it simply looks similar to a Kung fu or Karate kick.
> 
> Further, saying that the kick is "kung fu" is silly. Jon Jones has never trained Kung Fu his entire life. He's using MMA tactics and principles, thus any technique he's doing is coming from that sphere of influence. For example, I'm not suddenly doing Hung Gar (sp?) because I'm doing a reverse punch. I'm not suddenly doing Aikido because I'm performing a wrist lock.


Most of my strikes came to me directly through NGA, but NGA sourced them from elsewhere in the 1940's - most likely Shotokan, possibly with some Goju influence when it came to the US in the 1960's. It is not incorrect to say I use a Shotokan kick, simply because I didn't learn it there and I know it as NGA's Rear Leg Round Kick. If the same kick exists in Goju, it would not be incorrect for a student of that style to say, "Ah! That's our ____ kick!" It is all three of those kicks, perhaps with minor variations.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> The Chinese who have chosen MMA over their own traditional styles, leading to a massive decline in traditional CMAs in China.
> 
> And the Chinese who created their own system of MMA, yet chose to utilize western boxing over traditional CMA methods.


Yup, there are some Chinese who are doing that, I agree.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 7, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> Here is the truth of the matter.
> 
> There is a huge amount of overlap, in terms of what techniques are found in one system to the next.  They may not be exact or identical, but they are similar or variants.  Punches,kicks, elbows, knees, joint locks and manipulations, throws, takedowns, immobilizations, grapplings, breaks, rips, pokes, etc.  lots of systems have lots of these, in some shape or other.  Very few techniques are found exclusively in only one system.  That is a rarity.
> 
> ...


Sometime, I'd like to start a separate thread to dig into this a bit. You and I have a different view of what a system is, what defines it. We would be far OT here, but I think it would be an interesting discussion.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 7, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> Yup, there are some Chinese who are doing that, I agree.



Kung Fu’s Identity Crisis - Roads & Kingdoms
Why Kung Fu Masters Refuse to Teach  | VICE Sports
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/23/world/asia/hong-kong-kung-fu.html?_r=0

The main reason this is happening is because people (rightfully) believe that spending ten years to learn how to kick or punch properly is nonsense. This is especially true when you have equal methods where you can learn how to fight far more quickly.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 7, 2016)

drop bear said:


> That knee kick is thrown as hard as you can to do as much damage as you can.


Agreed. If I only deliver 9 lbs of force, that's unlikely to damage the knee, with the possible exception of a knee in a very compromised position (locked out, awkward weight transfer). I suspect that's where the number came from - if it has any accuracy at all - a worst-case scenario for the knee. It would take considerably more force to do more than strain the knee.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 7, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Sorry the 9 pounds of force is not true. Just a made up number.
> 
> A bag dosent hit back.


 A bag doesn't hit back when I punch it and that hasn't stopped me from landing the same punches to someone's face.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Kung Fu’s Identity Crisis - Roads & Kingdoms
> Why Kung Fu Masters Refuse to Teach  | VICE Sports
> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/23/world/asia/hong-kong-kung-fu.html?_r=0
> 
> The main reason this is happening is because people (rightfully) believe that spending ten years to learn how to kick or punch properly is nonsense. This is especially true when you have equal methods where you can learn how to fight far more quickly.


Hmmm...you mean the same way traditional martial arts in the US disappeared when the UFC got started?

Oh my mistake, that never happened...


----------



## RTKDCMB (Oct 7, 2016)

drop bear said:


> A bag dosent hit back.


It does if you don't watch out for the back swing after you've hit it.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 7, 2016)

kuniggety said:


> I studied TCMA for awhile. I really enjoyed it. It helped me develop my athleticism: calisthenic strength, flexibility, speed, etc. I built up reflexes and "feel" by doing sticky hands. However, you can look to the famous '70s match where 5 top kung fu fighters traveled to Bangkok and fought bare knuckle against 5 Muay Thai fighters. Everyone single one got KO'd or TKO'd by the MT stylists in the first round. They just weren't as brutal as they thought they were.


I don't know anything about this match, or who the participants were.

However, the 1970s would have been deep within the era of Modern Wushu, developed and promoted by the Communist government as a cultural performance art and a very deliberate move away from effective fighting martial arts.  This movement was begun in the 1950s, and did a lot of damage to traditional Chinese fighting systems.  Practice was forbidden, people disappeared for disobeying the government, people starved, and a lot of good Kung fu was forgotten, that much is true.  This was a movement by the government to take over control of martial activity and eliminate effective fighting methods.  Much of the good Chinese fighting methods that managed to survive did so because people were able to escape china and continue on elsewhere like Taiwan, Hong Kong, USA, Australia, Europe, etc.
And the government began this martial purge long long before UFC and the rise in popularity of MMA in anything like its modern form.


So it is entirely possible that these participants were based in performance wushu, and would not be surprising if they cannot fight.  Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the government didn't have a hand in setting it up to guarantee failure for the Chinese fighters, to further their control of all physical education in china. It would have been propaganda to support the theme that all old things are bad and must be done away with.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 7, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> Hmmm...you mean the same way traditional martial arts in the US disappeared when the UFC got started?
> 
> Oh my mistake, that never happened...



Well no, since no one ever made the argument that TMAs have disappeared, and Kung Fu declining in China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong is actually occurring.

Seeing Bjj getting practiced in an ancient Kung Fu temple is quite telling.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Kung Fu’s Identity Crisis - Roads & Kingdoms
> Why Kung Fu Masters Refuse to Teach  | VICE Sports
> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/23/world/asia/hong-kong-kung-fu.html?_r=0
> 
> The main reason this is happening is because people (rightfully) believe that spending ten years to learn how to kick or punch properly is nonsense. This is especially true when you have equal methods where you can learn how to fight far more quickly.


So I took a few minutes and read thru the attached article.  
There is some truth in it, but there are also some very questionable conclusions being drawn because a lot of history is ignored.

The takeover by the communists brought in some very tough times in china.  Oppression, paranoia as neighbors spied on and reported each other for unapproved activities, starvation, disappeared people, and a propaganda that focused on the elimination of old culture in favor of new.  That propaganda was the basis for a lot of the atrocities during that era, and included the suppression and elimination of traditional martial arts, in favor of the performance-oriented and very deliberately  not combat -effective Modern Wushu that was invented by the government.

So the government, for political and propaganda reasons, began to kill off traditional martial arts in china in the 1950s.  That process began well before the modern popularity of MMA and the UFC.  For decades now, it has been increasingly difficult to find quality traditional Chinese martial arts, in china.  Modern performance wushu has become the norm, is actively supported by the government, and is even used in places like Shaolin Temple in a fraudulent deception portrayal of martial arts.  Yes, the monks also do modern performance wushu, but they don't want you and I to know it.

As an aside, one of my Sifus visited shaolin in the 1980s, and demonstrated some traditional long fist material.  A couple of very old monks commented to him in private, that they remembered when that stuff USED TO BE practiced at Shaolin.

So, the government has taken a very active role in dictating activity in china, including martial arts.  In recent decades the government has woken up to what is going on in the world around them, and they know a money making opportunity when they see one.  With the rise in popularity of MMA, they see an opportunity for money and prestige, so they jump right in.  They are developing their own version of competition martial arts in a desire to compete and take a piece of that pie.  It is State sponsored, and they go for it.  Nothing about this is surprising.  That is exactly what china does.

But without some understanding of the history before all of this, it is easy to make some very uneducated and erroneous conclusions.  Traditional Chinese martial arts are not being abandoned in favor of MMA because of a perception that they are ineffective.  The truth is, they were being eliminated at the direction of the government long before now, so the good stuff is already hard to find in china.  And, the government wants people to do MMA and similar competition type stuff, because they want a place internationally, for national pride, so there is still a lot of propaganda around that.

Seriously Hanzou, you are uneducated about this stuff.  I am offering you an opportunity to get some of that education.  But you need to be open to receiving it, and you need to stop acting like an expert in things about which you are ignorant.

There is nothing wrong with ignorance, so long as you are open to being educated when the opportunity arises.

But refusing an education and choosing deliberate ignorance is stupidity on a whole other level.

Make your choice.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 7, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> So it is entirely possible that these participants were based in performance wushu, and would not be surprising if they cannot fight.


 This is true even for today.  I'm also sure that there were people who see a technique performed and then try to imitate the technique without understanding how the technique really works.    I run across many videos of people teaching kung fu techniques on you tube, and instantly I can tell that the mechanics for the technique are wrong and that the person really doesn't understand what he's doing, yet in his mind he does.  As a result these same people open a school thinking that they know kung fu.

In my mind this is what wushu is like.  It's a visual imitation of something real.  A fake gun may look real, feel real, but lack the small things that allow it to function.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 7, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> This is true even for today.  I'm also sure that there were people who see a technique performed and then try to imitate the technique without understanding how the technique really works.    I run across many videos of people teaching kung fu techniques on you tube, and instantly I can tell that the mechanics for the technique are wrong and that the person really doesn't understand what he's doing, yet in his mind he does.  As a result these same people open a school thinking that they know kung fu.
> 
> In my mind this is what wushu is like.  It's a visual imitation of something real.  A fake gun may look real, feel real, but lack the small things that allow it to function.


Yup, and modern wushu is alive and well today, so there are all kinds of people involved in that, who cannot fight, and were never meant to.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 7, 2016)

RTKDCMB said:


> It does if you don't watch out for the back swing after you've hit it.


Or, if you forget about the bottom ring and do an upward instep kick.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 7, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Or, if you forget about the bottom ring and do an upward instep kick.


Ouch!


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Well no, since no one ever made the argument that TMAs have disappeared, and Kung Fu declining in China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong is actually occurring.
> 
> Seeing Bjj getting practiced in an ancient Kung Fu temple is quite telling.


statements of ignorance.  
TMA's have disappeared





The Shaolin Temple Tagou Wushu School has 35,000 Students
Source: Kung fu hustle: Where to learn martial arts in China - CNN.com
http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/13/travel/experts-guide-to-learning-kung-fu-in-china/
Seeing BJJ getting practiced in an ancient Kung Fu temple is quite telling.
Thinking about the future of Kung Fu
"One of the main points that I attempted to emphasize is that the Chinese martial arts have always shown a great deal of flexibility and adaptability.  A lot of what we currently think of as “tradition” is really not all that old and was introduced as a successful “market adaptation” at some point in the not to distant past.  Indeed, “evolving with the times” is perhaps the oldest and most important tradition of Kung Fu."

"Secondly, I think that we cause some confusion by comparing the state of the traditional Chinese martial arts today to the 1980s or 1990s when China was in the grip of “Kung Fu Fever.”  In truth these were exceptional times when unprecedented numbers of people took up the martial arts.  They are not the sort of decades that you really want to use as a “baseline” to set your expectations by."

"In the grand scheme of things the traditional Chinese arts have always been somewhat marginal.  They have always struggled to find upwardly mobile students.  So perhaps our current situation is not as dire, or at least not as novel, as some have claimed."

Very good read that discusses Kung Fu in  ChinaSource: Some thoughts from Professor Ben Judkins of Kung Fu Tea - The Last Masters
"People are saying that "kung fu is dying"?"   Answer


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 7, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> Ouch!


That's what I should have said. Fortunately, there was nobody in that part of the dojo at the time.

On a side note, I'm apparently not the only one who did that. I went in one time and saw someone had duct-taped a focus pad to the bottom of the bag. Genius.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 7, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> So I took a few minutes and read thru the attached article.
> There is some truth in it, but there are also some very questionable conclusions being drawn because a lot of history is ignored.
> 
> The takeover by the communists brought in some very tough times in china.  Oppression, paranoia as neighbors spied on and reported each other for unapproved activities, starvation, disappeared people, and a propaganda that focused on the elimination of old culture in favor of new.  That propaganda was the basis for a lot of the atrocities during that era, and included the suppression and elimination of traditional martial arts, in favor of the performance-oriented and very deliberately  not combat -effective Modern Wushu that was invented by the government.
> ...



I do believe that my argument was that Kung Fu is in decline. Nothing you said above contradicts that assertion.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 7, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> statements of ignorance.
> TMA's have disappeared



Who said that?




> The Shaolin Temple Tagou Wushu School has 35,000 Students



Yes, they practice Bjj there, so that number isn't surprising.



> Very good read that discusses Kung Fu in  ChinaSource: Some thoughts from Professor Ben Judkins of Kung Fu Tea - The Last Masters
> "People are saying that "kung fu is dying"?"   Answer



Yeah, his answer is that Kung Fu is evolving. Essentially meaning that they are modernizing and in same cases being forced to integrate Bjj, boxing, western wrestling, and MMA. 

For some that is a sign of Kung Fu dying in China and abroad.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> I do believe that my argument was that Kung Fu is in decline. Nothing you said above contradicts that assertion.


I thought you were asserting that MMA's growth and the incursion of WMA (like boxing) was responsible for much of the decline. Did I misunderstand you?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, his answer is that Kung Fu is evolving. Essentially meaning that they are modernizing and in same cases being forced to integrate Bjj, boxing, western wrestling, and MMA.
> 
> For some that is a sign of Kung Fu dying in China and abroad.


Adaptation isn't a sign of a dying art. It's a sign of an art that can live. To be effective, an art should continue to grow after inception. Failure to do so is often based on a logical fallacy. I've forgotten the term for it, but it's an assumption that the progenitor was somehow a genius beyond the ken of those now practicing the art, so his approach must be the only right approach to the art. Nearly every art I know of has seen changes in my lifetime - adding techniques, dropping techniques, adopting suitable techniques from other arts where the principles applied fit within the framework, etc.

For purists, adaptation may seem to be death of an art, but that IMO is a misunderstanding of what defines an art.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> I do believe that my argument was that Kung Fu is in decline. Nothing you said above contradicts that assertion.


Your assertion is that Chinese martial arts is junk, and that is why it is in decline, and it is being driven out by the popularity of MMA.

Don't pretend it's otherwise.  Don't pretend you are misunderstood.  That's ********.

The only answer that you are in a position to give is "thanks for the information, I didn't know that".


----------



## Phobius (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, his answer is that Kung Fu is evolving. Essentially meaning that they are modernizing and in same cases being forced to integrate Bjj, boxing, western wrestling, and MMA.
> 
> For some that is a sign of Kung Fu dying in China and abroad.



Kung Fu is allowed to evolve. Kung Fu is not about what you learn, it is about how you put your mind and body into it.

Are we talking about specific systems then that may be a whole different matter, but to claim that Kung Fu is some traditional thing is strange given that it most likely is as modern as anything else. Downside is that there are a lot of places where Kung Fu is believed to be some noble historical fairy tale and somehow they forget the very essence of Kung Fu...

You are supposed to dedicate your life to becoming better. Training 3 hours a week and eating a donut every now and then to celebrate your healthy lifestyle choice is not Kung Fu and never will be no matter how traditional the system you study is.

Also Kung Fu is fading in Hong Kong along with many other traditional lifestyles due to the cost of rent. In such an environment it is hard to compete unless you are sport oriented where people can invest in your business for marketing purposes or fighting profits.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 7, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> A bag doesn't hit back when I punch it and that hasn't stopped me from landing the same punches to someone's face.



Then you need better sparring partners.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Yes, they practice Bjj there, so that number isn't surprising.


Once again your ignorance. 
Shaolin Tagou Martial Arts School | Learn Kung Fu in China
http://shaolintagou.org/
"*Shaolin Temple Tagou Martial Arts School *(or* Shaolin Tagou Wushu School*) is *the best *and *the biggest *kung fu academy in China. teaching students from around the world in all different styles of Chinese Martial Arts. Whether you are a beginner or an experienced martial artist, whether you want to stay for a month or a year – we kindly *invite you* to learn Kung Fu from our highly distinguished Shaolin Masters."

All of the following styles of Chinese Kung Fu are part of our weekly training schedule.  This is what is taught at the school Kung Fu Styles | Shaolin Tagou Martial Arts School











hmmm. Looks like those students were there soley for bjj.  They must have picked up the Kung fu techniques like you picked up the "oblique kick" technique.  They just saw someone do and said "Hey I can figure this out"  yep.  I learned in 2 days.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 7, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> I thought you were asserting that MMA's growth and the incursion of WMA (like boxing) was responsible for much of the decline. Did I misunderstand you?



That's definitely part of it. There's definitely other factors at play, but it's pretty obvious that MMA is being chosen over TMAs for a variety of reasons especially among the younger generation.

Throughout those articles a fairly common theme were older martial artists saying that the younger generation preferred MMA styles over the rigors of of TMAs.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> That's definitely part of it. There's definitely other factors at play, but it's pretty obvious that MMA is being chosen over TMAs for a variety of reasons especially among the younger generation.
> 
> Throughout those articles a fairly common theme were older martial artists saying that the younger generation preferred MMA styles over the rigors of of TMAs.



Which is silly because all martial arts done diligently is rigorous


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 7, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Then you need better sparring partners.


I need better sparring partners because I can punch someone in the face?  I actually sparred against someone who is a better sparring partner than the other instructor at my school.  I punched that guy under his jaw with a rising jab and popped his head like a pez dispenser, with a punch that was literally 10% power.  That guy was so shocked with that punch that it was the first thing he talked about after sparring about how he got punched upward under the jaw.  By the way the technique that I used is part of a technique used in drunken boxing.

I'm sure I'll meet someone else who is better than that guy and he'll get a taste of kung fu too.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 7, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> I need better sparring partners because I can punch someone in the face?  I actually sparred against someone who is a better sparring partner than the other instructor at my school.  I punched that guy under his jaw with a rising jab and popped his head like a pez dispenser, with a punch that was literally 10% power.  That guy was so shocked with that punch that it was the first thing he talked about after sparring about how he got punched upward under the jaw.  By the way the technique that I used is part of a technique used in drunken boxing.
> 
> I'm sure I'll meet someone else who is better than that guy and he'll get a taste of kung fu too.



Sorry my mistake. Looks like you have your sparring partners handled.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 7, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Which is silly because all martial arts done diligently is rigorous



Agreed. The problem is that you got these TMA instructors forcing people to do horse stances over and over again for months while more modern styles get right to the good stuff. So obviously the people are going to choose the more modern style over a style trapped in traditional mumbo-jumbo.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 7, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Adaptation isn't a sign of a dying art. It's a sign of an art that can live. To be effective, an art should continue to grow after inception. Failure to do so is often based on a logical fallacy. I've forgotten the term for it, but it's an assumption that the progenitor was somehow a genius beyond the ken of those now practicing the art, so his approach must be the only right approach to the art. Nearly every art I know of has seen changes in my lifetime - adding techniques, dropping techniques, adopting suitable techniques from other arts where the principles applied fit within the framework, etc.
> 
> For purists, adaptation may seem to be death of an art, but that IMO is a misunderstanding of what defines an art.



Well yes I'm talking about the purists here. In quite a few of those articles the traditionalists made it pretty clear that they were willing to let their style go extinct instead of modernizing their system to draw in fresh students.

There's quite a few TMA practicioners outside of Asia who feel the same way. I've assisted in Bjj seminars where TMA people were visibly upset that we were showing Bjj to their stufents. It's like they were surrendering to reality. It was amusing and sad at the same time.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 7, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Once again your ignorance.
> Shaolin Tagou Martial Arts School | Learn Kung Fu in China
> "*Shaolin Temple Tagou Martial Arts School *(or* Shaolin Tagou Wushu School*) is *the best *and *the biggest *kung fu academy in China. teaching students from around the world in all different styles of Chinese Martial Arts. Whether you are a beginner or an experienced martial artist, whether you want to stay for a month or a year – we kindly *invite you* to learn Kung Fu from our highly distinguished Shaolin Masters."
> 
> ...



Did you miss the Kung Fu training page where they listed all of the styles they taught there? Look under "actual fighting" and it's all MMA-based stuff including Boxing, grappling, and kickboxing.

Perhaps more amusing, the MMA styles are listed under "Actual Fighting".


----------



## drop bear (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Agreed. The problem is that you got these TMA instructors forcing people to do horse stances over and over again for months while more modern styles get right to the good stuff. So obviously the people are going to choose the more modern style over a style trapped in traditional mumbo-jumbo.



We do crap grindy stuff. Depends what they want to do.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 7, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Sorry my mistake. Looks like you have your sparring partners handled.


You just need to go a few rounds with someone that actually knows how to fight using kung fu.  I think you would have a different perspective about a lot of things especially in the realms of techniques.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Did you miss the Kung Fu training page where they listed all of the styles they taught there? Look under "actual fighting" and it's all MMA-based stuff including Boxing, grappling, and kickboxing.
> 
> Perhaps more amusing, the MMA styles are listed under "Actual Fighting".


Sanda is not an MMA style.
Boxing is not an MMA style
Taekwondo is not an MMA style
Wrestling is not an MMA style

These are all systems that exist without MMA.  MMA could not exist without these systems.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> That's definitely part of it. There's definitely other factors at play, but it's pretty obvious that MMA is being chosen over TMAs for a variety of reasons especially among the younger generation.
> 
> Throughout those articles a fairly common theme were older martial artists saying that the younger generation preferred MMA styles over the rigors of of TMAs.


That's not unique to CMA. Boxing is losing interest to MMA, Karate is losing interest to MMA, and I suspect so is Judo. MMA is the cool and exciting thing right now, so a lot of younger folks are going that route. That doesn't really speak to effectiveness so much as marketing. We both know most people don't choose where to train because of actual effectiveness - most aren't educated in the necessary areas to judge that properly. They are choosing based on perceived effectiveness or simply because it's what they want to do.


----------



## Phobius (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Did you miss the Kung Fu training page where they listed all of the styles they taught there? Look under "actual fighting" and it's all MMA-based stuff including Boxing, grappling, and kickboxing.
> 
> Perhaps more amusing, the MMA styles are listed under "Actual Fighting".



MMA styles? You mean Sanda, Wrestling, Taekwondo, boxing & fighting or self defense? Eastern view on boxing is not really what you think it is. Besides this is a school that is intended to attract international students.

And who says TMA is not the ones currently being successful? Problem is that the world in general has a decline in sport activities. Kids nowadays really do not want to leave their homes/computers/phones. Increased average population weight has become a national concern in many countries.

Now all evidence I have is pointing to MMA not really attracting students in any growing fashion. UFC made it popular and as such it has grown but mostly the popularity seems to create forum/youtube warriors. People that can dictate the efficiency of techniques or arts without ever spending a single second doing any of it.

TMAs has a decline because there was a huge boom in the 1980-2000 or somewhere around that timeframe for many countries. Now there is a decline as things are shifting back to what should be a more normal level.

As for the club where I train, things are going better than great. Problem now is that there is a lack of adults that dedicates themselves to an art with the knowledge that they will spend rest of their life poor on an instructor salary. As such with lack of instructors there is a problem with growth. (Those that have experience do not always have the time to teach kids)


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Well yes I'm talking about the purists here. In quite a few of those articles the traditionalists made it pretty clear that they were willing to let their style go extinct instead of modernizing their system to draw in fresh students.
> 
> There's quite a few TMA practicioners outside of Asia who feel the same way. I've assisted in Bjj seminars where TMA people were visibly upset that we were showing Bjj to their stufents. It's like they were surrendering to reality. It was amusing and sad at the same time.


Yeah, that exists in a portion of the MA population everywhere. It probably shows up in boxing gyms, too. Purists like things the way they are (or, at least, the way they've romanticized them to be). I know really good instructors who won't show something to their students unless it comes from higher in the hierarchy. I've never been a very good purist.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 7, 2016)

Well, there is now a generation of young people who grew up on a diet of MMA, and believes that is what a fighting method should look like.  These people can't conceive of the idea that something might look different, might be done different, and still be very effective.

Some of those people are here in the forums.

Given that example, it is not surprising if the younger generations drift in that direction.  And that's fine, people can do whatever they want.  I have no misgivings about what i do, and whatever others think about it really doesn't mean much to me when all is said and done.

I just wonder what are people trying to accomplish, when they come on here and try to paint whole categories of systems, or certain specific systems, as worthless?  What do they think is actually going to come of such a debate?

Maybe Hanzou can speak up on that question.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 7, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> That's not unique to CMA. Boxing is losing interest to MMA, Karate is losing interest to MMA, and I suspect so is Judo. MMA is the cool and exciting thing right now, so a lot of younger folks are going that route. That doesn't really speak to effectiveness so much as marketing. We both know most people don't choose where to train because of actual effectiveness - most aren't educated in the necessary areas to judge that properly. They are choosing based on perceived effectiveness or simply because it's what they want to do.


Correct.  Kung Fu, Wrestling, Boxing, Karate have all had their time in the spotlight of popularity.  Bruce Lee, Vision Quest, Rocky, Karate Kid, American Ninja, Blood Sport and other movies hyped up these fighting systems and made the fighting systems popular.   MMA, UFC, and BJJ are now in the spot light where people join just clubs that say "we teach, mma, ufc, and Bjj." because of the popularity.  When the popularity dies then so will the enrollment at these places.  Then it'll be back to where it was before where only people who have passion for it are training it. 

Even today people take BJJ thinking that they are going to be able to beat anyone up, simply because they know BJJ.   Kung Fu, Karate, and Taekwondo went through this phase with people thinking; "Yeah I can fight because I know this system. " Then reality hit and they learn that it's not what you know , but the ability to use what you know that makes you a proficient fighter of the system you train in.



gpseymour said:


> We both know most people don't choose where to train because of actual effectiveness - most aren't educated in the necessary areas to judge that properly.


I've experienced this first hand.  I told a parent that her son can learn to Kung Fu so he can protect himself.  She said she only wants her son to take Karate so he can learn discipline.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 7, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Sanda is not an MMA style.
> Boxing is not an MMA style
> Taekwondo is not an MMA style
> Wrestling is not an MMA style
> ...



UFC® Martial Arts Styles - Fighters Train in Multiple Disciplines


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 7, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> That's not unique to CMA. Boxing is losing interest to MMA, Karate is losing interest to MMA, and I suspect so is Judo. MMA is the cool and exciting thing right now, so a lot of younger folks are going that route. That doesn't really speak to effectiveness so much as marketing. We both know most people don't choose where to train because of actual effectiveness - most aren't educated in the necessary areas to judge that properly. They are choosing based on perceived effectiveness or simply because it's what they want to do.



No argument there. The interesting thing about Judo is that while its popularity is fading, you will find Judo programs within Bjj gyms, or you'll see former Judo clubs tacking on Bjj in order to gain more students. Same applies to Boxing and some MMA gyms. I think what you're seeing with those systems is that while their individual schools are fading, they're being placed in more popular MMA or Bjj programs. The same isn't happening for Kung Fu or Karate, though I have seen a few Kung Fu and Karate dojos tack on Bjj and MMA programs right before they go under.

You are also correct that many are choosing MMA or similar styles because of perceived effectiveness. MMA and specifically the UFC has had a profound impact on MA culture where people were raised entirely on the notion that MMA is the testing ground of MA effectiveness. If it doesn't appear in MMA, then its not worth learning. I'm not going to say whether that perception is right or wrong, but to deny its obvious impact would be crazy.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 7, 2016)

Phobius said:


> MMA styles? You mean Sanda, Wrestling, Taekwondo, boxing & fighting or self defense? Eastern view on boxing is not really what you think it is. Besides this is a school that is intended to attract international students.



See above.



> And who says TMA is not the ones currently being successful? Problem is that the world in general has a decline in sport activities. Kids nowadays really do not want to leave their homes/computers/phones. Increased average population weight has become a national concern in many countries.
> 
> Now all evidence I have is pointing to MMA not really attracting students in any growing fashion. UFC made it popular and as such it has grown but mostly the popularity seems to create forum/youtube warriors. People that can dictate the efficiency of techniques or arts without ever spending a single second doing any of it.



You can find numerous articles about the rapid popularity and growth of MMA and numerous articles about the decline of TMAs. Don't shoot the messenger, I'm merely reporting what people are saying.

As for personal experience, there's MMA and Bjj gyms all over the US these days. That wasn't the case 20 years ago. In fact, I would argue that its actually harder to find a decent Karate or Kung Fu school in a city than it is to find a decent Bjj or MMA school.

However TKD is everywhere. 



> TMAs has a decline because there was a huge boom in the 1980-2000 or somewhere around that timeframe for many countries. Now there is a decline as things are shifting back to what should be a more normal level.



Why do you think that decline took place? Could it have been a certain fighting event in the mid-90s, and the rise of MMA?

Check out this article, you may find it interesting;

Where have all the martial artists gone? Should we blame MMA?


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 7, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> Well, there is now a generation of young people who grew up on a diet of MMA, and believes that is what a fighting method should look like.  These people can't conceive of the idea that something might look different, might be done different, and still be very effective.
> 
> Some of those people are here in the forums.
> 
> ...



Where did I say that your style is _worthless_? I'm simply implying that I understand why a potential martial arts practitioner would choose MMA or a MMA style over White Crane or Jow Ga even in China or Japan.

Take it from  Valerie Ng, a 20-year-old college student in Hong Kong, who says she prefers Thai boxing because it is “attractive and charming” and does not take as long to master. She noted that kung fu masters often do not have defined muscles and that some of them look, well, a little chubby.

*“You can see how fierce Thai boxing is from watching professional matches,” she said. “But I rarely see such competition for kung fu, which makes me wonder whether those kung fu masters really are good at fighting or they just claim to be,”* she said.

That really says it all doesn't it?

BTW, that came from this article that you supposedly read: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/23/world/asia/hong-kong-kung-fu.html?_r=0


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Where did I say that your style is _worthless_? I'm simply implying that I understand why a potential martial arts practitioner would choose MMA or a MMA style over White Crane or Jow Ga even in China or Japan.



1. Liar.
2. What is you point in the constant and repeated attacks on everything that isn't MMA?

Still waiting for an answer.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 7, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> 1. Liar.
> 2. What is you point in the constant and repeated attacks on everything that isn't MMA?
> 
> Still waiting for an answer.



If I say that Kung Fu is declining and provide articles to back up that statement, you view that as an attack?

How sad.

Again, don't shoot the messenger. I'm merely reporting what other people have found. I don't know why you feel the need to create excuses why Kung Fu is declining. Everyone understands that the cultural revolution had an impact on Chinese martial arts, and those effects have rippled down to the present day. However, we also can't discount the fact that Kung Fu experienced a pretty healthy resurgence in the 80s and 90s that quickly dissipated once MMA came on the scene.

kuniggety bought up an old film showing a tournament between Kung Fu fighters and MT fighters where the KF guys got eaten alive. I saw a similar film, but it involved Kyokushin Karate guys versus a set of KF fighters from China. The film was called Fighting Black Kings and just like the film kuniggety saw, the KF fighters got eaten alive. If I find the video I'll be sure to post it. It's quite amusing.

Anyway, I truly feel that if we start seeing some authentic Kung Fu stylists enter MMA competition and do well (and actually doing Kung Fu instead of doing something you can't discern from standard kickboxing) you'd see that trend reverse itself. Unfortunately, I think we both know that that's never going to happen for an entire host of reasons.


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> If I say that Kung Fu is declining and provide articles to back up that statement, you view that as an attack?
> 
> How sad.
> 
> ...


Every day you come here and post stuff that is derisive of everything that isn't MMA connected.

What are you hoping to accomplish?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Where did I say that your style is _worthless_? I'm simply implying that I understand why a potential martial arts practitioner would choose MMA or a MMA style over White Crane or Jow Ga even in China or Japan.
> 
> Take it from  Valerie Ng, a 20-year-old college student in Hong Kong, who says she prefers Thai boxing because it is “attractive and charming” and does not take as long to master. She noted that kung fu masters often do not have defined muscles and that some of them look, well, a little chubby.
> 
> ...


That's unfortunate, but not uncommon. Picking a style because the participants tend to be strong and fierce, in general, would be a good way to end up in a style that requires strength and ferocity to be effective. I'm not saying Thai boxing requires that, but her experience shows no evidence it can be done without that combination.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> If I say that Kung Fu is declining and provide articles to back up that statement, you view that as an attack?
> 
> How sad.
> 
> ...


Actually, a resurgence would likely be driven by a decline of MMA popularity and some movie or event that makes Kung Fu look cool. At this point, most folks outside MA don't look at individual styles (unless some purist were to come in, and that's unlikely to work for any style). They associate MMA with MT, BJJ, western boxing, and the like. That wouldn't be changed by one fighter unless he was able to pull of what the Gracies did - which worked in part because they were training for their opponents, and surprised them.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Oct 7, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> If I say that Kung Fu is declining and provide articles to back up that statement, you view that as an attack?



You know, I can recall seeing articles pretty much constantly since the 1970's (which is as far back as I've been reading MA-related articles) saying that [insert current popular system] is awesome and everything else is declining.
 And yet, 40+ years later, all those arts are still doing just fine.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 7, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> That's unfortunate, but not uncommon. Picking a style because the participants tend to be strong and fierce, in general, would be a good way to end up in a style that requires strength and ferocity to be effective. I'm not saying Thai boxing requires that, but her experience shows no evidence it can be done without that combination.



Well we should look at it from her perspective, if your goal is to be able to fight or defend yourself, which way would you go? Would you join a system where people actually look like fighters and actually fight, or would you join a system where people look like they can't fight their way out of a paper bag? Slap on the little tidbit that it takes longer in the latter system to end up with (seemingly) worse results, and the choice seems pretty obvious.

We also shouldn't forget that Muay Thai boxers have a pretty long reputation for fighting prowess in Asia.



> Actually, a resurgence would likely be driven by a decline of MMA popularity and some movie or event that makes Kung Fu look cool. At this point, most folks outside MA don't look at individual styles (unless some purist were to come in, and that's unlikely to work for any style). They associate MMA with MT, BJJ, western boxing, and the like. That wouldn't be changed by one fighter unless he was able to pull of what the Gracies did - which worked in part because they were training for their opponents, and surprised them.



I disagree. Hector Lombard and Ronda Rousey's success led to a resurgence in Judo's popularity among the MMA crowd.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 7, 2016)

Dirty Dog said:


> You know, I can recall seeing articles pretty much constantly since the 1970's (which is as far back as I've been reading MA-related articles) saying that [insert current popular system] is awesome and everything else is declining.
> And yet, 40+ years later, all those arts are still doing just fine.


Jow Ga Kung Fu is a family style kung fu. Small name with a couple of articles here in there.  40 years ago, the only place to learn Jow Ga in the U.S. was in  Washtington D.C.
10 years later it shows up in New York, California, and Virginia.  10 years later it shows up in Sydney and then Melbourne Australia.  It took 40 years since it's arrival in the U.S. for it to show up in Georgia.  These aren't the signs of a system that's declining.

In terms of it declining in China.  To be honest China has a really bad habit of destroying and selling national treasures. The most recent example being that China cemented the Great Wall of China. 





China use to sell historical items for cheap and they tried to crush their own martial arts systems.  As traditional martial arts grows overseas, soon, it will be China that will be learning their martial arts from foreigners.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 8, 2016)

If I want to learn how to fight then I go where they train to fight. I wouldn't care how they look. I care about how they train.

The fitness gyms are full of fit people that look like they can fight but have no fighting skills nor do they train to fight.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 8, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> If I want to learn how to fight then I go where they train to fight. I wouldn't care how they look. I care about how they train.



If you wanted to learn how to fight, wouldn't you be better off at a MMA, Wrestling, Boxing, Bjj, Muay Thai, Judo, etc. school? In those places you have an ingrained sparring portion, zero katas (for the most part), and a very competitive (i.e. fighting) culture.

That simply isn't the case in many classical martial arts which spend an inordinate amount of time on forms, exaggerated stances, and other exotic techniques that generally get tossed aside when the poop hits the fan. 

Ten years in Bjj you'll more than likely have a black belt, and be very capable of fighting. Ten years in some TMAs and you're still learning how to kick and punch properly.


----------



## Phobius (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> If you wanted to learn how to fight, wouldn't you be better off at a MMA, Wrestling, Boxing, Bjj, Muay Thai, Judo, etc. school? In those places you have an ingrained sparring portion, zero katas (for the most part), and a very competitive (i.e. fighting) culture.
> 
> That simply isn't the case in many classical martial arts which spend an inordinate amount of time on forms, exaggerated stances, and other exotic techniques that generally get tossed aside when the poop hits the fan.
> 
> Ten years in Bjj you'll more than likely have a black belt, and be very capable of fighting. Ten years in some TMAs and you're still learning how to kick and punch properly.



You express opinion and not facts.

It is very important to understand that an opinion has no value in describing the world. It only describes you.

Now if you ask anyone, including this gal, why they train Muay Thai the answer will not be about how TMA was more interesting.

If you interview someone doing TMA their answer will be about their art being great.

It is all opinion.

Now Hong Kong is not evidence, no sport that does not have the aspect of money involved in some way will be unable to keep business running. Space costs too much. Not because of lack of students but because you cannot fit more students Into that space.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 8, 2016)

Phobius said:


> It is very important to understand that an opinion has no value in describing the world. It only describes you.



That is one of the best things I've read for a long time. Thank you.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> The problem is that you got these TMA instructors forcing people to do horse stances over and over again for months while more modern styles get right to the good stuff.


Which all comes down to students not being dedicated enough to put in the hard work to learn a TMA properly and want to take what they perceive as the easy way out.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> UFC® Martial Arts Styles - Fighters Train in Multiple Disciplines


That could be why they call it *Mixed *Martial Arts.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 8, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> That's unfortunate, but not uncommon. Picking a style because the participants tend to be strong and fierce, in general, would be a good way to end up in a style that requires strength and ferocity to be effective. I'm not saying Thai boxing requires that, but her experience shows no evidence it can be done without that combination.



Sort of.  It depends on the training. Thai requires you to be physical because the training is resisted. This does not mean that a less resisted style is better developed for less physical people.

You just look better in training


----------



## RTKDCMB (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Why do you think that decline took place? Could it have been a certain fighting event in the mid-90s, and the rise of MMA?


There are multitudes of reasons for the decline in TMA students and most of them have nothing to do with MMA or the UFC.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> If you wanted to learn how to fight, wouldn't you be better off at a MMA, Wrestling, Boxing, Bjj, Muay Thai, Judo, etc. school? In those places you have an ingrained sparring portion, zero katas (for the most part), and a very competitive (i.e. fighting) culture.
> 
> That simply isn't the case in many classical martial arts which spend an inordinate amount of time on forms, exaggerated stances, and other exotic techniques that generally get tossed aside when the poop hits the fan.
> 
> Ten years in Bjj you'll more than likely have a black belt, and be very capable of fighting. Ten years in some TMAs and you're still learning how to kick and punch properly.



See i can't agree with that and stay consistent. If the martial artist come up to some sort of competant standard. That validates the training.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Well we should look at it from her perspective, if your goal is to be able to fight or defend yourself, which way would you go? Would you join a system where people actually look like fighters and actually fight, or would you join a system where people look like they can't fight their way out of a paper bag? Slap on the little tidbit that it takes longer in the latter system to end up with (seemingly) worse results, and the choice seems pretty obvious.
> 
> We also shouldn't forget that Muay Thai boxers have a pretty long reputation for fighting prowess in Asia.


If I'm a guy who is reasonably fit and thinks he can look like those fighters, I might choose that. If I'm a small person (and most women are smaller), I would be better served looking for an art where it doesn't seem to require being muscular. I don't know enough of the mechanics of MT to judge the art on whether it only works well with strength or not, but if I had to make the choice on that evidence, alone, I'd have to say it likely does, since that's a feature common to all the MT fighters I've ever seen. Not necessarily a valid conclusion, but I hope it makes the point.

And yes, MT boxers do have a good reputation for effectiveness, and that would be a better reason for choosing, rather than choosing because they "look like" fighters. Heck, if someone showed me a kinda fat guy holding his own (even if he loses decisively in the end) to a fit and muscular MT guy, I'd be impressed by the skill that took and would want to take a look at what he studied that got him there.




> I disagree. Hector Lombard and Ronda Rousey's success led to a resurgence in Judo's popularity among the MMA crowd.


That's a good point, and you may be right, but Judo was an early part of MMA. There were many competitors whose primary art was Judo, so folks have an easier link there. I doubt a single fighter being competitive would shift people's thinking to an art they don't already associate with MMA. Of course, some overwhelming success will always have sway, but I doubt there's much of that left to be found from a single-art person unless we simply find one analogous to Tiger Woods or Michael Jordan.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> If you wanted to learn how to fight, wouldn't you be better off at a MMA, Wrestling, Boxing, Bjj, Muay Thai, Judo, etc. school? In those places you have an ingrained sparring portion, zero katas (for the most part), and a very competitive (i.e. fighting) culture.
> 
> That simply isn't the case in many classical martial arts which spend an inordinate amount of time on forms, exaggerated stances, and other exotic techniques that generally get tossed aside when the poop hits the fan.
> 
> Ten years in Bjj you'll more than likely have a black belt, and be very capable of fighting. Ten years in some TMAs and you're still learning how to kick and punch properly.


That's an exaggeration of how long things take in TMA's. I've never met anyone with 10 years of experience under a decent instructor who couldn't do what they'd been trained to do. If they were trained for fighting, they could do that with some competency.

Now, I will agree that BJJ appears to produce good results quicker than most TMA, which is odd to me because their teaching techniques don't differ that much from TMA's. The TMA schools I've been in (an admittedly small sample) didn't spend all that much time on forms. The forms were one way they ingrained responses ("muscle memory"), like the shrimping drill does (and like that shrimping drill, forms can also help with fitness). The forms showed up, and were used to a greater or lesser extent in various schools, but I can honestly say that in all the times I've visited schools, the only time I've seen a class doing forms is in my primary art.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 8, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Sort of.  It depends on the training. Thai requires you to be physical because the training is resisted. This does not mean that a less resisted style is better developed for less physical people.
> 
> You just look better in training


Your definition of "resisted" seems to require fighting strength with strength. I rarely resort to that, even in resisted training. I'm reasonably fit, and reasonably strong, but my training is to find where I don't have to do that. In my experience, it's the resistance that requires the strength, not the technique. As I've said before, this is one of those areas where your "resisted training" is actually not as realistic for self-defense as you seem to think it is. It's an effective tool, and one I like to use, but it's not an accurate representation of the resistance that's likely to happen in a self-defense situation.


----------



## Phobius (Oct 8, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> That's an exaggeration of how long things take in TMA's. I've never met anyone with 10 years of experience under a decent instructor who couldn't do what they'd been trained to do. If they were trained for fighting, they could do that with some competency.
> 
> Now, I will agree that BJJ appears to produce good results quicker than most TMA, which is odd to me because their teaching techniques don't differ that much from TMA's. The TMA schools I've been in (an admittedly small sample) didn't spend all that much time on forms. The forms were one way they ingrained responses ("muscle memory"), like the shrimping drill does (and like that shrimping drill, forms can also help with fitness). The forms showed up, and were used to a greater or lesser extent in various schools, but I can honestly say that in all the times I've visited schools, the only time I've seen a class doing forms is in my primary art.



BJJ does one thing I fear many clubs stopped doing or never did in the first place.

They do rolling/sparring from day one or near enough. It is something they have the possibility of doing.

Some clubs around where I live consider sparring to be competition and to be avoided until you are experienced and trained enough. Now in BJJ you learn from that rolling, realizing that there are always weaknesses in your movements even when you think you got it down well enough. No mystery, just teaching you that learning a technique means more than just doing it over and over in a drill.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 8, 2016)

Phobius said:


> BJJ does one thing I fear many clubs stopped doing or never did in the first place.
> 
> They do rolling/sparring from day one or near enough. It is something they have the possibility of doing.
> 
> Some clubs around where I live consider sparring to be competition and to be avoided until you are experienced and trained enough. Now in BJJ you learn from that rolling, realizing that there are always weaknesses in your movements even when you think you got it down well enough. No mystery, just teaching you that learning a technique means more than just doing it over and over in a drill.


That is one thing they do quite well. I've not found a good analog for day-one sparring for my students. We don't do ground work that early, so no rolling at that point. They can't take falls from throws yet, so no standing grappling, and besides, they wouldn't know the throws yet. The strikes they learn early are knees and elbows, and the first block is the "plow", so striking grappling would be problematic. Our early physical instruction is focused on teaching them a few escapes, a few simple techniques (the elbows and knees and plow), and starting them on basics of movement. The closest analog is that they get to fairly quickly accept an attack and give a response - a bit of one-step sparring, perhaps.

I have been working on moving sparring earlier, and even randori ("sparring" for standing grappling) though that's always going to be a bit later, but I've not found a good way to bring it into the first few weeks.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 8, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> That is one thing they do quite well. I've not found a good analog for day-one sparring for my students. We don't do ground work that early, so no rolling at that point. They can't take falls from throws yet, so no standing grappling, and besides, they wouldn't know the throws yet. The strikes they learn early are knees and elbows, and the first block is the "plow", so striking grappling would be problematic. Our early physical instruction is focused on teaching them a few escapes, a few simple techniques (the elbows and knees and plow), and starting them on basics of movement. The closest analog is that they get to fairly quickly accept an attack and give a response - a bit of one-step sparring, perhaps.
> 
> I have been working on moving sparring earlier, and even randori ("sparring" for standing grappling) though that's always going to be a bit later, but I've not found a good way to bring it into the first few weeks.



Fight for each others back. It would even let you apply akido concepts.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 8, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Your definition of "resisted" seems to require fighting strength with strength. I rarely resort to that, even in resisted training. I'm reasonably fit, and reasonably strong, but my training is to find where I don't have to do that. In my experience, it's the resistance that requires the strength, not the technique. As I've said before, this is one of those areas where your "resisted training" is actually not as realistic for self-defense as you seem to think it is. It's an effective tool, and one I like to use, but it's not an accurate representation of the resistance that's likely to happen in a self-defense situation.



Not really. In theory you use technique. But it is nieve to think the stronger guy does not have the advantage in a confrontation. The difference for us is that being strong isn't somehow cheating.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> If you wanted to learn how to fight, wouldn't you be better off at a MMA, Wrestling, Boxing, Bjj, Muay Thai, Judo, etc. school? In those places you have an ingrained sparring portion, zero katas (for the most part), and a very competitive (i.e. fighting) culture.


I take Jow Ga kung fu because I wanted a self-defense system that also taught weapons use and weapons defense.   MMA doesn't teach weapons.  Whenever someone comes to Martial Talk and ask which system they want to take.  I always respond "Do you want to learn how to use weapons?" Last time I check MMA, Wrestling, Boxing, BJJ, Muay Tai, and Judo schools don't teach how to hit with a staff, or fight with a knife.  My school has ingrained sparring every Thursday is dedicated to free sparring where students learn how to use kung fu techniques to fight and defend themselves.  I like katas.  As for the competitive fighting culture.  For Jow Ga (like most martial arts) it's about making myself better at Jow Ga and better at defending myself.  



Hanzou said:


> That simply isn't the case in many classical martial arts which spend an inordinate amount of time on forms, exaggerated stances, and other exotic techniques that generally get tossed aside when the poop hits the fan.


When I first looked for a Kung Fu school to attend I had in mind what I would need in order to learn how to fight using Kung Fu.  I stayed away from any school that didn't meet the requirement.



Hanzou said:


> Ten years in Bjj you'll more than likely have a black belt, and be very capable of fighting. Ten years in some TMAs and you're still learning how to kick and punch properly.


Students who train to fight by using Jow Ga will be very capable of fighting and defending themselves with at least 3 techniques after the first year, after the first year additional techniques become easier to learn provided that they don't revert back to using what feels comfortable and what they think is their strongest attack.  In other words, people who are right handed tend to fight right-handed because they feel that it's their best bet. As a result they don't use their left hand to do much fighting and the left hand decays. This is something that all fighting systems have to deal with, but I try to make sure that students are as balanced as possible.  But unfortunately it is ultimately up to the student.



RTKDCMB said:


> Which all comes down to students not being dedicated enough to put in the hard work to learn a TMA properly and want to take what they perceive as the easy way out.


I'm glad you mentioned this because I actually had a black student (a teen) try out a class and we decided to go extremely light that day so that he would not be overwhelmed with trying to keep up.  During the class he says out loud "Can I go back to doing Karate because it's easier."  The amazing part about this comment is that it was said  during our warm up exercises.  His statement isn't a reflection on Karate, it's a reflection on his training (at the least) and his karate school at the most.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 8, 2016)

RTKDCMB said:


> Which all comes down to students not being dedicated enough to put in the hard work to learn a TMA properly and want to take what they perceive as the easy way out.



Or it comes from the TMA having an unrealistic training regimen. We have various examples of other martial arts producing similar results at a much faster pace.



RTKDCMB said:


> There are multitudes of reasons for the decline in TMA students and most of them have nothing to do with MMA or the UFC.



Well you're more than free to name some other reasons. In those articles I posted, MMA was mentioned in all of them.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 8, 2016)

Phobius said:


> BJJ does one thing I fear many clubs stopped doing or never did in the first place.
> 
> They do rolling/sparring from day one or near enough. It is something they have the possibility of doing.
> 
> Some clubs around where I live consider sparring to be competition and to be avoided until you are experienced and trained enough. Now in BJJ you learn from that rolling, realizing that there are always weaknesses in your movements even when you think you got it down well enough. No mystery, just teaching you that learning a technique means more than just doing it over and over in a drill.


This is often because not everyone who takes a TMA wants to learn how to fight.  If an instructor has an entire school that really doesn't want to learn how to fight then the school will tend to be light on sparring.  My sparring class went 6 months of me shadow boxing (kung fu style) and training my wife and son before any of the other students joined.  They just didn't care about learning how to fight with Jow Ga to the extend where they had to get hit in order to learn it.  The student from China is always reminding me that he's only doing the class to stay in shape.  

I try to get people into sparring as soon as I can.  If I had another 5 year old then both of them would be sparring.  But since I only have 1, she'll have to just settle for pads.  The sooner people can feel comfortable with punches coming in, the better they will be able to deal with a real attack on the street.  The easier it will be to recognize the signs of an attack, and the sooner they will learn how to draw out attacks.  But we are one of the few schools that I know of that take that approach.  However with that said.  I've seen quite a few schools on youtube with kids as young as 8 doing sparring. As you stated it's just depends on the school and the training.  It's not a representation of the art, but the training.



drop bear said:


> But it is nieve to think the stronger guy does not have the advantage in a confrontation. The difference for us is that being strong isn't somehow cheating.


 This is where the value of soft techniques come into play.  Soft techniques is admitting that one day you won't be the strongest one or the most powerful one in the fight.  To be honest a person can think of BJJ as having some soft techniques, from what I understand the bjj practitioner isn't always exerting more strength sometimes they are just weighting the person down so that the person has to fighting the practitioner's weight and gravity while in inefficient positions.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 8, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> That's an exaggeration of how long things take in TMA's. I've never met anyone with 10 years of experience under a decent instructor who couldn't do what they'd been trained to do. If they were trained for fighting, they could do that with some competency.



Well I have met some TMA instructors who had trained for a very long time, and couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag.

Anecdotes aside, I present exhibit A:






And exhibit B:






I do believe exhibit B had been training in Hung Gar for over 30 years....




> Now, I will agree that BJJ appears to produce good results quicker than most TMA, which is odd to me because their teaching techniques don't differ that much from TMA's. The TMA schools I've been in (an admittedly small sample) didn't spend all that much time on forms. The forms were one way they ingrained responses ("muscle memory"), like the shrimping drill does (and like that shrimping drill, forms can also help with fitness). The forms showed up, and were used to a greater or lesser extent in various schools, but I can honestly say that in all the times I've visited schools, the only time I've seen a class doing forms is in my primary art.



Well the difference in Bjj is that shrimping for example has a direct application that can be used in a variety of situations. You can use the shrimp escape to get out of just about every bottom situation, and you use it constantly while rolling (sparring). I suppose a better comparison could be what we call the "triple threat", a series where you learn the Kimura (shoulder lock), Guillotine (choke), and the Hip bump (sweep) from the bottom of Guard. However unlike a kata, the application is practical and there is zero exaggeration. A student can learn the triple threat for the first time, and probably pull off a hip bump if someone was on top of him. Additionally, like shrimping, you use the triple threat set up constantly in sparring.

On the other hand, look at the Heian Kata series in Shotokan. The vast majority of those movements will never be used while fighting, and you never see them in the fighting form. However, in Shotokan we spent a lot of time perfecting those forms, and our ability to go up the ranks was based on our perfection of those movements in which we were never going to use. As I've said many times, my eyes were opened wide when I sparred a boxer in my dojo and all that karate training and pretty katas meant nothing.

So on one hand you have extremely applicable movements, and on the other you have a multitude of movements that aren't applicable to anything except getting a new piece of cloth wrapped around your waist. If someone asked me where they would go if they wanted to learn how to fight, it certainly wouldn't be a TMA.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 8, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> If I'm a guy who is reasonably fit and thinks he can look like those fighters, I might choose that. If I'm a small person (and most women are smaller), I would be better served looking for an art where it doesn't seem to require being muscular. I don't know enough of the mechanics of MT to judge the art on whether it only works well with strength or not, but if I had to make the choice on that evidence, alone, I'd have to say it likely does, since that's a feature common to all the MT fighters I've ever seen. Not necessarily a valid conclusion, but I hope it makes the point.
> 
> And yes, MT boxers do have a good reputation for effectiveness, and that would be a better reason for choosing, rather than choosing because they "look like" fighters. Heck, if someone showed me a kinda fat guy holding his own (even if he loses decisively in the end) to a fit and muscular MT guy, I'd be impressed by the skill that took and would want to take a look at what he studied that got him there.



No disagreement there. I agree with all of that. I was simply pointing out that perception is a very powerful tool for people when looking into something they know little about. A big reason for the explosion of popularity with MMA, MT, and Bjj is the perception of effectiveness. A big reason for the decline of TMAs is the perception of ineffectiveness. 



> That's a good point, and you may be right, but Judo was an early part of MMA. There were many competitors whose primary art was Judo, so folks have an easier link there. I doubt a single fighter being competitive would shift people's thinking to an art they don't already associate with MMA. Of course, some overwhelming success will always have sway, but I doubt there's much of that left to be found from a single-art person unless we simply find one analogous to Tiger Woods or Michael Jordan.



I can agree with that for the most part. I do think it would require a series of fighters utilizing clear Kung Fu skills in order for those negative perceptions of Kung Fu to be turned around. However, one very impressive fighter lighting the MMA world on fire would definitely speed up the process.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 8, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> I take Jow Ga kung fu because I wanted a self-defense system that also taught weapons use and weapons defense.   MMA doesn't teach weapons.  Whenever someone comes to Martial Talk and ask which system they want to take.  I always respond "Do you want to learn how to use weapons?" Last time I check MMA, Wrestling, Boxing, BJJ, Muay Tai, and Judo schools don't teach how to hit with a staff, or fight with a knife.  My school has ingrained sparring every Thursday is dedicated to free sparring where students learn how to use kung fu techniques to fight and defend themselves.  I like katas.  As for the competitive fighting culture.  For Jow Ga (like most martial arts) it's about making myself better at Jow Ga and better at defending myself.
> 
> Students who train to fight by using Jow Ga will be very capable of fighting and defending themselves with at least 3 techniques after the first year, after the first year additional techniques become easier to learn provided that they don't revert back to using what feels comfortable and what they think is their strongest attack.  In other words, people who are right handed tend to fight right-handed because they feel that it's their best bet. As a result they don't use their left hand to do much fighting and the left hand decays. This is something that all fighting systems have to deal with, but I try to make sure that students are as balanced as possible.  But unfortunately it is ultimately up to the student.



Yes, but your Jow Ga school is an island within a massive ocean. If a student is looking for a martial art to learn how to fight, and they come across a kung fu school, do you think that that KF school would be anything like your school? We both know that the standards of kung fu training in the US vary like crazy.

On the other hand, if I suggest a Bjj school to a student, the standards aren't going to vary that much. Mainly because the Bjj community has been pretty vigilant in keeping the standards of Bjj at a certain level. The Kung Fu community has no interest in that level of vigilance, and they prefer to live and let live. That attitude has allowed all sorts of frauds to pop up and dillute the effectiveness of the CMAs.


----------



## Steve (Oct 8, 2016)

Guthrie said:


> Well said and I don't believe many mma practioners understand that experience in traditional arts, teach exactly these concepts.
> 
> It is also interesting to note, that Hanzou, is pointing out a subject that exist in all arts*, techniques never look the same in combat as they do in practice yet doesn't seem to understand that mma, is quilty of this as well.*
> 
> I think it brings up the point, that it always depends on the individual and not the art.


bolded part isn't true.   They do look the same, if trained well.   But it's important to distinguish between drills and technique.   Jumping rope isn't a technique in boxing, but a jab is.   And the jab in application, whether a street fight or a boxing ring, looks like a jab in training.

A scissor sweep is a basic technique in BJJ which looks the same in application as in training.

This idea of techniques looking different in application only comes up when the training stops short of application.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Or it comes from the TMA having an unrealistic training regimen. We have various examples of other martial arts producing similar results at a much faster pace.



Maybe in your limited experience. It only takes about three months to have tangible self defense benefits in a properly run martial art. One of our white belt children a couple of weeks ago was able to use a block to prevent another kid from punching him and he had only been training for a few weeks,



Hanzou said:


> Well you're more than free to name some other reasons. In those articles I posted, MMA was mentioned in all of them.



Laziness for one. Too many people are more interested in playing computer games and using social media (a problem that didn't exist in the mid 90's) to actually get off their butts and learn a martial art. People wanting instant gratification and not wanting to invest their time in a TMA. Students who quit when they don't get promoted quickly enough. etc.



Hanzou said:


> Well I have met some TMA instructors who had trained for a very long time, and couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag.



And none of the instructors from any of the schools I have attended fit into that category.



Hanzou said:


> As I've said many times, my eyes were opened wide when I sparred a boxer in my dojo and all that karate training and pretty katas meant nothing.



Which is due more to your own inadequacies rather those of TMA as a whole.

And just for interest if you notice the trend below can be explained like so; MMA was a fairly new concept almost unheard of 20-30 years ago, and with all new things there is initially a lot of interest. But after about 2009 the curve flattens out to be essentially constant from then on. How do you think the trend would look for, say, TKD if Google had been around in the mid 50's?.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 8, 2016)

RTKDCMB said:


> Maybe in your limited experience. It only takes about three months to have tangible self defense benefits in a properly run martial art. One of our white belt children a couple of weeks ago was able to use a block to prevent another kid from punching him and he had only been training for a few weeks,
> 
> 
> 
> Laziness for one. Too many people are more interested in playing computer games and using social media (a problem that didn't exist in the mid 90's) to actually get off their butts and learn a martial art. People wanting instant gratification and not wanting to invest their time in a TMA. Students who quit when they don't get promoted quickly enough. etc.



I'm pretty sure that TKD produces more child black belts than any other MA, and the average time to reach black belt is about 2 years depending on the number of belts they added to the belt factory. That culture is textbook instant gratification.


I must say, it produces some great kickers.



> Which is due more to your own inadequacies rather those of TMA as a whole.



An inadequacy that I've seen repeated in a variety of TMA practicioners.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 8, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Fight for each others back. It would even let you apply akido concepts.


I'm familiar with that term for groundwork, I think, but I'm not familiar with it for standing work. As for working with aiki concepts, I don't get into that in the first few weeks. I work first to build a base of some simple movements.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 8, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Not really. In theory you use technique. But it is nieve to think the stronger guy does not have the advantage in a confrontation. The difference for us is that being strong isn't somehow cheating.


I never said the stronger guy doesn't have the advantage. Strength, reach, and weight are always an advantage. I'm not sure where you get the idea that using those advantages is "cheating" in any art. In arts working to reduce that advantage (for the opponent), they take that advantage away during training my requiring students to work without applying strength. If you can apply the technique without strength, then you have your strength held in reserve as a "fix" when things don't go according to plan.

The difference is that some techniques require that you be stronger to make them work in any reasonable fashion, and others do not. This, in my experience, exists as a range within most styles. What I was pointing out was that participants being uniformly fit and muscular does not give any indication that someone who isn't muscular can do what they do. A style where some participants are effective in spite of not being in top physical condition gives more likelihood of that.

That's not a shot against those arts where the participants are particularly fit. If the art doesn't actually require that fitness level to be effective, then they've built a very handy reserve to draw upon.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> I'm pretty sure that TKD produces more child black belts than any other MA, and the average time to reach black belt is about 2 years depending on the number of belts they added to the belt factory.


That is more the result of individual schools and organizations lowering their standards to gain more students than TKD as a whole.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 8, 2016)

RTKDCMB said:


> That is more the result of individual schools and organizations lowering their standards to gain more students than TKD as a whole.



LoL! 

Of course, it's never YOUR school is it?


----------



## RTKDCMB (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> LoL!
> 
> Of course, it's never YOUR school is it?


Of course not, I am in a good school. If it wasn't i wouldn't be in it.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 8, 2016)

RTKDCMB said:


> Of course not, I am in a good school. If it wasn't i wouldn't be in it.



Just because they have kid black belts and a fast track to a black belt doesn't make it a bad school.

It just makes it a good business model (a mcdojo). There's a reason TKD is the most popular MA in the world. The kiddies love kicking high and bossing adults around...


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Well I have met some TMA instructors who had trained for a very long time, and couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag.
> 
> Anecdotes aside, I present exhibit A:
> 
> ...



There certainly are folks who aren't capable of fighting. Assuming that's what they trained for, they didn't succeed. I was speaking to your assertion that in 10 years someone wouldn't know how to throw a kick. If they've never thrown it under heavy pressure, they may not be able to during a fight like that, but that's a different assertion (and a problem that should be solved by aggressive sparring at some points in training).



> Well the difference in Bjj is that shrimping for example has a direct application that can be used in a variety of situations. You can use the shrimp escape to get out of just about every bottom situation, and you use it constantly while rolling (sparring). I suppose a better comparison could be what we call the "triple threat", a series where you learn the Kimura (shoulder lock), Guillotine (choke), and the Hip bump (sweep) from the bottom of Guard. However unlike a kata, the application is practical and there is zero exaggeration. A student can learn the triple threat for the first time, and probably pull off a hip bump if someone was on top of him. Additionally, like shrimping, you use the triple threat set up constantly in sparring.


No argument with any of that. The hip bump, as an example, is one of those nice bits that can be put to use pretty easily, and as they progress they'll get better with it every year. They'll likely think they "got it" after a few months, and will figure out how it really works much later and will understand why the black belt's hip bump is so much more effective, though he seems to be doing less.



> On the other hand, look at the Heian Kata series in Shotokan. The vast majority of those movements will never be used while fighting, and you never see them in the fighting form. However, in Shotokan we spent a lot of time perfecting those forms, and our ability to go up the ranks was based on our perfection of those movements in which we were never going to use. As I've said many times, my eyes were opened wide when I sparred a boxer in my dojo and all that karate training and pretty katas meant nothing.


I can't speak to Shotokan katas. In my two brief forays into Karate (one Shotokan, the other maybe Shotokan - the instructor never used that term or any other style term that I recall), I had limited exposure to forms. They were there, and I remember more advanced folks practicing them, but I never got to them. From your experience, I'd certainly have drawn the same conclusion.



> So on one hand you have extremely applicable movements, and on the other you have a multitude of movements that aren't applicable to anything except getting a new piece of cloth wrapped around your waist. If someone asked me where they would go if they wanted to learn how to fight, it certainly wouldn't be a TMA.


Used properly, forms should be about ingraining neural pathways ("muscle memory"). Movements should only be slightly exaggerated where that exaggeration causes most students to actually use the entire movement (many shorten the movements they are taught, so some kata overdo the movement to correct for that). Kata used improperly are probably a waste of time.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Yes, but your Jow Ga school is an island within a massive ocean. If a student is looking for a martial art to learn how to fight, and they come across a kung fu school, do you think that that KF school would be anything like your school? We both know that the standards of kung fu training in the US vary like crazy.
> 
> On the other hand, if I suggest a Bjj school to a student, the standards aren't going to vary that much. Mainly because the Bjj community has been pretty vigilant in keeping the standards of Bjj at a certain level. The Kung Fu community has no interest in that level of vigilance, and they prefer to live and let live. That attitude has allowed all sorts of frauds to pop up and dillute the effectiveness of the CMAs.


This is a distinct advantage of styles that have consistent, resistive competition, as you have said before. It's difficult to last for long as a poor BJJ instructor. There are some out there (outside associations) that seem to be getting by, but that's certainly nothing unique to BJJ, and competition seems to keep them to a very low number. Those that do last are almost certainly not competing.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 8, 2016)

Steve said:


> bolded part isn't true.   They do look the same, if trained well.   But it's important to distinguish between drills and technique.   Jumping rope isn't a technique in boxing, but a jab is.   And the jab in application, whether a street fight or a boxing ring, looks like a jab in training.
> 
> A scissor sweep is a basic technique in BJJ which looks the same in application as in training.
> 
> This idea of techniques looking different in application only comes up when the training stops short of application.


That depends upon the training techniques being used, and how familiar someone is with the variations of the technique - it might not look like the form because it's a variant. If I showed you our Classical form for one of our techniques, you could watch for days of application work and maybe not see that form show up in application. But that would be because the attacks and responses simply hadn't led to that version of the technique. I could show you 4 or 5 variants of some of the techniques, and only one of them would be particularly close to Classical - not because of a flaw in Classical, but because we had to pick one variant to use in the form. So, for Arm Bar (a common technique, so easy for discussion), we have 6 variants (breaking over the shoulder, breaking across the body, rollover, wrap-around, reverse, and Classical) plus all the "grey areas" between those variants. If the attacks and responses I receive don't lead me into the Classical variant, you could argue that this is a problem with the form. However, if the next attack makes that variant available, you'd likely see something that looks quite close to the movements in the form.


----------



## Steve (Oct 8, 2016)

My spidey sense is tingling, my friend.  Application of technique should resemble training.  If it diesnt, something is awry.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 8, 2016)

Steve said:


> My spidey sense is tingling, my friend.  Application of technique should resemble training.  If it diesnt, something is awry.


Agreed. Not every application need resemble the form, though. We train all those different applications, but only one variant makes it into the Classical form. So I teach my students 5 variants of Arm Bar plus Classical, and they train all of them. But the form is only Classical.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 8, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> That is one thing they do quite well. I've not found a good analog for day-one sparring for my students. We don't do ground work that early, so no rolling at that point. They can't take falls from throws yet, so no standing grappling, and besides, they wouldn't know the throws yet. The strikes they learn early are knees and elbows, and the first block is the "plow", so striking grappling would be problematic. Our early physical instruction is focused on teaching them a few escapes, a few simple techniques (the elbows and knees and plow), and starting them on basics of movement. The closest analog is that they get to fairly quickly accept an attack and give a response - a bit of one-step sparring, perhaps.
> 
> I have been working on moving sparring earlier, and even randori ("sparring" for standing grappling) though that's always going to be a bit later, but I've not found a good way to bring it into the first few weeks.


The only thing I focus on for beginners without experience is getting them comfortable with hitting someone else. So they may spend up to 2 months just attacking someone who isn't going to hit them back.  Sometimes beginners have the assumption that they can hit hard enough to hurt someone.  This is rarely true for a person sparring and punching for the first time.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 8, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> The only thing I focus on for beginners without experience is getting them comfortable with hitting someone else. So they may spend up to 2 months just attacking someone who isn't going to hit them back.  Sometimes beginners have the assumption that they can hit hard enough to hurt someone.  This is rarely true for a person sparring and punching for the first time.


Okay, so a one-sided sparring session. The newbie is attacking, and the more experienced person just defends. Sounds like a good intro to striking in a dynamic setting.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Well I have met some TMA instructors who had trained for a very long time, and couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag.
> 
> Anecdotes aside, I present exhibit A:
> 
> ...


And yet none of my videos look like that on and I do hung ga techniques and I have less experience so what is your point.  2 different fighters same system different training.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 8, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Okay, so a one-sided sparring session. The newbie is attacking, and the more experienced person just defends. Sounds like a good intro to striking in a dynamic setting.


It works for both as the experienced student has to rely 100% on footwork to evade attacks. For use footwork allows us to counter better. The drill also helps us to focus more on what attacks look like.  I try to make students study what comes at them so they can get good enough to exploit attacks, defenses, footing. Etc.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 8, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> And yet none of my videos look like that on and I do hung ga techniques and I have less experience so what is your point.  2 different fighters same system different training.



To be fair, your videos showcase free sparring. Those 2 vids showed people actually trying to take each other's heads off.

Regardless, as I said in an earlier post, your school could very well be a very good Kung Fu school. The problem is that there's scores of KF schools that aren't very good. The guy in the second vid runs a huge Hung Gar association in NYC and has taught thousands of students, some of which are instructors themselves these days.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 8, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> There certainly are folks who aren't capable of fighting. Assuming that's what they trained for, they didn't succeed. I was speaking to your assertion that in 10 years someone wouldn't know how to throw a kick. If they've never thrown it under heavy pressure, they may not be able to during a fight like that, but that's a different assertion (and a problem that should be solved by aggressive sparring at some points in training).



Frankly, if you can't throw a good kick or punch in combat after 30 years of training, then you never learned how to kick or punch properly.






Nice forms though.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> To be fair, your videos showcase free sparring. Those 2 vids showed people actually trying to take each other's heads off.


 I don't punch slower or lighter when I increase the intensity of the sparring.  My attacks get faster and harder.  This is my speed at 40% - 45%, the increase in speed and power is a result of me just relaxing and not trying to kill the guy.  You can actually see me still pull punches at this level. You can tell by the sound of the gloves that the punches aren't light.   This is what I would consider an intermediate level of sparring. I landed 4 out of 5 strikes.  It would have been 5 out of 5 strikes had I not pulled one of my punches that I could clearly see he wasn't going to be able defend against (the one before the kick). Things only get worse when I increase my speed and my power, it doesn't get better.  If he couldn't keep up at this level then he's not going to be able to keep up with me  at 90%. 

I had to stop the sparring for my concern of his safety.  I don't need to run you over with my car to know that it'll hurt you.  I don't have to punch a person's head off to know that if my punch connects then it will hurt.



Hanzou said:


> Frankly, if you can't throw a good kick or punch in combat after 30 years of training, then you never learned how to kick or punch properly.


The problem isn't throwing a good kick or punch. anyone can do that.  The problem is throwing a good kick or punch in the context of fighting which requires a different skill set than what is used when doing forms.

Things like timing and seeing openings and opportunities to use techniques, and then picking the right technique for a specific situation are improved through sparring.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 8, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> I don't punch slower or lighter when I increase the intensity of the sparring.  My attacks get faster and harder.  This is my speed at 40% - 45%, the increase in speed and power is a result of me just relaxing and not trying to kill the guy.  You can actually see me still pull punches at this level. You can tell by the sound of the gloves that the punches aren't light.   This is what I would consider an intermediate level of sparring. I landed 4 out of 5 strikes.  It would have been 5 out of 5 strikes had I not pulled one of my punches that I could clearly see he wasn't going to be able defend against (the one before the kick). Things only get worse when I increase my speed and my power, it doesn't get better.  If he couldn't keep up at this level then he's not going to be able to keep up with me  at 90%.



I'm surprised you're not getting my point here; Sparring isn't actually fighting. Sparring is a training exercise that imitates fighting.
Not saying that you couldn't pull off what you do in those sparring videos in an actual confrontation. I'm simply saying that comparing your sparring videos to two people actually fighting is a bit silly.



> The problem isn't throwing a good kick or punch. anyone can do that.  The problem is throwing a good kick or punch in the context of fighting which requires a different skill set than what is used when doing forms.
> 
> Things like timing and seeing openings and opportunities to use techniques, and then picking the right technique for a specific situation are improved through sparring.



And the Hung Gar sifu's training clearly favored forms over fighting. Thus, over the course of 30 years he developed excellent forms, but poor fighting ability.

That's the point. I highly doubt someone with 30 years of Bjj, Judo, or Muay Thai experience would fight like the HG sifu did in that confrontation.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> That's the point. I highly doubt someone with 30 years of Bjj, Judo, or Muay Thai experience would fight like Mr. Bey did in that confrontation


 Anyone with decent continuous sparring or even just a self-defense training wouldn't fight like he id in that confrontation.  In comparison to someone who isn't trained this is what the footwork looks like




Their stances were better than what he had. The movement was better  My personal thoughts is that ego got in Bey's way thinking he greatly out-skilled the person he was sparring against, and he paid the price for it.

I lecture students when their ego causes them to think they are better than someone else in fighting.  Even if we know that we are, the rule is to understand that the person can still hurt us if we aren't careful.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 8, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Anyone with decent continuous sparring or even just a self-defense training wouldn't fight like he id in that confrontation.  In comparison to someone who isn't trained this is what the footwork looks like
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Unfortunate that the boy with his shirt off didn't know Bjj, he could have ended that fight at the 1:35 mark.

Nonetheless, I disagree that it was ego, it was the simple fact that he couldn't fight. When you spend the vast majority of your training time doing ancient Asian dance routines, that tends to happen.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 8, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> That depends upon the training techniques being used, and how familiar someone is with the variations of the technique - it might not look like the form because it's a variant. If I showed you our Classical form for one of our techniques, you could watch for days of application work and maybe not see that form show up in application. But that would be because the attacks and responses simply hadn't led to that version of the technique. I could show you 4 or 5 variants of some of the techniques, and only one of them would be particularly close to Classical - not because of a flaw in Classical, but because we had to pick one variant to use in the form. So, for Arm Bar (a common technique, so easy for discussion), we have 6 variants (breaking over the shoulder, breaking across the body, rollover, wrap-around, reverse, and Classical) plus all the "grey areas" between those variants. If the attacks and responses I receive don't lead me into the Classical variant, you could argue that this is a problem with the form. However, if the next attack makes that variant available, you'd likely see something that looks quite close to the movements in the form.


This causes a lot of confusion for many people.  I showed the students a technique we called #1.  It's one of the basic techniques that beginners first learn.  This one technique is made of 3 movements that are actually separate techniques.  Students used to think that we are supposed to do all 3 movements in order to "do the #1 technique.  Then I showed them that it could be broken down where the components can be done separately, or to an extend in a different order. They didn't realize that it's acceptable to use variations of the techniques.  

I've literally sparred against several people only using variations and segments from #1. and it provided enough variation for me to be effective even if I didn't use all of the variations


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Unfortunate that the boy with his shirt off didn't know Bjj, he could have ended that fight at the 1:35 mark.
> 
> Nonetheless, I disagree that it was ego, it was the simple fact that he couldn't fight. When you spend the vast majority of your training time doing ancient Asian dance routines, that tends to happen.


This is why I think it was EGO.  Here are his students.  If they know not to fight with the feet close together then why doesn't he know? Skip to 13:00


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 8, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> This is why I think it was EGO.  Here are his students.  If they know not to fight with the feet close together then why doesn't he know? Skip to 13:00



Because he never fought someone trying to take his head off. 

Also if you look beyond that, some of the principles his pupils were learning raised some serious red flags. I can see why he get bested by some MMA scrub off the street.


----------



## Kickboxer101 (Oct 8, 2016)

I'll try and steer this away from the whole style vs style thing that seems to be going on here. So for the kick I agree it should be banned as should the side kick to the knee or any knee kicks. Rogan once said oh yeah those kicks mess your knee up but so does a leg lock well yeah rogan but the difference is a leg lock you can tap before there's any real damage (unless your fighting rousimar palhares then your knees screwed either way lol) but it's a great techique to use on the street simple and fast


----------



## kuniggety (Oct 8, 2016)

Kickboxer101 said:


> I'll try and steer this away from the whole style vs style thing that seems to be going on here. So for the kick I agree it should be banned as should the side kick to the knee or any knee kicks. Rogan once said oh yeah those kicks mess your knee up but so does a leg lock well yeah rogan but the difference is a leg lock you can tap before there's any real damage (unless your fighting rousimar palhares then your knees screwed either way lol) but it's a great techique to use on the street simple and fast



In an amp'd setting like an MMA fight, there will be damage from a leg lock before the person has time to tap. Pretty much every technique used in a fight is dangerous, otherwise why are you using it?


----------



## Kickboxer101 (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Well I have met some TMA instructors who had trained for a very long time, and couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag.
> 
> Anecdotes aside, I present exhibit A:
> 
> ...



So if a guy gets knocked out quick that means his whole style is useless does that mean Jose Aldo sucks because he's been training for years and got knocked out in 13 seconds what about Damian Maia got knocked out in 21 seconds his amazing jiu jitsu meant absolute 0 when he took a punch to the face.


----------



## Kickboxer101 (Oct 8, 2016)

kuniggety said:


> In an amp'd setting like an MMA fight, there will be damage from a leg lock before the person has time to tap. Pretty much every technique used in a fight is dangerous, otherwise why are you using it?


Yes but when a leg lock starts to get painful you tap before it destroys your knee the kick you've got no choice if it lands right your knees done


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 8, 2016)

Kickboxer101 said:


> So if a guy gets knocked out quick that means his whole style is useless does that mean Jose Aldo sucks because he's been training for years and got knocked out in 13 seconds what about Damian Maia got knocked out in 21 seconds his amazing jiu jitsu meant absolute 0 when he took a punch to the face.



Bey didn't get knocked out quick, the fight lasted for quite a few minutes. In those few minutes we saw a distinct lack of fighting ability for someone who spent 30 years training in his art of choice.

As for Jose Aldo and Damian Maia, they were fighting world class fighters, and they themselves are world class fighters who have ample counter-examples to support their fighting ability. Neither of the same can be said about Bey and Hung Gar.

Perhaps if Bey participated in some more fights, this little incident would be wiped away. However, we both know that's not going to happen.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 8, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> It works for both as the experienced student has to rely 100% on footwork to evade attacks. For use footwork allows us to counter better. The drill also helps us to focus more on what attacks look like.  I try to make students study what comes at them so they can get good enough to exploit attacks, defenses, footing. Etc.


I'd like to see that in action. It sounds like it might translate well for NGA, too.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 8, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Frankly, if you can't throw a good kick or punch in combat after 30 years of training, then you never learned how to kick or punch properly.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The weight controls, etc. needed for performing a kick under the pressure of an attack are different from performing it alone. I've seen people do very good kicks whose kicks would fall apart when used dynamically. I've also seen folks whose kicks were simply too slow for use in combat - they'd never practiced to that context, so had never developed the ability to use it there. "Properly" can vary by context: a proper kick to break open a door is a bit different from a proper kick to push someone back is different from a proper kick to do damage in combat.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 8, 2016)

Kickboxer101 said:


> I'll try and steer this away from the whole style vs style thing that seems to be going on here. So for the kick I agree it should be banned as should the side kick to the knee or any knee kicks. Rogan once said oh yeah those kicks mess your knee up but so does a leg lock well yeah rogan but the difference is a leg lock you can tap before there's any real damage (unless your fighting rousimar palhares then your knees screwed either way lol) but it's a great techique to use on the street simple and fast



A round kick can mess your knee up.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 8, 2016)

Steve said:


> bolded part isn't true.   They do look the same, if trained well.   But it's important to distinguish between drills and technique.   Jumping rope isn't a technique in boxing, but a jab is.   And the jab in application, whether a street fight or a boxing ring, looks like a jab in training.
> 
> A scissor sweep is a basic technique in BJJ which looks the same in application as in training.
> 
> This idea of techniques looking different in application only comes up when the training stops short of application.


I am speaking from a karate perspective and the applications, in their general delivery, do differ from the movements within the forms.

I was simply stating that although the movements are the same, in combat, the motions can vary and deviate from the original directions. This doesn't mean that I think it turns into sloopy kickboxing. Nor do I think the proper structure is damaged while delivering a strike or techniques.

Do the art, till the art does you.

This is what a tell my current student, do the techniques many times, so that you move without thinking. Teach your body, to catch up with your thoughts.

Also, I do not see the difference between forms and the ground movements of bjj. Correct me if I am wrong but, bjj has a step by step process for learning the techniques from takedowns to ground techniques(a specific pattern albiet shorter)

Katas, forms or whatever you want to call them, follow this same process for stand up techniques and strikes. The delivery of the applications vary from the forms, because forms are used to teach the specific pattern of a technique, not the method of delivery. Thats what application is for.

The forms do not teach the 3 foundations of combat karate, Enter, Counter and Escape. This incidentally, is the key to the success of karate in combat, notice the first one, enter, karate works when you enter. The counter can be one tech or fifty, this of course is at the discretion of the individual. Still, the application is needed in order for the student to truly understand the technique, the entering process, counter and escape.

As I stated earlier, this is purely from a karate perspective.

If you are doing forms but you are not exploring the motions in a form as combative moves, then you are not learning karate forms the proper way.

Karate has an on gaurd stance for a reason.

Karate is not holding your strike out and then waiting for the defender to complete the techniques. When you deliver the strike, crowd the defender, make sure they can execute the techniques in realtime, resist.

Karate is meant to enter, move pass the strike, incapacitate and escape.

Apologies Steve, lol not necessarily directed at you specifically but, in karate there are different uses between katas and apps.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 8, 2016)

Kickboxer101 said:


> Yes but when a leg lock starts to get painful you tap before it destroys your knee the kick you've got no choice if it lands right your knees done


Good point.  There is no gradual application of impact.  Similar to the effect of a kick breaking a board.  The force that allows the kick to break the board is not gradually applied to the board.


----------



## kuniggety (Oct 8, 2016)

I think you guys haven't trained leg locks. There is no "give" in the knee and the exact same point you're trying to make about the knee kicks applies to the locks that attack the knee whether a knee bar or a heel hook. 

Knee bars are only allowed in advanced category in competitions and heel hooks in either immediate or advanced (depending on the rules) because of how easy it is to hurt the other person when you're both rolling around with adrenaline in you.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 8, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> I'd like to see that in action. It sounds like it might translate well for NGA, too.


I'll try to remember to record this the next time we do it.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 8, 2016)

kuniggety said:


> I think you guys haven't trained leg locks. There is no "give" in the knee and the exact same point you're trying to make about the knee kicks applies to the locks that attack the knee whether a knee bar or a heel hook.
> 
> Knee bars are only allowed in advanced category in competitions and heel hooks in either immediate or advanced (depending on the rules) because of how easy it is to hurt the other person when you're both rolling around with adrenaline in you.


Legs locks don't happen instantly.  Kicks and punches do.
The time it takes to get a leg lock vs the time it takes to kick a leg inward.




With the leg lock I know it's going bad for me and that there's a chance to escape.  But with that specific kick.  It just pops up with no warning.  You can tell by the fighter who got the kick that he was totally unprepared for the kick.  In Kung Fu this is why we have stances that are lower than what we see used in boxing in MMA.  There is an acceptance that there is a slim chance that a fighter would be able to react quickly enough to that kick to save that knee, so knees are bent in a way that protect the knee.  Your chances of avoiding  that kick improve after the first kick, but only slightly because now your looking for it.


----------



## kuniggety (Oct 9, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Legs locks don't happen instantly.  Kicks and punches do.
> The time it takes to get a leg lock vs the time it takes to kick a leg inward.



The set up for a leg lock is longer but the application of pressure is not. Once the lock is applied, the difference in pressure to apply pain and to break is very small. If two people are using full force on each other, there is not time to "just tap" unless you prematurely tap as soon as the lock is had/before pressure is applied.

I'm not arguing that one is more dangerous than the other; they're both dangerous. They're both sudden violent moves that cause the knee to move in a way it's not designed to.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 9, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Legs locks don't happen instantly.  Kicks and punches do.
> The time it takes to get a leg lock vs the time it takes to kick a leg inward.
> 
> 
> ...



John jones spent 15 minutes knee kicking a dude and couldn't break the knee though


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 9, 2016)

drop bear said:


> John jones spent 15 minutes knee kicking a dude and couldn't break the knee though


He wasn't targeting the knee.  He was targeting the above the knee on the thigh and below the knee.  Hitting there is not the same as striking directly on the knee.  You won't understand this kick until you have a chance to experience it on the shin, which is the safest place to take the kick vs on the knee.  

Once this kick has been used on you then you will understand the force of the kick. Just from your statement, I assume that you haven't had this technique done on you, nor have you correctly done this technique before.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Oct 9, 2016)

drop bear said:


> John jones spent 15 minutes knee kicking a dude and couldn't break the knee though


Do you really think he was trying to actually break the knee though?


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 9, 2016)

Guthrie said:


> Also, I do not see the difference between forms and the ground movements of bjj. Correct me if I am wrong but, bjj has a step by step process for learning the techniques from takedowns to ground techniques(a specific pattern albiet shorter)



There's a world of difference. The movements found in Karate kata are barely used in the fighting form, which is why the argument of people not fighting like the forms comes up fairly consistently.

Example:






Beautiful kata, but I have yet to see any karateka fight like that. They more closely resemble kick boxers.

Bjj techniques:






Pretty much how you would do those techniques while fighting.


----------



## Kickboxer101 (Oct 9, 2016)

RTKDCMB said:


> Do you really think he was trying to actually break the knee though?


With Jon jones yeah I do most people probably but that is a total douche. He pokes people's eyes constantly he hits at the back of the head constantly his only was a DQ for multipal illegal elbows then looked shocked it happened. The guy is a dirty fighter and I have no doubts he was trying to do it and did injure him rampage said his knee was never the same after the fight


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 9, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> The movements found in Karate kata are barely used in the fighting form, which is why the argument of people not fighting like the forms comes up fairly consistently.


 Not true. Techniques from the form in that video that are commonly used (only the ones I recognize because I don't do karate)
1:17  knife hand in bow stance is slipping a punch and countering.





1:19 1-2 punch combination
1:23 front kick the one she used has been seen in UFC knocking people out.
1:26 cat stance is always used in fighting in some shape or form. 




1:29 lead hand outward block. 




1:37 elbow strike to ribs



Hanzou said:


> Beautiful kata, but I have yet to see any karateka fight like that.


No one is going to fight like that kata.  Kata wasn't designed to be used as how a fight should look like.  As a matter of fact when they show the application of a technique, it doesn't look like kata, but they can point to the reference in the kata.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 9, 2016)

Kickboxer101 said:


> With Jon jones yeah I do most people probably but that is a total douche. He pokes people's eyes constantly he hits at the back of the head constantly his only was a DQ for multipal illegal elbows then looked shocked it happened. The guy is a dirty fighter and I have no doubts he was trying to do it and did injure him rampage said his knee was never the same after the fight


He has really bad aim then.  If you want to break the knee then you'll have to put all of the force on the knee so the joint will fail.


----------



## Kickboxer101 (Oct 9, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Not true. Techniques from the form in that video that are commonly used (only the ones I recognize because I don't do karate)
> 1:17  knife hand in bow stance is slipping a punch and countering.
> 
> 
> ...



Lets also not forget who the number 1 contender for the welterweight title is Stephen Thompson a Karate fighter who's beaten pretty much everyone from boxers, wrestlers, jiu jitsu guys and pure mma fighters.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 9, 2016)

RTKDCMB said:


> Do you really think he was trying to actually break the knee though?



If he breaks the knee he wins and goes home. 

Why wouldn't he?


----------



## drop bear (Oct 9, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> He wasn't targeting the knee.  He was targeting the above the knee on the thigh and below the knee.  Hitting there is not the same as striking directly on the knee.  You won't understand this kick until you have a chance to experience it on the shin, which is the safest place to take the kick vs on the knee.
> 
> Once this kick has been used on you then you will understand the force of the kick. Just from your statement, I assume that you haven't had this technique done on you, nor have you correctly done this technique before.



So you have a better oblique kick than john jones. who does it wrong.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 9, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Not true. Techniques from the form in that video that are commonly used (only the ones I recognize because I don't do karate)
> 1:17  knife hand in bow stance is slipping a punch and countering.
> 
> 1:19 1-2 punch combination
> ...



Utter nonsense. None of the stuff you mentioned above appears in that kata. Nor would any karateka pull such techniques from that kata. 



> No one is going to fight like that kata.  Kata wasn't designed to be used as how a fight should look like.  As a matter of fact when they show the application of a technique, it doesn't look like kata, but they can point to the reference in the kata.



Which simply shows their level of usefulness.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 9, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> There's a world of difference. The movements found in Karate kata are barely used in the fighting form, which is why the argument of people not fighting like the forms comes up fairly consistently.
> 
> Example:
> 
> ...


Again, I'm unfamiliar with Karate techniques, so I'll take your word for them being commonly disparate from application. One of the tenets I was taught was "keep application close to Classical". In keeping with this, as I adjusted application for Shojin-ryu, I also changed the Classical forms to keep them close to application. I specifically designed the forms to be reasonably close to application - the primary difference being the level of movement (our forms are intended for more sedate movement, to allow practice when first learning, injured, etc.).


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 9, 2016)

drop bear said:


> If he breaks the knee he wins and goes home.
> 
> Why wouldn't he?


Because it's a sport, and trying to hurt someone for sport is a d*** move.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 9, 2016)

drop bear said:


> So you have a better oblique kick than john jones. who does it wrong.


He said Jones wasn't hitting the right place. That either means he wasn't aiming there or has bad aim. It looked like good force, and he kept his balance well, so I'm inclined to think he wasn't aiming directly for the knee. Hitting directly on the knee with a slight miss (without shoes) would seem to expose the foot to more danger, so he may have intentionally been working around the knee to protect his foot. Given the comments I've read about him, that seems more likely than him avoiding hurting the other guy.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 9, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Because it's a sport, and trying to hurt someone for sport is a d*** move.



Jon Jones is a d****, so its not surprising that he'd do d**** moves. He's pretty notorious for purposely eye gouging people while fighting.

I'm still a fan though. Guy is an amazing martial artist.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 9, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Jon Jones is a d****, so its not surprising that he'd do d**** moves. He's pretty notorious for purposely eye gouging people while fighting.
> 
> I'm still a fan though. Guy is an amazing martial artist.


I'm incapable of being a fan of someone who routinely cheats and tries to hurt people (beyond what the sport calls for) in any sport. I do admire his technique, though.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 9, 2016)

drop bear said:


> So you have a better oblique kick than john jones. who does it wrong.


It's  always about who is better with you. My thoughts about him doing the kick is that he doesn't do it with the possible maximum force. To me it looks  like the kick lacks forward movement which means that he's cutting that power off on purpose or he doesn't know how to connect the forward movement in or to maximize the force of the kick.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 9, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Utter nonsense. None of the stuff you mentioned above appears in that kata. Nor would any karateka pull such techniques from that kata.


 Then I guess this is nonsense too. Because this is just what this guy did
*Chatanyara Kushanku and application *


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 9, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Then I guess this is nonsense too. Because this is just what this guy did
> *Chatanyara Kushanku and application *



Yes. Check out their kumite at the 7:30 mark....






No pretty kata applications, just more sloppy kickboxing.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 9, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Again, I'm unfamiliar with Karate techniques, so I'll take your word for them being commonly disparate from application. One of the tenets I was taught was "keep application close to Classical". In keeping with this, as I adjusted application for Shojin-ryu, I also changed the Classical forms to keep them close to application. I specifically designed the forms to be reasonably close to application - the primary difference being the level of movement (our forms are intended for more sedate movement, to allow practice when first learning, injured, etc.).


Most forms are like this. There is always a base for techniques and from that bases proper movement is taught and that movement will deteriorate when done in application when application is applied, but it will still be the most efficient move against that specific resistance.  If the technique flies through without contest then it will be  the most effective strike.

If I start with incorrect movement, then it will be even more so when resistance is applied, If my strike enters without resistance then the best case scenario will be an ineffective strike.  Hanzou just doesn't understand because he doesn't want to understand and everything that people say has to be verified by MMA fights. just like the kick, when he stated the only reason the kick worked was because it was done with the MMA Method.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 9, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Yes. Check out their kumite at the 7:30 mark....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The majority of the video was showing how they develop their footwork and timing, then it showed them doing one-sided sparring where one person attacks and the other defends. The sparring session is geared towards sports. The only thing the video shows are students learning how to use their techniques.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 9, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> There's a world of difference. The movements found in Karate kata are barely used in the fighting form, which is why the argument of people not fighting like the forms comes up fairly consistently.
> 
> Example:
> 
> ...





Hanzou said:


> There's a world of difference. The movements found in Karate kata are barely used in the fighting form, which is why the argument of people not fighting like the forms comes up fairly consistently.
> 
> Example:
> 
> ...


Your bias shows, and your lack of knowledge concerning Karate is understandable. You obviously are a cherry picker. If you would have read my entire post...you would have understood, that I stated that the applications, will look different than the forms.
You just do not understand that the movements in Kata, are not meant to teach the method of delivery. And its obvious that you have a lousy eye, when it comes to a person delivering the techniques.

Hell, you can see the sloppiness in every cage match in mma. Its right in front of your face. You are just mystified by the current kick of the month.

When I cocompared the teachings of kata with the step by step method that bjj teachs..it was an attempt to get you to understand that practice and delivery are not the same. But it is clear that you just want to be right.

If you had real experience you would know that the teaching and training of real karate, was massively altered in the earlier 80's for tournament. Massive mistake and some stepped away from those schools that did this.

This statement shows the very problem that ensued due to that change:

The movements found in Karate kata are barely used in the fighting form, which is why the argument of people not fighting like the forms comes up fairly consistently.

This statement here..always shows me whether or not someones Karate is legit or not.

You see kickboxing, simply because a majority of karateka, are trained for tournament and competition, not actual fighting.

Thats why I have stated in earlier threads, that it seems two different systems are being taught..Kata and sloppy kickboxing and it is obvious that you, are a victim of one of these types of school when you did karate.

Next time, read the persons entire post.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 9, 2016)

Another statement that shows a lack of knowledge in karate...is when a person says that Karate has no grappling or throws.

Anyone can learn to punch, strike and wrestle. There is nothing special about that. Every young kid learns these things in playground scuffling and brawling. Thats why mma is popular.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 9, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> The majority of the video was showing how they develop their footwork and timing, then it showed them doing one-sided sparring where one person attacks and the other defends. The sparring session is geared towards sports. The only thing the video shows are students learning how to use their techniques.




I wasn't talking about the majority of the video, I was talking about the end of the video where those students were applying their techniques in fighting form.

Nothing of that extensive kata practice from your earlier video were on display.

If in a confrontation, those students will fight exactly like they did at the end of my video. That's how they're trained, and that's how they spar.

Frankly if you want to learn kickboxing with takedowns you're better off learning Sanda.


----------



## Kickboxer101 (Oct 9, 2016)

This thread has seriously gone downhill it started off analysing 1 kick in what was actually discussion now it's just gone to a style vs style slagging match. 

Honestly I think it's pretty ignorant of any high level martial artist to disrespect another style and call it useless. Me personally I don't like grappling I find it dull to watch and boring to practice but I still respect it and still know it has its uses as does kickboxing as does Kung fu as does karate as does taekwondo as does anything.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 9, 2016)

Kickboxer101 said:


> This thread has seriously gone downhill it started off analysing 1 kick in what was actually discussion now it's just gone to a style vs style slagging match.
> 
> Honestly I think it's pretty ignorant of any high level martial artist to disrespect another style and call it useless. Me personally I don't like grappling I find it dull to watch and boring to practice but I still respect it and still know it has its uses as does kickboxing as does Kung fu as does karate as does taekwondo as does anything.



WHo said any art was useless?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 9, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Most forms are like this. There is always a base for techniques and from that bases proper movement is taught and that movement will deteriorate when done in application when application is applied, but it will still be the most efficient move against that specific resistance.  If the technique flies through without contest then it will be  the most effective strike.
> 
> If I start with incorrect movement, then it will be even more so when resistance is applied, If my strike enters without resistance then the best case scenario will be an ineffective strike.  Hanzou just doesn't understand because he doesn't want to understand and everything that people say has to be verified by MMA fights. just like the kick, when he stated the only reason the kick worked was because it was done with the MMA Method.


That lines up with my understanding of the way we use forms, they are the "perfect" application of the technique - perfect situation, perfect movement, etc. Application in sparring or fight will never quite match it, since you'll never get those exact optimal circumstances and will often have to make some compromises on the perfect movement to accommodate whatever appears to be next.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 9, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Because it's a sport, and trying to hurt someone for sport is a d*** move.



They are trying to beat each other unconscious. There is an element of that.

And regarding John jones. Crashing in to a pregnant chick and then running away because he is on the pingas tops anything knee kick wise.

Jon Jones -- Drugs Found In Crash Car


----------



## drop bear (Oct 9, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> It's  always about who is better with you. My thoughts about him doing the kick is that he doesn't do it with the possible maximum force. To me it looks  like the kick lacks forward movement which means that he's cutting that power off on purpose or he doesn't know how to connect the forward movement in or to maximize the force of the kick.



Yeah. If I had a choice between the John Jones kick that wins him UFC fights and yours which rearranged the bag in your room. I would probably go the John Jones kick.

Look I might be missing out on an awesome technique. But I guess I will just have to take that risk.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 9, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> I was talking about the end of the video where those students were applying their techniques in fighting form


Student and martial artists in general will only use the techniques that they feel comfortable with. As the student gets better, they begin to add on more advanced techniques to their list of techniques to use in a fight. I wouldn't expect children to have a large comfort zone of karate techniques for use.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 9, 2016)

Guthrie said:


> Your bias shows, and your lack of knowledge concerning Karate is understandable. You obviously are a cherry picker. If you would have read my entire post...you would have understood, that I stated that the applications, will look different than the forms.



Funny, that's exactly what I said. What are you disagreeing with?



> You just do not understand that the movements in Kata, are not meant to teach the method of delivery.



Again, that's what I said.



> Hell, you can see the sloppiness in every cage match in mma. Its right in front of your face. You are just mystified by the current kick of the month.



What does that even mean?



> When I cocompared the teachings of kata with the step by step method that bjj teachs..it was an attempt to get you to understand that practice and delivery are not the same. But it is clear that you just want to be right.



And then in this same post you say this;



> The movements found in Karate kata are barely used in the fighting form, which is why the argument of people not fighting like the forms comes up fairly consistently.



Which makes them COMPLETELY different from the step by step method that Bjj teaches.

Again, what are you disagreeing with?



> You see kickboxing, simply because a majority of karateka, are trained for tournament and competition, not actual fighting.



Feel free to show me some karateka doing some "actual" fighting. The only ones I've seen on a consistent basis are Kyokushin practitioners. 



> Next time, read the persons entire post.



Nah.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 9, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Student and martial artists in general will only use the techniques that they feel comfortable with. As the student gets better, they begin to add on more advanced techniques to their list of techniques to use in a fight. I wouldn't expect children to have a large comfort zone of karate techniques for use.



Some of those "children" were advanced rank. A few were even black belts.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 9, 2016)

Kickboxer101 said:


> This thread has seriously gone downhill it started off analysing 1 kick in what was actually discussion now it's just gone to a style vs style slagging match.
> 
> Honestly I think it's pretty ignorant of any high level martial artist to disrespect another style and call it useless. Me personally I don't like grappling I find it dull to watch and boring to practice but I still respect it and still know it has its uses as does kickboxing as does Kung fu as does karate as does taekwondo as does anything.


Unfortunately you are right which is why I had to start another thread. To discuss and analyze the kick.  
*The impact of a Kung Fu Shin Kick - aka oblique kick in MMA*


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 9, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> That lines up with my understanding of the way we use forms, they are the "perfect" application of the technique - perfect situation, perfect movement, etc. Application in sparring or fight will never quite match it, since you'll never get those exact optimal circumstances and will often have to make some compromises on the perfect movement to accommodate whatever appears to be next.


I think I've come up with a way to numerically compare form and resistance.  It'll be able to show how the technique from the form is affected by resistance and it will show how a technique that can be performed with one motion but will have different applications.  Right now the equation only works for one technique and it doesn't account for a combination of techniques working together such as parry punch.  It'll make a good read if I can get the variables correct.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 9, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Some of those "children" were advanced rank. A few were even black belts.


Advanced rank  and color belt within a school doesn't reflect fighting capabilities.  My school doesn't use skill ranks or belts, so I guess that would make me horrible at martial arts. 

Every school has it's own criteria for getting a black belt.  If the school is heavily focused on Martial Arts as a sport, then there's no need to make it a requirement to actually know how to fight in order to get a black belt.

If a school is heavily focused on knowing kata and being able to do it correctly with little or no flaw then there's no need to make it a requirement to actually know how to fight in order to get a black belt.

Blackbelts often represent the focus of the schools training.   If the school trains to beat the mess out of people then you can be confident that the guys wearing the black belts in that school are the best at beating the mess out of people (within their school).


----------



## drop bear (Oct 9, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Advanced rank  and color belt within a school doesn't reflect fighting capabilities.  My school doesn't use skill ranks or belts, so I guess that would make me horrible at martial arts.
> 
> Every school has it's own criteria for getting a black belt.  If the school is heavily focused on Martial Arts as a sport, then there's no need to make it a requirement to actually know how to fight in order to get a black belt.
> 
> ...



Not really. Ok.  You have effective training and well lets say less effective training. So if you train to punch kick and grapple well then you will be better at beating the mess out of people than someone who doesn't train effectively. This is regardless as to what your focus is.

So the few weeks of super basic military training. Is generally not as good as dedicated civilian training. And why the Mc map crowd get eaten alive in sports gyms.

Now having said that Kata and stance training is used pretty consistently and so would fall in to an either or category for creating an effective fighter.

eg. Connor Mcgregor and his movement training.





which if you look at squinty eyeyed reflects the same elements as kata. In that it trains you to move. which is an important fighting element.

and why I have no real issue with kata. (exept when people get weird about it) And even acro kicks.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 9, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Yeah. If I had a choice between the John Jones kick that wins him UFC fights and yours which rearranged the bag in your room. I would probably go the John Jones kick.
> 
> Look I might be missing out on an awesome technique. But I guess I will just have to take that risk.


It's the same kick..  You can volunteer your shin next time.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 9, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Advanced rank  and color belt within a school doesn't reflect fighting capabilities.  My school doesn't use skill ranks or belts, so I guess that would make me horrible at martial arts.



In Bjj it does. In Karate a black belt should have some level of fighting skill. Second degree black belts are allowed to teach in some Karate schools.



> Every school has it's own criteria for getting a black belt.  If the school is heavily focused on Martial Arts as a sport, then there's no need to make it a requirement to actually know how to fight in order to get a black belt.



Again, not the case with Bjj, even in heavy sport schools. If you suck at rolling, you're not advancing in rank.



> Blackbelts often represent the focus of the schools training.   If the school trains to beat the mess out of people then you can be confident that the guys wearing the black belts in that school are the best at beating the mess out of people (within their school).



So what was the focus of that school? Dancing? It certainly isn't fighting.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 9, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> It's the same kick..  You can volunteer your shin next time.



Unlike that bag. I am not going to just stand there. Different element. Anything works if you just stand there.

My major issue with security wrist locks by the way.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 9, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> In Karate a black belt should have some level of fighting skill. Second degree black belts are allowed to teach in some Karate schools.


 This used to be true but now it's not. Not every karate school trains for self-defense or even the intensity that comes with a real fight.  However there are some school that do train using traditional methods, so showing the video of kids learning is not representative of those who train using traditional methods.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 9, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Unlike that bag. I am not going to just stand there. Different element. Anything works if you just stand there.
> 
> My major issue with security wrist locks by the way.


It doesn't matter if you aren't just going to stand there.  I would still be able to deliver the kick at full force, and you'll get it when you least expect it.  Plus you moving will actually work in my benefit and actually make this kick easier to land.

While anything works if you just stand there.  There's a lot of things in martial arts that works better when the opponent is moving.  Martial arts systems that make use of pulling, yielding, and sweep love it when the opponent moves. The more committed you are to your movements the more devastating a technique can be.   This kick falls into that category.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 9, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> This used to be true but now it's not. Not every karate school trains for self-defense or even the intensity that comes with a real fight.  However there are some school that do train using traditional methods, so showing the video of kids learning is not representative of those who train using traditional methods.



In the Kyokushin line and similar lines of karate it's definitely true. However, Kyokushin is based around fighting (though there is kata in the system).

In any case, here's a vid of adults doing the exact same thing the kids were doing;






Keep in mind, this is the dojo you used as an example of people utilizing kata bunkai. As you can see, it has little bearing on their  actual fighting method.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 9, 2016)

drop bear said:


> They are trying to beat each other unconscious. There is an element of that.
> 
> And regarding John jones. Crashing in to a pregnant chick and then running away because he is on the pingas tops anything knee kick wise.
> 
> Jon Jones -- Drugs Found In Crash Car


Obviously, there's no debating that last point.

My point was that the sport fairly requires a certain amount of injuring others, but there's a point beyond which a good competitor should not go. Taking out knees on purpose is definitely across that line.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 9, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Unlike that bag. I am not going to just stand there. Different element. Anything works if you just stand there.
> 
> My major issue with security wrist locks by the way.


I have this issue with wrist locks for retention, too. Many of those locks are only dependable for destruction, IMO, and security officers won't normally be allowed to destroy a joint.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 9, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> In the Kyokushin line and similar lines of karate it's definitely true. However, Kyokushin is based around fighting (though there is kata in the system).
> 
> In any case, here's a vid of adults doing the exact same thing the kids were doing;
> 
> ...


yeah that's all sports training there. But that was back to what I've always said.  Not everyone trains to fight some train for sport.  In the case of the video that you posted, they are training for the sport of point sparring, so you can compare that to the self-defense approach to training.  From a self-defense perspective no one does a one hit, then yell, and pose at the end of the punch.  

You keep trying to generalize on the fighting system instead of looking at the fighters or the school to even determine if they are actually training for fighting.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 9, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> I have this issue with wrist locks for retention, too. Many of those locks are only dependable for destruction, IMO, and security officers won't normally be allowed to destroy a joint.



I use wrestling to secure arm and body control before I hit the wrist lock. so the guy is wrapped up first.

Anyway. If you do a security course generally you are asked to stand there limp. let the instructor put the arm lock on and then he cranks the crap out of it. which of course hurts like hell.

Aparently thats proof wrist locks work.

You go into the world and there are not so many people let you do that.

Not a bad example of how the dynamics of wrist locking kind of works.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 9, 2016)

drop bear said:


> I use wrestling to secure arm and body control before I hit the wrist lock. so the guy is wrapped up first.
> 
> Anyway. If you do a security course generally you are asked to stand there limp. let the instructor put the arm lock on and then he cranks the crap out of it. which of course hurts like hell.
> 
> ...


  Successful Joint locks have 3 basics.
1. Joint locks are to flow with the persons movement.  By flowing with the movement there is no resistance. 
2. Know more than one joint lock.  Usually when a person resits one joint lock, they put themselves in the position to have another joint lock applied.  For example.  The resistance to the wrist lock at 2:00 could have been turned into a different lock.
3. Do what was shown in the video, always keep the attempt to lock a joint hidden, by doing something that distracts the person from your true attention which then allows you to follow #1 of going with the flow of the person's movement.

I understand why in a security course that they ask the person to not resist and it's because of the lack of control of the people practicing the joint lock. The more that my partner resists, the more effort I'll put into doing the joint lock and that's not a good thing to do without control.  If I think someone is going to resist then I may try to beat that person's resistance with speed or strength and as a result I may accidentally destroy the joint.  It would be different if the instructor knows with certainty that the participants have control, but since he has no way of knowing it's just best to play it safe.

The other danger is that sometimes the resistance goes in the wrong direction.  There have been times when I had to release my attempt to lock a joint because the student was twisting in a way in which he would have damaged his own joint by trying to escape.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Oct 10, 2016)

drop bear said:


> If he breaks the knee he wins and goes home.
> 
> Why wouldn't he?


Because if he goes around breaking his opponents knees on purpose who would put him in their promotions?


----------



## RTKDCMB (Oct 10, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> What does that even mean?


Really? You can't see the sloppy punches and kicks and brawling in MMA fights?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 10, 2016)

drop bear said:


> I use wrestling to secure arm and body control before I hit the wrist lock. so the guy is wrapped up first.
> 
> Anyway. If you do a security course generally you are asked to stand there limp. let the instructor put the arm lock on and then he cranks the crap out of it. which of course hurts like hell.
> 
> ...


My first instructor in NGA was a cop and went on to teach at LE academies in three states (as he moved). I get most of my attitude toward our locks from him. He would teach a small number of them for cuffing and restraint (mostly for transitions like in the KM video you posted), but most aren't suited to that - too much risk of causing significant damage if they resist, or not a decent base to them unless you already have them off their feet, or just too situation-specific. In a self-defense situation, I'm not as concerned about the potential of damaging them. I have little need to restrain someone via wrist lock when they are actively fighting back if they're actually trying to hurt me - I want to stop the fighting, and can use the destructions if needed. There are easier locks for restraint (larger joints), that give me better control of their movement even if they ignore the pain.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 10, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Successful Joint locks have 3 basics.
> 1. Joint locks are to flow with the persons movement.  By flowing with the movement there is no resistance.
> 2. Know more than one joint lock.  Usually when a person resits one joint lock, they put themselves in the position to have another joint lock applied.  For example.  The resistance to the wrist lock at 2:00 could have been turned into a different lock.
> 3. Do what was shown in the video, always keep the attempt to lock a joint hidden, by doing something that distracts the person from your true attention which then allows you to follow #1 of going with the flow of the person's movement.
> ...


That's my issue with some of the wrist lock work taught in security courses, JGW. Those guys are not going to get enough repetitions to get all of that down, so they should mostly avoid those locks where resistance leads too easily to destruction. The one shown in the video is a good one, because there's a relatively long continuum of application to that. For instance, the way it's used in the video isn't strictly speaking a lock, because there's no base against which to lock it. He's using it to force the uke's weight back (working beautifully in one of the "grey spaces" I love, combining two techniques found in NGA) for the throw. That same lock can be used for pain compliance and lead (like the video), and if applied further can strain the wrist (unlikely to cause long-term damage) and if applied hard and fast with a base behind it can be turned to destruction. Because there's that middle area where it hurts a lot and causes relatively minor injury (strain) that will reduce the limb's effectiveness, it's a good one for security training. I love his selection of it, and just wish he'd shown it used in restraint, as well, because there's a nice transition to putting the guy on his stomach and using the wrist lock (putting a base behind it) or transitioning to a shoulder lock.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 10, 2016)

RTKDCMB said:


> Really? You can't see the sloppy punches and kicks and brawling in MMA fights?



I would very much like to see this sloppyness that you're talking about.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 10, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Funny, that's exactly what I said. What are you disagreeing with?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I have no idea ....you keep going back and forth. Its best to not engage with you.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 10, 2016)

That and you do not read peoples entire comments...which shows that reading your opinions, is a serious waste of time.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 10, 2016)

Guthrie said:


> I have no idea ....you keep going back and forth. Its best to not engage with you.



I said that kata doesn't resemble actual fighting.

You said that kata doesn't resemble actual fighting.

Your mistake is believing that no martial art fights like it trains.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 10, 2016)

C


Hanzou said:


> I said that kata doesn't resemble actual fighting.
> 
> You said that kata doesn't resemble actual fighting.
> 
> Your mistake is believing that no martial art fights like it trains.



I am sorry, the number you are trying to reach, is nolonger in service.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 10, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> I said that kata doesn't resemble actual fighting.
> 
> You said that kata doesn't resemble actual fighting.
> 
> Your mistake is believing that no martial art fights like it trains.


There might be a disconnect here. Forms (kata) aren't the only training in any art I'm aware of. It is true that in some the forms don't look quite like the fighting, but other parts of training are the link between the two. That's why styles that don't have forms are easier to see the fighting in the training. I'm not debating the value of forms in this post, mind you, just pointing out that you may be comparing one kind of drill in one style to a drill with a different purpose in another style. Given that things like shrimping drills have analogs in TMA's that have forms, but those analogs are not the forms, I'm not sure what we gain from comparing forms to other kinds of drills.


----------



## Phobius (Oct 10, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> I said that kata doesn't resemble actual fighting.
> 
> You said that kata doesn't resemble actual fighting.
> 
> Your mistake is believing that no martial art fights like it trains.



Comparing forms to other drills is same as comparing stretching to fighting.

Noone stretches like they fight. Well there might be some system that does and I might step on their toes saying this. But no serious art.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Oct 10, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> I would very much like to see this sloppyness that you're talking about.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 10, 2016)

Phobius said:


> Comparing forms to other drills is same as comparing stretching to fighting.
> 
> Noone stretches like they fight. Well there might be some system that does and I might step on their toes saying this. But no serious art.



I didn't make the comparison, Guthrie did.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 10, 2016)

RTKDCMB said:


>


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 10, 2016)

RTKDCMB said:


>



Yeah, just what I suspected.

The only two fights in that video you could consider "sloppy" were the Kimbo vs Dada 5000 fight, and the Gabby Garcia fight. The first fight got sloppy because those two clowns gassed almost as soon as the fight began, and it was clown fight to begin with. The problem with Gabby Garcia is that her striking sucked due to her sport Bjj background.

You really can't compare that to the preponderance of sloppy kickboxing in the traditional arts.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 10, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, just what I suspected.
> 
> The only two fights in that video you could consider "sloppy" were the Kimbo vs Dada 5000 fight, and the Gabby Garcia fight. The first fight got sloppy because those two clowns gassed almost as soon as the fight began, and it was clown fight to begin with. The problem with Gabby Garcia is that her striking sucked due to her sport Bjj background.
> 
> You really can't compare that to the preponderance of sloppy kickboxing in the traditional arts.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 10, 2016)




----------



## Phobius (Oct 10, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> I didn't make the comparison, Guthrie did.



Fair enough, but a question to you. Do you say that stretching needs to look like fighting? Just asking because if you say the only  thing one should train is what resembles fighting there is no way to stretch effectively.

Forms are not intended to be application in terms of Kung Fu, it is a library of movements that we need to train as part of remembering. Sort of like a technique of remembrance. This is of course not needed for all arts but passing on a method of remembering is important to Kung Fu.

We however only use forms sort of like a starting of class maybe 5-10 minutes tops. It is not a large focus of class but it is still important. Just like stretching, warmup, conditioning and strength training. This is for your memory. Maybe it was a way to keep things secret, quiet or whatnot. A time before video cameras and YouTube. A time where you could not be sure the art itself was kept intact even if your top students somehow died. The knowledge of most forms were still maintained by all students.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 10, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


>



Did you actually watch any of those videos? The point behind them is stupid things some fighters do in the ring fighters gassing out too quickly, fighters dancing around too much, or bad calls by the referee. Anderson Silva and Fedor were in those vids. Those guys are pretty far from lacking technique or fighting ability.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 10, 2016)

Phobius said:


> Fair enough, but a question to you. Do you say that stretching needs to look like fighting? Just asking because if you say the only  thing one should train is what resembles fighting there is no way to stretch effectively.



Of course not. However, stretching has a pretty direct purpose which can aid overall fighting ability.



> Forms are not intended to be application in terms of Kung Fu, it is a library of movements that we need to train as part of remembering. Sort of like a technique of remembrance. This is of course not needed for all arts but passing on a method of remembering is important to Kung Fu.



Why have a library of fighting movements that aren't meant to be applied in a fight?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 10, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Did you actually watch any of those videos? The point behind them is stupid things some fighters do in the ring fighters gassing out too quickly, fighters dancing around too much, or bad calls by the referee. Anderson Silva and Fedor were in those vids. Those guys are pretty far from lacking technique or fighting ability.


I'm not going to hold your hand and point out the sloppy fighting in those videos,  if you can't tell the difference of what's sloppy and what's not in that video then you clearly have a disease which affects your ability to analyze.


----------



## Steve (Oct 10, 2016)

I thought bunkai was all about application?  Are you guys now saying kata is like stretching?


----------



## drop bear (Oct 10, 2016)

Steve said:


> I thought bunkai was all about application?  Are you guys now saying kata is like stretching?



I have been saying it. Some people just dont understand kata.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 10, 2016)

Steve said:


> I thought bunkai was all about application?  Are you guys now saying kata is like stretching?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 10, 2016)




----------



## Hanzou (Oct 10, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


>



That vid perfectly illustrates the problem of bunkai; No one is ever going to attack you in that fashion to allow you to perform those types of counters.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 10, 2016)




----------



## Hanzou (Oct 10, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


>



That's one hell of an interpretation considering that he pulled all of that from this;







All of that from that simple movement? Yeah, okay..... 


Protip: Learn proper head clinching from a style like Muay Thai where they actually practice it.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 10, 2016)




----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 10, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> That's one hell of an interpretation considering that he pulled all of that from this;
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It looks like those guys are practicing it, too.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 10, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> It looks like those guys are practicing it, too.



Nah, that's a seminar.

I did that kata numerous times. No one ever even hinted at any of that being a head clinch.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 10, 2016)




----------



## Buka (Oct 11, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


>





JowGaWolf said:


>





Hanzou said:


> That vid perfectly illustrates the problem of bunkai; No one is ever going to attack you in that fashion to allow you to perform those types of counters.





JowGaWolf said:


>





JowGaWolf said:


>





JowGaWolf said:


>



You're kind of supporting all of Hanzou's points.  (They'll be no living with him.)


----------



## RTKDCMB (Oct 11, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> You really can't compare that to the preponderance of sloppy kickboxing in the traditional arts.


I'm pretty sure I just did.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 11, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Nah, that's a seminar.
> 
> I did that kata numerous times. No one ever even hinted at any of that being a head clinch.


Just because it's a seminar, and because the kata is being interpreted differently than you were taught, that doesn't change the fact that those folks at the seminar are, in fact, practicing a head clinch. Arts evolve (or should).


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 11, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Just because it's a seminar, and because the kata is being interpreted differently than you were taught, that doesn't change the fact that those folks at the seminar are, in fact, practicing a head clinch. Arts evolve (or should).



Seminars are in place to build upon fundamentals, or to teach fundamentals themselves. Something as complex as the head clinch isn't something you should be introducing at a seminar. This is especially true if the movement you're pulling it from (kata) is a dubious source to begin with. 

Further, I don't remember ever drilling head clinches in my old Shotokan classes, nor ever fighting a karateka that used them. The main strikers in my experience who utilize head clinches are Muay Thai kickboxers, and they have an entire sub-system built around that position.

With all due respect, Mr. Abernathy's "bunkai" has always struck me as something he just makes up as he goes along.


----------



## Phobius (Oct 11, 2016)

Steve said:


> I thought bunkai was all about application?  Are you guys now saying kata is like stretching?



I said forms same as stretching in relations to fighting.

Meaning it has another purpose that is of benefit, it is not fighting.

Never did I say kata or bunkai. I leave that discussion to others.


----------



## Phobius (Oct 11, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Why have a library of fighting movements that aren't meant to be applied in a fight?



I never said it was not applied. Just like writing down alphabet does not mean it will resemble words. It will only show you the letters you may use and in terms of forms there is also concepts and theories that apply to them to create thought.

None of it intended to be application and in my view not something that is of large focus during training. Still important to understand movements correctly.

Waste of time? Ask me in 40 years if I can show all things in this system. If I still remember all forms then I can show you. It takes you years of study to grasp what I show but that is not my problem unless I wish to teach you.


----------



## Steve (Oct 11, 2016)

Phobius said:


> I said forms same as stretching in relations to fighting.
> 
> Meaning it has another purpose that is of benefit, it is not fighting.
> 
> Never did I say kata or bunkai. I leave that discussion to others.


 I was under the impression that forms and kata are used synonymously.  I'm pretty sure that many here use them that way.  Thanks for clearing this up.  

So, just to make sure.   You're saying forms are not kata, but are more like stretching in that they have an indirect benefit tmfighting skill.


----------



## Phobius (Oct 11, 2016)

Steve said:


> I was under the impression that forms and kata are used synonymously.  I'm pretty sure that many here use them that way.  Thanks for clearing this up.
> 
> So, just to make sure.   You're saying forms are not kata, but are more like stretching in that they have an indirect benefit tmfighting skill.



Well for my kung fu art the forms are libraries and ideas.

They contain he base of our movements. Without the movements we do not have an art. In terms of doing forms it is like looking up the words. Sometimes we might realize something new and in other cases we simply wish to find something we have forgotten or become unsure of.

Stretching or conditioning are same way for joints, heart, lungs and muscles. Forms are for mind.

Plus I am sure it may be trained without showing application and as such be secret to others as part of situation in the past.

Once more we do forms but it is not a major part of training.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 11, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Seminars are in place to build upon fundamentals, or to teach fundamentals themselves. Something as complex as the head clinch isn't something you should be introducing at a seminar. This is especially true if the movement you're pulling it from (kata) is a dubious source to begin with.
> 
> Further, I don't remember ever drilling head clinches in my old Shotokan classes, nor ever fighting a karateka that used them. The main strikers in my experience who utilize head clinches are Muay Thai kickboxers, and they have an entire sub-system built around that position.
> 
> With all due respect, Mr. Abernathy's "bunkai" has always struck me as something he just makes up as he goes along.


He may be adding to what was originally intended, but that's not the same as making it up. If he finds a movement they already rehearse (in a form) and uses that to teach something that should be in their training but isn't, that's probably a good intro to it. As I said, arts should evolve, and this would be a good evolutionary step for Karate.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 11, 2016)

Phobius said:


> I never said it was not applied. Just like writing down alphabet does not mean it will resemble words. It will only show you the letters you may use and in terms of forms there is also concepts and theories that apply to them to create thought.
> 
> None of it intended to be application and in my view not something that is of large focus during training. Still important to understand movements correctly.
> 
> Waste of time? Ask me in 40 years if I can show all things in this system. If I still remember all forms then I can show you. It takes you years of study to grasp what I show but that is not my problem unless I wish to teach you.


I remember talking with another martial artist about how they used forms (it was a hybrid art drawing on Indonesian and Filipino roots). He demonstrated part of a form for me that was just a series of steps (literally, no hand movements), and it looked pretty goofy. Then he showed me a couple of applications to their techniques, and showed me where the sequences of footwork (including one that knelt halfway through and another that rose from kneeling) showed up in the form. They used it just like you're talking about. 

His instructor would say something like, "Okay, while you block, take steps 7 through 9 and bring his arm with you."

It was a way for them to learn the footwork, and then plug it into a technique, so they could work the handwork separately.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 11, 2016)

Buka said:


> You're kind of supporting all of Hanzou's points.  (They'll be no living with him.)


The videos don't support his argument.  If you look at what is being done and ask "can I make the same movement in a fight?" then it actually shows the validity of the bunkai and forms.
For example: Can we clinch using the technique shown in the bunkai videos?  Yes. notice the placement of the hands










Can we  push down someone's head using the same technique? Yes. 
In a fight, those techniques aren't going to look exactly the same because the resistance caused variation in performance of the technique.  For example,  When a person trains the jab by punching a bag. The are training the "perfect form" of that jab because there is no resistance.  When they get into the fight, that "perfect form" degrades.  The same jab that we throw in a fight is not the same jab that is thrown in practice when hitting the pads.  The jabs that are thrown in a real fight are variations of what we practice when hitting the pads.  Bunkai and Forms are the same way.  They are the "perfect" representation of what we try to, with the understanding that the elements of fighting will cause changes in how "perfect" a technique is.   We don't want to learn a technique from it's variation because the variation isn't "perfect." technique or "perfect" power. When a technique is landed with little or no resistance then we want to make sure that we are as close to "perfect" as possible.  Sometimes a technique is able to enter with little to no resistance and when it does, we want  that punch to be close to a perfect punch as possible and not an assumed variation.





A = starting quality of technique   B = Resistance that changes quality of technique.  C =  Variation of technique caused by resistance
A+B = C
The quality of my punch is 100.   The level of resistance reduces my quality by  -20   so the variation of my technique caused by resistance is 80

If I train from the variation then I'm not training from 100, I'm training from 80. In that case 
The quality of my punch is 80.  The level of resistance reduces my quality by -20, so the variation of my technique is now 60  
If my punch enters without  resistance the the quality of my punch cannot be higher than 80 which is the quality that I started off with.
As seen in this picture.  Notice the bend in the wrist.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 11, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> I remember talking with another martial artist about how they used forms (it was a hybrid art drawing on Indonesian and Filipino roots). He demonstrated part of a form for me that was just a series of steps (literally, no hand movements), and it looked pretty goofy. Then he showed me a couple of applications to their techniques, and showed me where the sequences of footwork (including one that knelt halfway through and another that rose from kneeling) showed up in the form. They used it just like you're talking about.
> 
> His instructor would say something like, "Okay, while you block, take steps 7 through 9 and bring his arm with you."
> 
> It was a way for them to learn the footwork, and then plug it into a technique, so they could work the handwork separately.


My forms are a little different.  Some of the stuff in my forms are like as you explained while other parts of the form are used in fighting exactly the way that it's use in fighting.  I have one punching form that can be use as a counter to a kick and the counter only works if it's performed exactly like it is in the form.  My Sifu never taught me this technique.  I just stumbled on it during training.  I was trying to punch someone but they kicked instead and I was able to get enough feedback to understand what was happening.   So instead of using the technique for punching am able to now use the same technique against some kicks.  The application of this punching technique only works against a kick if it's done exactly like it's done in a form, any variation of this technique increases failure.  I know this because I see student's trying to force the technique by adding variation that they think they need and each time they fail.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 11, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> He may be adding to what was originally intended, but that's not the same as making it up. If he finds a movement they already rehearse (in a form) and uses that to teach something that should be in their training but isn't, that's probably a good intro to it. As I said, arts should evolve, and this would be a good evolutionary step for Karate.



Except there is zero evidence that a head clinch is what was intended from that movement. Further, if you look at the actual movement from the kata, you would have to have a fairly active imagination to pull a head clinch from that movement. From my experience with Aberbathy's videos and books, he has that in spades.

Arts should evolve, no argument there. The problem though is that if you believe that your kata/form fills all the holes in your art, you're art isn't going to evolve because you'll wrongly believe that your art has all the answers.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 11, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Except there is zero evidence that a head clinch is what was intended from that movement. Further, if you look at the actual movement from the kata, you would have to have a fairly active imagination to pull a head clinch from that movement. From my experience with Aberbathy's videos and books, he has that in spades.
> 
> Arts should evolve, no argument there. The problem though is that if you believe that your kata/form fills all the holes in your art, you're art isn't going to evolve because you'll wrongly believe that your art has all the answers.


I'm not claiming the kata fills all the holes. I'm suggesting that using what's in the kata - movements folks already know - can make it easier to teach even new material.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 11, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Except there is zero evidence that a head clinch is what was intended from that movement.


 When I look at Kata I think of kung fu forms.  One movement may have different applications and no one says "there is zero evidence that the application was intended from that movement" when someone stumbles or discovers another application for that movement. Then it's either going to work or not work.  If the application works then the technique is valid and that move can represent that application.  I believe this is how the martial art technique evolves.  

In Jow Ga  I can show one movement and give you multiple applications from that one movement.  I will use a sweep for example,  In Jow Ga the sweep is always taught to students as a low sweep. Similar to this





For me my sweep has a wider application range because I'm a deceptive fighter.  When my Sifu first saw me do my version of the back sweep, he keep telling me that I need to get lower like the guy in the picture. He stopped telling me this when he saw that not only can I do the sweep without being this low, but that I had better mobility with the sweep when I wasn't this low.  You know what he didn't tell me.  He didn't say "There's is zero evidence that that the sweep was intended to be done from that position."   The way that I do my sweep gives me 2 additional applications adds 2 deceptive appearances that aren't in the original sweep that is taught in all the Jow Ga schools.  Based on what you stated, While there is no evidence that the way I do my sweeps were ever used.  There is also no evidence that it wasn't used that way.

This is how I look at those Kata videos.  While you suggest that there's no evidence that those techniques work that way or were intended that way,  there is no evidence that it doesn't work that way.  Based on what I saw in those videos, the application of the clinch and pushing the head down is very practical and in my book that's how fighting should be.  I usually don't have concern with applications until they stop being practical.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 11, 2016)

Kata and forms should never be viewed as "This is the technique and this is the only application for the technique"  To have the mindset that techniques are that limited will prevent any deeper understanding of what can be done, how it can be applied, and will ultimately prevent the martial art from evolving.

I would be interested in seeing just how much you understand technique by watching a video of you free sparring.  I'm curious to know if you just do basic kick boxing stuff or if you can actually perform beyond that.  At the very minimum, you should be able to use at least 4 techniques that aren't basic punching and kicking skills.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 11, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> I'm not claiming the kata fills all the holes. I'm suggesting that using what's in the kata - movements folks already know - can make it easier to teach even new material.



Well that's my point; a head clinch is not in the kata, and it's not a move that karateka are going to know. Adding a head clinch to a kata is simply trying to fill a hole. It's no different than the clown who said the Bunkai of a Shotokan kata was actually ground fighting.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 11, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> When I look at Kata I think of kung fu forms.  One movement may have different applications and no one says "there is zero evidence that the application was intended from that movement" when someone stumbles or discovers another application for that movement. Then it's either going to work or not work.  If the application works then the technique is valid and that move can represent that application.  I believe this is how the martial art technique evolves.
> 
> In Jow Ga  I can show one movement and give you multiple applications from that one movement.  I will use a sweep for example,  In Jow Ga the sweep is always taught to students as a low sweep. Similar to this
> 
> ...



Except that isn't what I'm telling you. I'm telling you that that's a sweep. I have no problem with a variation of a sweep, as long as you acknowledge that the purpose of that sweep is to knock someone down. My issue is when people take movements that are clearly one thing and then claim its something completely different in order to fill holes within the system.



> This is how I look at those Kata videos.  While you suggest that there's no evidence that those techniques work that way or were intended that way,  there is no evidence that it doesn't work that way.  Based on what I saw in those videos, the application of the clinch and pushing the head down is very practical and in my book that's how fighting should be.  I usually don't have concern with applications until they stop being practical.



The evidence is simply looking at the movement that clinch is based on.






A head clinch was clearly not its original purpose.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 11, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Except that isn't what I'm telling you. I'm telling you that that's a sweep. I have no problem with a variation of a sweep, as long as you acknowledge that the purpose of that sweep is to knock someone down. My issue is when people take movements that are clearly one thing and then claim its something completely different in order to fill holes within the system.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So what is the application of the movement as you see it?


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 11, 2016)

Shotokan...must not have any throws. Is that assessment correct?


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 11, 2016)

Pinan four...does have a head clinch to a knee strike. Roughly the last technique in the form, ust before the turn into a knife hand strike.


----------



## Phobius (Oct 11, 2016)

Guthrie said:


> Pinan four...does have a head clinch to a knee strike. Roughly the last technique in the form, ust before the turn into a knife hand strike.



Agreed that is definitively a head clinch. Now I might agree that the gif provided by Hanzou it would be a stretch to call that a head clinch since it does seem like the intent and force is not correct in that movement. Then again we have a form in my system that is void of body movement because it emphasize hand movements separated from application (Structure is not void however).


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 11, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> So what is the application of the movement as you see it?



It's nothing. It's merely a salute or gesture to open the kata.

Saying that its a head clinch doesn't jive with the rest of the kata which is clearly structured to be fighting multiple opponents with your back against a wall.

Its important to note that in some variations, that salute or gesture isn't even there.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 11, 2016)

Guthrie said:


> Shotokan...must not have any throws. Is that assessment correct?



No.

http://www.karatebyjesse.com/funakoshi-9-throws-shotokan-karate/


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 11, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Well that's my point; a head clinch is not in the kata, and it's not a move that karateka are going to know. Adding a head clinch to a kata is simply trying to fill a hole. It's no different than the clown who said the Bunkai of a Shotokan kata was actually ground fighting.


I'm talking about the hand movement in the kata that Abernathy is using to teach the clinch. They know that movement, so it's a good place to link in the clinch. Adults learn faster when new learning is clearly linked to old learning, and that's what he's doing when he uses that movement to teach a clinch.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 11, 2016)

Guthrie said:


> Shotokan...must not have any throws. Is that assessment correct?


I've heard mixed reports on this. I have a student who studied Shotokan for 8 years in Germany, and they did no throws, other than sweeps (which they seem to view as a variation of a kick). I've heard from others in Shotokan that there are, indeed, strikes within the system. Whether those were originally there and were lost in some schools, or weren't originally there and have been added in some schools, I cannot say.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 11, 2016)

Phobius said:


> Then again we have a form in my system that is void of body movement because it emphasize hand movements separated from application (Structure is not void however)


 We have a wrist escape in Jow Ga where the hand movement is valid but the body structure isn't.  Wing Chun does something similar where the hand movement is valid but the structure isn't.  Come to think about it, we have a couple of techniques where the concept of the hand movement doesn't match the body structure that would be required to utilize the hand technique.

If someone told you how to translate a head clinch in a form what would that look like. How would you turn what you see here to a form. What are the important elements that make the clinch successful?  Is it how the hands are held, is it the pushing the pushing the head down?  Does the form in the bunkai videos help train the habit of keeping the elbow's tight?  So if you are creating a form.  What would it look like once all of the important elements are captured that allow the clinch to work.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 11, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> I have no problem with a variation of a sweep, as long as you acknowledge that the purpose of that sweep is to knock someone down.


My variations of a sweep aren't always for knocking someone down.  But the movement is the same as a sweep.   The way that I do my sweeps allows me to strike by using the same movement that is used for a sweep. 

If I need to change a sweep into something else then I can do that as it doesn't require a different movement to do so.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 11, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> I'm talking about the hand movement in the kata that Abernathy is using to teach the clinch. They know that movement, so it's a good place to link in the clinch. Adults learn faster when new learning is clearly linked to old learning, and that's what he's doing when he uses that movement to teach a clinch.



And if you watched the video he exaggerates the hand movement of the actual kata in order to make his head clinch work.

So no, they won't know what the movement is. They'll only know an approximation of it.

Again, if you want to learn how to properly do a head clinch, go learn Muay Thai, or a grappling system. You're not going to learn how to do it from a phony bunkai.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 11, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> It's nothing. It's merely a salute or gesture to open the kata.
> 
> Saying that its a head clinch doesn't jive with the rest of the kata which is clearly structured to be fighting multiple opponents with your back against a wall.
> 
> Its important to note that in some variations, that salute or gesture isn't even there.


I'll leave the karate to you then.  I always thought the Japanese bow that practitioners do was the salute.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 11, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> I'll leave the karate to you then.  I always thought the Japanese bow that practitioners do was the salute.



They do, but the origin of the kata is actually Okinawan and before that Chinese.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 11, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> We have a wrist escape in Jow Ga where the hand movement is valid but the body structure isn't.  Wing Chun does something similar where the hand movement is valid but the structure isn't.  Come to think about it, we have a couple of techniques where the concept of the hand movement doesn't match the body structure that would be required to utilize the hand technique.
> 
> If someone told you how to translate a head clinch in a form what would that look like. How would you turn what you see here to a form. What are the important elements that make the clinch successful?  Is it how the hands are held, is it the pushing the pushing the head down?  Does the form in the bunkai videos help train the habit of keeping the elbow's tight?  So if you are creating a form.  What would it look like once all of the important elements are captured that allow the clinch to work.



Like this.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 11, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> They do, but the origin of the kata is actually Okinawan and before that Chinese.


What does this have to do with anything?  The kata doesn't have a Chinese salute.


----------



## Deleted member 34973 (Oct 11, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> No.
> 
> http://www.karatebyjesse.com/funakoshi-9-throws-shotokan-karate/


Wouldn't that be a type of clinching?


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 11, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> What does this have to do with anything?  The kata doesn't have a Chinese salute.



My point is that the origins of the kata are not Japanese. Additionally, the gesture could have came from anywhere considering that the exact point of origin for the kata is unknown.



Guthrie said:


> Wouldn't that be a type of clinching?



That would be a form of grappling.

And yes, the head clinch is grappling.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 11, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> My point is that the origins of the kata are not Japanese. Additionally, the gesture could have came from anywhere considering that the exact point of origin for the kata is unknown.


  If you don't know what the origins of the kata are then how can you say it doesn't represent a head clinch?



Hanzou said:


> Additionally, the gesture could have came from anywhere considering that the exact point of origin for the kata is unknown.


but in your previous statement you mentioned that it was Okinawan and Chinese.  Now you are saying that origin is unknown?


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 11, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> If you don't know what the origins of the kata are then how can you say it doesn't represent a head clinch?



1. Because (again) the kata is based on fighting multiple opponents with your back to a wall, blasting then with swift punches, counters, and sweeping kicks. An opening head clinch doesn't make any sense within that context.

2. That gesture doesn't appear the same way in all variations of the kata. Wado-Ryu (the style Abernathy trains in) has a very wide opening gesture, while Shotokan has a very muted gesture where you simply bring your hands together, while the older Okinawan variations are more akin to the gif I posted.



> but in your previous statement you mentioned that it was Okinawan and Chinese.  Now you are saying that origin is unknown?



I said the *exact point* is unknown. China is a pretty massive place, with countless martial systems, and we have no idea what system the original form came from. So we know it came to Okinawa by way of China, but that's about it.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 11, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> 1. Because (again) the kata is based on fighting multiple opponents with your back to a wall, blasting then with swift punches, counters, and sweeping kicks. An opening head clinch doesn't make any sense within that context.
> 
> 2. That gesture doesn't appear the same way in all variations of the kata. Wado-Ryu (the style Abernathy trains in) has a very wide opening gesture, while Shotokan has a very muted gesture where you simply bring your hands together, while the older Okinawan variations are more akin to the gif I posted.
> 
> ...


So you are saying that a Kata that fights multiple opponents can't have techniques that can be used on a single person? That means if I get in a fight with 2 people where I quickly beat one of my attackers, I shouldn't put the remaining fighter in a head clinch?


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 11, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> So you are saying that a Kata that fights multiple opponents can't have techniques that can be used on a single person? That means if I get in a fight with 2 people where I quickly beat one of my attackers, I shouldn't put the remaining fighter in a head clinch?



.........

That phony head clinch is the *opening* of the kata where supposedly multiple people are coming at you from your left and right. 

Here is the bunkai of that exact same kata from an older Okinawan style of karate (Shorin Ryu);






Notice the lack of a head clinch.


----------



## Buka (Oct 12, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> For example,  When a person trains the jab by punching a bag. The are training the "perfect form" of that jab because there is no resistance.  When they get into the fight, that "perfect form" degrades.  The same jab that we throw in a fight is not the same jab that is thrown in practice when hitting the pads.  The jabs that are thrown in a real fight are variations of what we practice when hitting the pads.  Bunkai and Forms are the same way.



When you say -"_When a person trains the jab by punching a bag. The are training the "perfect form" of that jab because there is no resistance. When they get into the fight, that "perfect form" degrades. The same jab that we throw in a fight is not the same jab that is thrown in practice when hitting the pads. The jabs that are thrown in a real fight are variations of what we practice when hitting the pads
_
If you were training throwing a punch, let's say the jab like you mentioned. Would you throw the jab at the bag and not bring it back to position, just leave your arm out, fist touching the bag? Or on the pads? Or in a fight? In some of the videos posted, the counters are great, but the man punching is just doing the freeze frame thing, like being frozen in place_. _I don't think you would do that, I wouldn't, and I'll bet you even the guy in the vid wouldn't do that if he was fighting._
_
I don't know, to me, that kind of one step drill is to fighting, the same as lip syncing is to singing.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 12, 2016)

Buka said:


> Would you throw the jab at the bag and not bring it back to position


When you throw a jab in a fight you may get interference from a guard, a parry, a counter, or even a pull on the jab that you throw (in martial arts it's possible to blend with a jab and actually pull on it), the jab may be trapped or the jab itself may be attacked with the elbow.  All of these things degrade the jab that you train causing the mechanics of that jab to degrade.  This is what I meant by the jab that we train is not the same jab that we fight with.  Even evasive movement both from us and our opponent can change how our jab is thrown.  

I found a picture (too large to post here) and it showed a boxer in a fight that connects with a right cross.  When you look at his cross you can see that his wrist is not aligned as if he turn his wrist in an effort to chase his opponents face.


----------

