# Hey guys - couple questions



## The_Fish (Mar 26, 2008)

Hey guys,

I'm Nick, 20 years old from the UK and I'm new to the world of martial arts. I've had a couple lessons in Aikido so far and whilst I have been enjoying myself at these lessons, I ultimately feel that Aikido is not what I am looking for in a martial art. There is very little focus upon striking (or rather, the 'type of striking' I would be interested in, not atemi which is a big part of Aikido I am led to believe) and I would like something that had a little more emphasis on striking - kicks and punches - as well as locks and the like. I feel Hapkido would be perfect for me, but alas, there are no places of instruction anywhere near me. 

What matters most to me is that it is an effective self-defence system. What also put me off with Aikido is the reputed length of time it takes to become proficient in that respect as opposed to other martial arts. I am not impatient by any means - I understand the fundemental principles behind a martial art do not come overnight - but Aikido apparently takes longer than many other/most martial arts. I think I can see why.

I have began exploring other avenues in my area, and have found:

 - A couple of places that teach Wado-Ryu Karate and other styles of Karate. Karate doesn't appeal to me that much at all, as from what I have heard from practitioners both in real life and from trawling forums is that it is very kata-based and not always particularly effective. I am looking for a style that is very real, that can be very much applied in a real life scenario - any karateka able to perhaps shed some light on this? Am I hearing just very biased opinions based on bad experiences?

- A couple of places that teach ju-jitsu, and some teach BJJ. From what I can grasp, Ju-jitsu is a very formidable MA system that focuses on throws, locks and pins and the like? How does Ju-jitsu differ to Aikido and Judo? If no alternatives present themselves, I may well be interested in Ju-jitsu. Is it effective for self defence?

- A place nearby teaches Shaolin Chuan Fa Kung Fu. I've looked at their website and it focuses somewhat on weapons training, Din Mak, Chi Sao, Chin Na, and some other concepts/techniques. I'm a little confused by all of this, and I've managed to find a little basic information on Din Mak, Chi Sao and Chin Na but not so much the others. I'm wondering if anybody has heard of Shaolin Chuan Fa before, and if the components it is made up of are effective? I have always had the impression (and we can thank the media for this) that Kung Fu was predominantly a striking style. The Shaolun Chuan Fa Kung Fu website for the place that teaches it local to me seems to imply the opposite: http://www.hullkungfu.co.uk/

- There's a place that teaches Taekwon-do. Looks appealing but I'm dubious as to it's effectiveness in a real-life street scenario thanks to a lot of 'bad press' I've heard in regards to the vast majority of places teaching it in a style catered to sports/olympic fighting. Any TKD practitioners care to throw in a few points about their MA in regards to being effective in self defence?

Hope I'm not asking too much of you all and somebody can help. I'm aware that it is moreso the quality of instruction that matters over the style that is learned (and the only way I'm going to find out if a style/instructor is right for me is by taking the plunge), but there's no arguing that the various styles are very different. The questions and thoughts I have on the above styles are not my own, simply ones I have garnered through speaking with others - others who may or may not be 'qualified' to speak about these styles. I remain open minded in my views on all MA styles.

Any help would be much appreciated. Hope to be posting about as I delve deep into the world of MA too, so this post doubles as my introduction. Sorry for rambling on too much! 

Thanks,
Nick


----------



## Chris Parker (Mar 26, 2008)

Hi, Nick

Well, that's quite a list of systems you've got there, let's see if we can deal with them one by one...

Aikido is (for my money) one of the most graceful, beautiful arts around, but you're right, it can take quite a while before any real practical skill is developed. The basic concepts of most Aikido schools centre on the later teachings of Ueshiba Sensei (O-Sensei), after WWII. The schools that split prior to that (mainly the Yoshinkan founded by Gozo Shioda) tend to be more practical, and a fair bit harder than the later schools, particularly Iwama Ryu, also known as Takemusu Aikido. However, this system is considered by most that I have spoken to as the more "complete" version, incorporating the complete sword and jo work. Incidentally, the other main line of Aikido is Tomiki Aikido, which differentiates itself by the use of knife, and having a sporting aspect.

Karate can indeed be as you describe it, but there are substantial enough differences between the various groups for you to get one idea from one school which doesn't apply to others. Wado Ryu, for instance (The Way of Peace) is noted amongst karate systems as having more grappling (the throws and locks you're looking for) than the others, and having amore "circular" approach, whereas most karate systems are very "linear" (ie, face your opponent and only go straight forward or straight back, as well as having primarily straight attacks - kicks, punches etc. It should be noted that the famous Mawashi Geri, or Roundhouse Kick, was never a part of Traditional Karate. It was instead said to have been developed by the son of Gichin Funakoshi, who apparently stole it from Thai fighters). For self defence, schools such as Shukokai, and it's parent Shito Ryu, tend to have shorter stances, and are far more mobile (and therefore faster) than schools such as Shotokan (the system Gichin Funakoshi first introduced to Japan in the early 20th Century, around 1912 I believe, although the first school wasn't opened until 1917 or so). The other big contender would have to be Kyokushinkai, founded by Mas Oyama, simply for their (very!) hard approach and full contact tournaments...but more on that subject later.

Jujutsu. Okay, kind of a big topic to cover here, but I'll do my best. Jujutsu was a term originally used simply to describe the unarmed (or in some cases, lightly armed) tactics, techniques, and concepts of the samurai. It was by no means the first term used to describe them, nor was it the only or universally accepted term, but has become the most common, so it's a good one to use. The distinction we need to make here is whether we are talking about Classical Jujutsu (Koryu - Old systems, founded prior to the Meiji Restoration in 1862), or modern Jujutsu (Gendai Jujutsu - founded after that). Most Classical systems simply won't meet your criteria of modern self defence, as they are primarily taught as a method of keeping alive old wisdom and traditions, rather than keeping alive people. This doesn't mean they are ineffective, some of the most painful things I've experienced have come from these old systems of knowledge, just that a need to defend yourself against old style Japanese weapons and attacks just isn't needed today. Modern Jujutsu could almost refer to anything, I've seen systems based in karate and aikido taught together under the name jujutsu, such as Kokushi Ryu, all the way through to more modern expressions of Classical techniques being given a new name. In this case, it's a case of "Try before you buy".

Brasilian Jiu-Jitsu. For the most part, BJJ is the only commonly accepted system to change the spelling of Jujutsu to Jiu-Jitsu (for the record, it's not just a different way of pronouncing it, they are actually different words. Jutsu means Practical Art, and Jitsu means Truth. The characters used to write these words are very different, as well, and the English equivalent would be something like "Pen" and "Pan"... you wouldn't ask to borrow someone's PAN to write something...). BJJ began when Jigoro Kano (the founder of Judo) started sending some of his senior students abroad to spread the art, and one of the students named Maeda went to Brasil. There he taught a number of people, amongst them a family of brothers named Gracie. The youngest brother, Helio, was a sick child, and couldn't train with his older siblings, but he watched, and when he was stronger, practiced what he saw. Due to Brasil's particular penchant for ground fighting, the original Kodokan Judo techniques the brothers were taught were gradually morphed into what is now known as Brasilian Jiu-Jitsu, with less striking, less focus on throwing, instead getting a large reportiore of sweeps, takedowns, and chokes, locks and other submissions. It rose to prominence due in no small part to Royce Gracie's success in the first few Ultimate Fighting Championships, there is more to that story, but not relevant so I'll leave that for now. Advocates of BJJ often quote statistics that 80 - 90% of fights go to the ground, so ground fighting is vital, and the only thing you need for self defence... Suffice to say, that stat is a little blown out of proportion. Yes, most fights do go to ground, but not out of choice. Often, it is just people tripping or slipping over, they fall on the ground, roll around, and get back up again. Repeat. The arguement can be made that should one of them know what to do on the ground, it could all be over in that first slip and fall, but it should also be noted that when on the ground, you are far less able to defend against other people, and if you fall over with someone and you suddenly seem to be choking your opponent out, that could be just when his friends decide to "help out"... In short, BJJ is a fantastic art for winning competitions, I firmly believe that there is no-one better on the ground, but it can be very dangerous to rely on it alone in terms of self defence.

In terms of differences between Jujutsu and Judo/Aikido, in very real terms, Aikido and Judo can be looked at as simply other types or forms of Jujutsu themselves. In fact, Judo wa originally simply known as Kano Ha Kodokan Jujutsu, or Kano Jujutsu. It gained popularity after some of Kano's top students won a number of key competitions (essentially with slightly different rules than the other guys were used to... a good tactic, by the way, known as taking the opponent out of their area of strength).

The Chinese system you are describing sounds to me like a modern eclectic version... I'd be careful mainy due to the fact that everything they mention seem to be just what a fantasy (made-up) school would include. The name (Shaolin Chuan Fa Gung Fu) sends out a few warning signs, the Shaolin temple is widely acknowledged as the birthplace of Aisian Martial Arts (I would probably just say Chinese Martial Arts, but that's just me), so using the title in it's name can be a marketing ploy. The next part, Chuan, simply means Fist, Fa is Method, and Gung Fu is a generic term for Chinese Martial Arts. Dim Mak (rather than Din Mak, not sure if that was their mistake, or your keyboard... mine keeps making mistakes for me all the time, so I'm giving the benefit of doubt) is commonly called the Death Touch - quite an exciting concept, huh! Essentially, without getting into all the history of the term (and in the process, the history of Tai Chi Chuan), what this refers to is simply the use of proper targeting. In Japanese arts, this is called Kyusho Jutsu in most systems. Chi Sau is known as Sticky Hands and is a Wing Chun sensitivity  exercise (NOTE: Not a Shaolin technique). Chin Na is the Chines term for aspects of grappling; locks, throws, trapping etc.

In terms of effectiveness, it is going to depend very much on the quality of the instructor, but it sounds like you may have found someone who (best case scenario) has taken a number of different sources and tried to combine them, or (not really such a good case) it could be someone who has taken a number of exotic sounding Chinese terms and essentially made up what they want. I would approach with caution. Kung Fu/Gung Fu, as already stated, is simply a generic term used for Chinese Martial Arts, although the translation can be difficult. Most refer to hard work, the rewards of effort etc. The Chinese term for Martial Art itself, by the way, is Wu Shu, although most schools that use that name tendto be very acrobatic, and often trace their skills back to arts developed for the Beijing Opera Company... not really the most street effective background. In terms of being primarily striking, it depends on the art. It is true, however, that Chinese arts as a whole tend more towards striking and Japanese tend towards grappling, and this is mainly due to the styles of armour worn in each country, amongst other reasons. But there are a number of Chinese arts who have a great deal of grappling, including some "Internal" schools such as Pa Gua (Eight Trigrams).

Tae Kwon Do. Right. Tae Kwon Do was developed in the 1950's by General Choi for a number of reasons, including aiding the physical fitness and moral of the Korean Army, but not realistically self defence. By the time it was develpoed, guns were plenty good enough at hurting the enemy, so why would they need to get another unarmed combat method? Tae Kwon Do owes a great deal of it's popularity these days to it's non-contact tournaments, and very family friendly environment. But for self defence? Probably not such a good idea. Especially when you consider that the art is about 60 - 70% kicks, something you simply don't have room for in most street attacks or bar fights, not to mention how risky it is to deliberately place your faith in an art that teaches you to be on one leg most of the time. And just to end on TKD, there is a great emphasis on high kicks in their tournaments (you get more points), but in a street situation against an unarmed attacker, a kick to the head could be grounds for you being arrested for aggrevated assault... Something to consider.

So what to study? Well, there are a number of Reality Based Self Defence groups (RBSD) around, some better thatn others, but essentially all selling the same or similar ideas. And that shouldn't be a surprise, as there are only a finite number of ways to injure someone of defend against a wide hook to the head. Then there's Krav Maga, an Israeli modern system developed for the Israeli Army. Depending on who you go to, you may find that their approach is a bit too military for truly legal street defence, but there are some good ones around. Just be aware that there are also a large number of instructors in RBSD and Krav Maga who have simply attended a Weekend Trainers Course and been certified from that, whereas you will find most Martial Art instructors have a least a few years in their particular sytsem under their belt. There have also been some corruption issues with some branches of Krav Maga that I am aware of, at least here in Australia.

I would probably be remiss if I didn't mention my own art, Ninjutsu. Be aware, however, that this is an old system, and if you find a Jinenkan or Genbukan school, you will be taught in a very exacting (traditional) approach - old style attacks and defences. Bujinkan schools tend to give more variation in their teachings, but the approach (modern or more traditional) will depend upon the instructor, as there really isn't any governing syllabus everyone follows. It's pretty much up to individual instructors to teach what they decide, and some only do what they are interested in, where others have a more responsible approach.

However, when all is said and done, if what you want is self defence, my general advise is to take up boxing or kickboxing. Along wiht Kyokushinkai and their full contact tournaments, these systems give you something most Martial Art schools don't - the ability to give and recieve hits. And that is one of the main things that brings a lot of martial artists undone, they are simply not psychologically prepared for the (emotional) trauma of being hit or hitting someone. Then get a job as a bouncer in the most horrible place you can find. You'll either get good, or it'll be a very short career. Not the safest way to learn, but one of the quickest and surest! Good luck with your search!


----------



## exile (Mar 26, 2008)

Chris Parker said:


> Tae Kwon Do. Right. Tae Kwon Do was developed in the 1950's by General Choi for a number of reasons, including aiding the physical fitness and moral of the Korean Army, but not realistically self defence.



Whoa, Christhink again. TKD is the only martial art that was ever made the national standard for an entire military. It was the military H2H combative system of the RoK in two horrific wars, in which it was successful enough that in the Vietnam war, the Viet Cong field command directed VC troops to avoid hostile engagement with RoK soldiers at all costs, specifically because of the latter's skill in TKD (an interesting fact reported in Time magazine in a 1966 issue, documented in Stuart Anslow's recent book on bunkai for the ITF tuls). It is, as I say, the only TMA fighting system, so far as I know, to have been taught to an entire national military cadre. And those techs are still there, latent, in TKD patterns. At the Battle of Tra Binh Dong, in 1967, the 11th Division RoK Marines shattered an assault by a much larger North Vietnamese force, repelling them with heavy casualties in a day of savage close-quarter fighting in which many of the enemy were killed by empty-hand techs (Anslow's book also includes a description of the battle that appeared in the US Marine Corps newsletter during that same year). And in both wars, the RoK Tiger commando units were feared, and justly so, by enemy combatants, in large part because of their skill in lethal CQ combat. I really don't see what more anyone could reasonably ask for!



Chris Parker said:


> By the time it was develpoed, guns were plenty good enough at hurting the enemy, so why would they need to get another unarmed combat method?



For the same reason that the armed forced of every nation-state with a military has a system of unarmed combatives for their soldiers:  because you don't always have access to your weapons. Because weapons, especially more modern, complex ones, are apt to jam. Because you run out of ammo. Because, particularly for special ops groups, you may have to trade firepower for swift movement and silence, minimizing the amount of hardware you get to carry with you (and this bears particularly on the case of the Black Tiger and White Tiger commando units of the RoK army). 



Chris Parker said:


> Tae Kwon Do owes a great deal of it's popularity these days to it's non-contact tournaments, and very family friendly environment.



Again, some dojangs are essentially high-priced short-term babysitting services, some are places where you can learn several different ways to break your assailant's neckliterally (vertical elbow strikes, neck twists, etc.), and everything in between. 




Chris Parker said:


> But for self defence? Probably not such a good idea. Especially when you consider that the art is about 60 - 70% kicks, something you simply don't have room for in most street attacks or bar fights, not to mention how risky it is to deliberately place your faith in an art that teaches you to be on one leg most of the time.



Again, if the dojang emphases the 'business end' of the forms taught, you are going to get a _lot_ of SD applications (including locking/pinning/trapping techs to set up terminal strikes). My own particular style of TKD shares a technical base with Shotokan karate, but we also practice kicks a lotto achieve predictable force and balance in using these powerful offensive weapons. We train high kicks, but that doesn't mean we have to use them in all offensive situations; we train knee strikes and mid-to-low kicks as parts of SD applications emphasizing upper body techniques, but training high kicks for good balance makes your low kicks really solid. 



Chris Parker said:


> And just to end on TKD, there is a great emphasis on high kicks in their tournaments (you get more points), but in a street situation against an unarmed attacker, a kick to the head could be grounds for you being arrested for aggrevated assault... Something to consider.



There are many TKD schools in which tournament factors are completely irrelevant to the curriculum. It's important to distinguish the art, and its range of capabilities, from how it's taught and what's emphasized in any particular case. The last person I'd want to face in a streetfight would be an RoK Marine trained in the classical 'military' TKD style... and we have people on MT who are still trained that way. 

More generally, I think it's very hard to generalize. Boxing vs. any of the karate-based arts? Remember, Choki Motobu made his reputation in Japan by knocking out a professional boxer in a challenge match there. And as Geoff Thompson reports, one of his students lost badly to a boxer fighting under boxing rules, but when a rematch was arranged, with essentially 'no-rules' rules, his student demolished the boxer. I've come to the conclusion, so far as MAs are concerned, that... as we used to joke when I was in high school... all generalizations are false :wink1:


----------



## The_Fish (Mar 26, 2008)

Chris,

Thank you very much for taking the time to respond. That is some very useful and interesting information. 

I&#8217;ve had a root around, and some of the Karate schools I&#8217;ve found locally are Wado-Ryu, Gendo-Kai and Kenkyu-Kai. The Gendo-Kai school seems to be quite popular so it might be best if I just plunge in for the first free lesson and give it a try. As far as kickboxing/boxing goes, I have found nowhere in my area that does either. There used to be a gym near my house that did kickboxing classes but that has recently closed down. There is also a Krav Maga system being offered at a gym that will be opening shortly but it&#8217;s very costly so I&#8217;m going to have to disregard that one. I've had a look at the TKD website and it mentions it teaches WTF style that is used in tournaments, which puts me off too.

I know I have quite a choice there but none of them really seem to appeal to me as much, there are a couple of styles in particular I wish were offered nearby. Oh well, beggars can&#8217;t be choosers &#8211; I&#8217;ll have to work with what I&#8217;ve got, and above all ensure I have a good instructor. 

Thank you,

Nick

EDIT: Exile, thanks too for your post. That was a very interesting read, and I definitely like the appeal of TKD - except the only place that teaches it near me is sport/tournament based.


----------



## exile (Mar 26, 2008)

The_Fish said:


> I definitely like the appeal of TKD - except the only place that teaches it near me is sport/tournament based.



Ah, that's too bada lot of what Chris posted does apply to the heavily sport-oriented dojangs. It's really important to understand just what you're getting into at any given school before you sign on the dotted line (and as a general rule, you should avoid long-term contracts like the plague, if at all possible). 

I actually think a direct question to the head instructor'Can you give me some details on the role of practical SD applications in your curriculum'is a good way to go. You'll be able to detect any hemming and hawing with no trouble, I'm pretty sure, if they don't emphasize practical combat methods. And definitely observe a class or two before you make a decision. You have to trust your instincts on this, to some extent....


----------



## charyuop (Mar 26, 2008)

exile said:


> Whoa, Christhink again. TKD is the only martial art that was ever made the national standard for an entire military.


 
Isn't that true also for Krav Maga and Israel military?


----------



## exile (Mar 26, 2008)

charyuop said:


> Isn't that true also for Krav Maga and Israel military?



Is it? Could well be... I was thinking TMAs, but you could well be right about KM. I just don't know... any KM people with that info?


----------



## The_Fish (Mar 26, 2008)

exile said:


> I actually think a direct question to the head instructor&#8212;'Can you give me some details on the role of practical SD applications in your curriculum'&#8212;is a good way to go. You'll be able to detect any hemming and hawing with no trouble, I'm pretty sure, if they don't emphasize practical combat methods. And definitely observe a class or two before you make a decision. You have to trust your instincts on this, to some extent....


 
I'll give them a ring in about 10 minutes and see what they say. I'm going to a Karate class tonight, and there is a TKD class tomorrow - I'll go along and have a look-see. Here's all I could take from the site:



> We are a WTF (World TaeKwonDo Federation) club: this is the form of TaeKwonDo which has been an Olympic sport since 2000. WTF TaeKwonDo is characterised by high kicks, spinning kicks and footwork. In competition it involves full contact, continuous sparring. (* This is what puts me off this particular club, however read on...*[/COLOR]
> 
> Within our teaching we also include elements of other Martial Arts including HanMuDo, Spetznaz and Wing Chun Kung Fu. We also teach practical self defence techniques and some of these are required to move through the belts. *(This bit sells me it some, but the first paragraph still makes me dubious.)*


 
I suppose I'm not going to find anything out without getting down and having a look. Thanks again guys. 

Nick[/COLOR]


----------



## exile (Mar 26, 2008)

The_Fish said:


> I suppose I'm not going to find anything out without getting down and having a look. Thanks again guys.
> Nick[/COLOR]



Our pleasure, TF, and you're right: there's no way to get the full picture except by going and have a close look... maybe a few times, at that. Good luck on your quest and let us know what you wind up deciding, eh?


----------



## Twin Fist (Mar 26, 2008)

The Fish.
Here is the thing.

ANY system can be used for effective self defense. It is however up the person to make it effective.

TKD for example, people make the mistake of thinking "they only kick high, you cant do that on the street" thats true. But here is the part they miss: TKD teaches high kicking so that you CAN kick high, but if you can kick HIGH, you can kick LOW. And Your low kicks will be even faster, and will land even harder.

BJJ is all the rage, BUT, try that rolling around on concrete. Trust me,  you wont enjoy it.

Plus, while you are rolling around trying for that arm bar, his buddy will be kicking a hole in your head. Fighting is best done standing up, and when they are standing up, BJJ guys are kittens.

The point I am making is that REAL self defense is brutal, simple, and ugly. And no ONE style is best for self defense. And in the end, it will come down to "whats best for ME" not "what is best"

ALL grappling leaves you unprepared for a stand up fight. All striking leaves you unprepared for the ground.

The best bet is something that teaches you strikes and kicks first, and incorporates some grappling into the picture.


----------



## exile (Mar 26, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> The Fish.
> Here is the thing.
> 
> *ANY system can be used for effective self defense. It is however up the person to make it effective.*
> ...



A lot of truth in this post!


----------



## mrhnau (Mar 26, 2008)

Chris Parker said:


> I would probably be remiss if I didn't mention my own art, Ninjutsu. Be aware, however, that this is an old system, and if you find a Jinenkan or Genbukan school, you will be taught in a very exacting (traditional) approach - old style attacks and defences. Bujinkan schools tend to give more variation in their teachings, but the approach (modern or more traditional) will depend upon the instructor, as there really isn't any governing syllabus everyone follows. It's pretty much up to individual instructors to teach what they decide, and some only do what they are interested in, where others have a more responsible approach.


I'll second that  With the right instructor, the X-kans can be really good...


----------



## The_Fish (Mar 26, 2008)

I've found a gym nearby, after some internet searching, that does kickboxing. I'm thinking of trying a kickboxing class out tonight, and if it goes well, sticking with my Aikido class and also taking the kickboxing class too to augment it. I like Aikido but I fancied something with a little striking in - this way, I get the best of both worlds. It gives me an extra night to satiate my cravings for doing something a little active that I enjoy too. 

If the kickboxing class isn't upto scratch, then I'll be trying TKD tomorrow.

Thanks again for the posts guys. 

Nick


----------



## exile (Mar 26, 2008)

Keep shopping around until you are dead certain you've found something that you want to buy, Nick. If you keep searching, you'll find. A lot of MAists seem to be kind of insecure about their art, as if they're constantly second-guessing their choice. If you keep your main desiderata clearly in mind, you'll find something that you don't have to feel that way about. Let us know!


----------



## Flying Crane (Mar 26, 2008)

The_Fish said:


> The Shaolun Chuan Fa Kung Fu website for the place that teaches it local to me seems to imply the opposite: http://www.hullkungfu.co.uk/
> 
> Thanks,
> Nick


 
Hi Nick,

I checked out this website you linked.  I really don't know what to make of it.  There is very little information given about the actual background and what method(s) are taught.  There are some vague references to five animals, bagua, hsing-i, and tai chi, but nothing specific.  These terms are somewhat generic, meaning that there are several schools of tai chi, several schools of bagua, several schools of hsing-i, five animals is something found within many different Chinese systems, etc.  So to make this kind of statement doesn't really tell us much and I couldn't find anything more specific on the website.  Just what type of tai chi do they teach, What is the context of their five animals, what is their lineage of bagua, etc.  Who did their head instructor study under and what are his qualifications?

It's possible that he is teaching some good stuff, it's just hard to tell from the website, and frankly, the whole presentation of the website seems kind of odd to me and gives the kind of presentation that I personally tend to avoid.  It gives me the impression that they may have built a school on sort of equal parts mediocre training and high fantasy.  I could be wrong, but that's just the impression it gives me.  

If you decide to check this school out, let us know what you find.  I'd be curious.

Good luck to you, you've already got a lot of good advice from the others on this thread.  Check out all the schools, keep in mind what you are hoping to get from the training, and talk to the instructors to get an idea of how they would meet your needs.  Find something that works well for you and stick with it.  

Most systems have something good to offer if it is well taught, and you stay dedicated to it.  There is no such thing as the "perfect" system in any absolute or measurable way.  You just find the best thing for you, and that may be contrary to what others think.


----------



## Steel Tiger (Mar 26, 2008)

Flying Crane said:


> Hi Nick,
> 
> I checked out this website you linked. I really don't know what to make of it. There is very little information given about the actual background and what method(s) are taught. There are some vague references to five animals, bagua, hsing-i, and tai chi, but nothing specific. These terms are somewhat generic, meaning that there are several schools of tai chi, several schools of bagua, several schools of hsing-i, five animals is something found within many different Chinese systems, etc. So to make this kind of statement doesn't really tell us much and I couldn't find anything more specific on the website. Just what type of tai chi do they teach, What is the context of their five animals, what is their lineage of bagua, etc. Who did their head instructor study under and what are his qualifications?


 
Yeah, I cruised around their site as well, and the thing that kept occurring to me was "this is modern Wushu".  Some of the pictures (flying kicks and one hand cartwheels) were really suggestive and the fact that they offer seemingly non-specific neijia (internal Chinese arts) is usually a telling point.

If it is Wushu then it is not the sort of thing the OP is looking for.




Flying Crane said:


> Most systems have something good to offer if it is well taught, and you stay dedicated to it. There is no such thing as the "perfect" system in any absolute or measurable way. You just find the best thing for you, and that may be contrary to what others think.


 
I have to agree.  The most effective art is the one you can understand and apply the best.  That could be any of the ones mentioned or it could be something completely different.


----------



## Flying Crane (Mar 26, 2008)

Steel Tiger said:


> ...one hand cartwheels)


 
This is a particular pet peeve of mine.  What that person was doing is not a one-handed cartwheel, but rather a technique from capoeira that was stolen and is now found in many XMA, performance type systems.  The technique is called Beija-Flor, which translates literally as "kiss the flower", but really means "the hummingbird".  It is actually a kick that comes over the head, strikes, and then retreats back the way it came, all the while balanced on one hand.

Prior to 1990 when I began studying capoeira, i had never seen anything like that.  At that time, capoeira was still quite obscure.  Now that capoeira has become much more well known, that tech has found it's way into all these performance styles, and I simply hate the fact that they stole a piece of my art and cheapened it in this way.  And that person in the photo was doing it VERY VERY poorly, almost unrecognizable if you don't know what it is suppose to be.  That's why it looked like a one-handed cartwheel.

Most people don't even know how to properly hit something with it.  I've actually landed it on the back of people's heads, in the capoeira roda.


----------



## Flying Crane (Mar 26, 2008)

The following was taken directly from the website, regarding Chi Sao:


The Chi Sao techniques that we study from the Tai Chi Chuan Chi Sao System 

BEAU JEE SAO SPEAR HAND/THRUSTING FINGERS 
BONG SAO WING HAND 
CHUN SAO SPADE HAND 
CUP SAO SCOOPING HAND 
FAK SAO WHISKING HAND 
FOK SAO BENT WRIST HAND 
GUAN SAO SPLITTING BLOCK 
GUM GAO GIN SAO GOLDEN SCISSOR HAND 
GUM SAO TRAPPING HAND 
GWAI SAO ELBOW HACKING HAND 
HEUNG SAO SHOULDER TRAP HAND 
HUEN SAO CIRCLING HANDS 
JOM SAO INWARD CHOPPING HAND 
JUM SAO SINKING ELBOWS 
JUT SAO JERKING HANDS 
KAU SAO HOOKING HANG 
LAN SAO BAR ARM 
LAO SAP SLIPPING HAND 
LAP/LOP SAO PULLING HAND 
MAN GENG SAO NECK PULLING HAND 
MUN SAO INQUISITIVE HAND 
PAK SAO SLAPPING HAND 
PAI SAO ELBOW HACKING HANDS 
PO PAI SAO DOUBLE PALM HANDS 
SAT SAO SLICING HANDS 
TAN SAO PALM UP HAND, FLIPPING, SLIDING, REVERSE, ROLLING 
TOK SAO ELBOW LIFTING HANDS 
YIM SAO SICKLE HAND 


I don't recognize all of these terms, but I do recognize many of them, and they are from Wing Chun, which uses Chi Sau extensively as a training method to develop skills.  I doubt Wing Chun is the only system to use some method of Chi Sau, but I've never heard of Chi Sau in the context of Taiji Chuan.  Taiji uses Push Hands, and can be a similar concept to Chi Sau, but technically it is somewhat different.  I don't believe the terminology listed above would apply to Push Hands in any Taiji system.

Things that make ya go "hmmm...."


----------



## Steel Tiger (Mar 26, 2008)

Flying Crane said:


> This is a particular pet peeve of mine. What that person was doing is not a one-handed cartwheel, but rather a technique from capoeira that was stolen and is now found in many XMA, performance type systems. The technique is called Beija-Flor, which translates literally as "kiss the flower", but really means "the hummingbird". It is actually a kick that comes over the head, strikes, and then retreats back the way it came, all the while balanced on one hand.
> 
> Prior to 1990 when I began studying capoeira, i had never seen anything like that. At that time, capoeira was still quite obscure. Now that capoeira has become much more well known, that tech has found it's way into all these performance styles, and I simply hate the fact that they stole a piece of my art and cheapened it in this way. And that person in the photo was doing it VERY VERY poorly, almost unrecognizable if you don't know what it is suppose to be. That's why it looked like a one-handed cartwheel.
> 
> Most people don't even know how to properly hit something with it. I've actually landed it on the back of people's heads, in the capoeira roda.


 
Very interesting.  It had looked to me like one of those one hand or no hands rollovers you see so often in dao forms.  The Beija-Flor sounds like an extreme technique, not one for me though (I'm the wrong shape for that sort of thing).  Once you described it, though, I knew what you mean't.  I have seen some very good Capoeirista hold the end position for a few seconds before returning to the ground.

That degree of eclectism is usually not a good sign in a martial art school.  The focus is all over the place adn so the balance is lost.


Just a little aside, in pre-Columbian Mexico the Aztec war god was Hitzilopochtli.  His name translates as "Left-Handed Hummingbird".  Interesting isn't it?


----------



## Flying Crane (Mar 26, 2008)

Steel Tiger said:


> That degree of eclectism is usually not a good sign in a martial art school. The focus is all over the place adn so the balance is lost.


 
you nailed it.



> Just a little aside, in pre-Columbian Mexico the Aztec war god was Hitzilopochtli. His name translates as "Left-Handed Hummingbird". Interesting isn't it?


 
interesting, that the hummingbird would have that connection.  I wonder how it fits into the mythology.


----------



## Steel Tiger (Mar 26, 2008)

Flying Crane said:


> interesting, that the hummingbird would have that connection. I wonder how it fits into the mythology.


 
They had a lot of funny iconography.  Butterflies associated with the death god.  I think the hummingbird comes from Huitzilopochtli's constant struggle against darkness.  It is a symbol of constancy.


----------



## The_Fish (Mar 27, 2008)

Very interesting. I did a little research of my own before reading this, and came to the conclusion that it was a very new 'homemade' style of sorts. I'll be sure to steer clear, especially considering as I think I've found my perfect mix.

I went to a Kickboxing class last night, and I really enjoyed it (if I'd have known the Kickboxing class was about prior to posting this I wouldn't have posted!). Aside from stretches and the like, we did 1-on-1 padwork with some punches, kicks, knees, elbows and basic combinations, with the instructors putting a lot of emphasis on stance/posture and footwork. It's only an hour lesson so there isn't much time to mix things up in a lesson but I'm really looking forward to the next one.

I also feel that I want to continue with Aikido now I've found a Kickboxing class to satiate my 'striking wants'. Although Kickboxing is very different to Aikido, I feel that one will not conflict with the other due to the nature of the styles. I've only had a couple of Aikido classes so far but it is very enjoyable - great atmosphere (not too big in numbers, very helpful students), fantastic teacher (tries to keep things as 'real' and 'live' as possible in an Aikido training situation, stressing that training should never be with Uke over-exagerrating his movements, but rather with Nage doing the techs properly. He's also a perfectionist). I've heard the word 'relax' about 23409234923423423 times because I have a real problem focusing on what I'm doing whilst trying to keep relaxed, but that'll come with time.

Anyway, I'm going on and on again now. Thanks for your time, help and information all. 

Nick


----------

