# Problems with "traditional arts" part 2



## KPM (Jul 7, 2018)

We have had two threads now that have touched upon the problems some people see with the "traditional" approach martial arts.   So let's do a thread that summarizes and adds to it.

The problems I have been seeing:

1.  Many "traditional" arts don't spar at all.  They spend the majority of their time training forms, and in the case of Wing Chun, doing Chi Sau.
2.  When "traditional" arts do spar, they very often end up doing a form of somewhat sloppy kickboxing and an outside observer may have a hard time even determining what "traditional" art they represent.  Very often no movements from the forms they have spent many hours working on are evident.
3.  "Traditional" arts often hold back information.  They are somewhat secretive and unwilling to share or talk about what they consider important elements of their system.  Among their own students they may teach the "secrets" or the "good parts" to only a select few that demonstrate loyalty over many years.  Or they may string out their curriculum over a long period of time simply to keep students coming and paying the tuition.
4.  "Traditional" arts place too much value on the idea of "lineage."  If a student does something that the teacher doesn't like, they are "disowned" or kicked out of the lineage.  Then the teacher often devalues and dismisses that students background and training to try and discredit them.  Leung Ting and William Cheung have done this to many students over the years.   That was done to me as well.
5.  "Traditional" arts often have a very narrow and specific way of defining their method and techniques.  So if you depart from that, you are no longer doing their art....and, once again, you may  get disowned from the lineage!

I could problem come up with more after giving it a little thought!    But what do you guys think?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 7, 2018)

KPM said:


> 2.  When "traditional" arts do spar, they very often end up doing a form of somewhat sloppy kickboxing ...


Sparring is not the solution here. You can spar for 5 years, but after 5 years if you still spar the same way as you did 5 years ago, you just repeat the same pattern for 5 years and you have not learned anything new.

You should spar by using techniques from your style. In order to do so, you have to define what technique (or techniques) can make you a winner. For example, if this week you can only score with a "foot sweep", all students will be forced to use "foot sweep".


----------



## Headhunter (Jul 7, 2018)

I think these types of threads are pointless....that stuff can apply to some schools but not all of them. Same as anything it all depends on the instructor not the style. So saying its a problem with traditional martia arts is frankly just plain wrong


----------



## MetalBoar (Jul 7, 2018)

1. I guess I don't see this as a problem inherent to TMA, more a symptom of what has captured the consumers' interest. I think there are and have always been a fair number of people who don't really want to spar and then another subset of people who REALLY want to spar and a few in between. For a long time boxing was not accessible for the majority of martial arts "hobbyists" (for lack of a better term) because most of the good boxing gyms were, and largely still are, only interested in potential pros. This meant that for a long time all those people who wanted to spar, but weren't interested in pro boxing, did TMA and there were a fair number of TMA schools that offered sparring to attract these customers.

With the incredible visibility that MMA/BJJ achieved during the 90's and their accessible gym culture, a lot of those people who really want to spar either started in, or moved to, those schools. At the same time that this transition was happening, the US was getting a lot safer. I suspect a lot of people who were on the fence about sparring didn't have an interest in the level of commitment necessary for MMA, especially in conjunction with societal changes that made it feel a lot less likely they might need to actually defend themselves. So, while they might have some interest in some sparring, it wasn't a big deal for them. TMA schools now had a majority customer base that either didn't want to spar or didn't care much about sparring and therefor an incentive to do less and less. So, while not a problem with TMA themselves, this has become a problem for many TMA schools and it is self re-enforcing.

2. I concur that this is a problem.  Many of the worst examples of this I've seen have been in freestyle type tournaments, so it's impossible to know if the competitors ever sparred at all in their schools or what kinds of drills and other training they might do. If you never spar with your art and you don't do any drills to ingrain proper application there is a good chance you'll revert to something like bad kick boxing under pressure. Again, not necessarily a problem with TMA, but a problem with the current economic reality that to keep your doors open in a commercial-ish TMA school you may be wasting your time and driving away your strongest target market if you focus on application and sparring.

3. I hear this a lot and I've seen the recent thread where this has been an issue, but I have never experienced it personally. I don't know how prevalent it is, but I admit I'm a little dubious that it represents a wide spread issue in the modern US. Whether its widespread or not, I think withholding information is pretty counterproductive in general and to whatever degree TMA's promotes this sort of thing I would agree that's a problem.

I have had the curriculum spread out over a long period of time, but it being a TMA school had nothing to do with it. In my experience, a lot of martial arts instructors aren't good teachers and have not been provided with or created any tools to codify their teaching into a coherent program. Some of this may be an artifact of historic TMA methods, but I think it's mainly that most people are bad at their jobs (whatever they may be) and that many martial arts instructors (TMA or not) have spent a lot of time learning martial arts and not a lot of time learning how to teach them. TMA's that contain 10,000 forms and 50 weapons may exacerbate this problem, but I think it still falls largely on the instructor rather than the art.

4. I would agree that politics seem to be a problem in TMA, perhaps MA in general. I try to do my best not to get involved in that sort of thing, it can get petty, mean spirited and miserable for all involved. I guess if I ever started teaching I might have to worry about it, but in the mean time I'll just stick to doing my best to represent myself honestly and try to treat others with courtesy.

Lineage is tricky in my opinion. Not everyone is looking for the same thing from their martial arts training. I don't think lineage, by itself, is any sort of guarantee of martial effectiveness or even knowledge. If your only goal is super effective fighting skills in the ring or on the street, then lineage in and of itself seems pretty meaningless. In those cases you only really care if the school produces good competitors or teaches effective self defense. On the other hand, if you have a real interest in learning a specific TMA because you find it's techniques and tactical approach interesting or something, then lineage is pretty important.

If Joe down the street says he's teaching Hung Gar when in reality he's studied boxing and watched a few Hung Gar instructional videos he might or might not be great at teaching you how to fight, but he probably isn't going to teach you much about Hung Gar. If instead Joe could legitimately trace his lineage back through a reputable chain of Hung Gar instructors it's still no guarantee of anything but it does significantly increase the chances that he knows something about Hung Gar.

5. This is also tricky, but I think it's fair to say that if you claim to teach an art, and your instructor and other informed practitioners of the style feel that what you are teaching doesn't utilize the principals and/or techniques of "their" art, that it is not unreasonable for them to say that you are not teaching "their" art. Going back to what I said above, your students can decide if what you teach matches what they want to learn. But, barring obvious politics unrelated to the practice of the art itself, if your teacher claims you aren't teaching "their" art then someone who puts an emphasis on learning that specific art might not want to study with you, regardless of how good what you teach might be in some other regard. 

I mean, let's be honest, if I charged someone money to teach them how to program in Java, but I what I actually taught was Python, people would have every right to tell me I'm not teaching Java, no matter how good my Python instruction might be and no matter how much my Python instruction might prepare them to learn Java in the future. This would be true even if Python was better suited to the specific programming problems they wanted to solve.

The closest I've come to encountering this particular problem is with schools that didn't want me to cross train in other arts at the same time. The arguments against this have been of varying quality, and I've honored this request thus far, but I tend to be dubious about the validity


----------



## drop bear (Jul 7, 2018)

An art becomes better if it is conceptually driven by its practitioners. Not by its founders.

Which is the primary issue with the traditional martial arts in they resist that concept as much as possible.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 7, 2018)

KPM said:


> We have had two threads now that have touched upon the problems some people see with the "traditional" approach martial arts.   So let's do a thread that summarizes and adds to it.
> 
> The problems I have been seeing:
> 
> ...


A lot of that seems more targeted at TCMA than TJMA, in my view.


----------



## Anarax (Jul 7, 2018)

KPM said:


> Many "traditional" arts don't spar at all. They spend the majority of their time training forms, and in the case of Wing Chun, doing Chi Sau.


This varies more so from school to school opposed to style to style. Each school develops a different training culture than others. Once a training culture(good or bad) is established it's very difficult to change it, for you already have a class comprised of individuals that adhere and encourage that culture. 

I agree 100% with the Chi Sau comment. *Replacing* sparring with Chi Sau is counter-productive.



KPM said:


> When "traditional" arts do spar, they very often end up doing a form of somewhat sloppy kickboxing and an outside observer may have a hard time even determining what "traditional" art they represent. Very often no movements from the forms they have spent many hours working on are evident.


This is more reflective on the school rather than "traditional MA". When I studied Kung Fu I was taught very little before I started sparring. I was shown a few forms, how to kick/punch, I wasn't taught HOW to fight or HOW to spar. However, that was at that one school. I later moved onto other systems with much better instructors that taught me what I actually needed to know to develop as a Martial Artist. Combative drills, focus drills, tactics, strategy, etc. Essentially I think it comes down to the MA teacher and the school opposed to style.



KPM said:


> "Traditional" arts often hold back information. They are somewhat secretive and unwilling to share or talk about what they consider important elements of their system. Among their own students they may teach the "secrets" or the "good parts" to only a select few that demonstrate loyalty over many years. Or they may string out their curriculum over a long period of time simply to keep students coming and paying the tuition.


I think there are definitely teachers that fall into those categories, but I also think ignorance is another category. Meaning not all teacher were taught how to fight nor the applications of their forms. They can't teach what they don't know, but that's more a reflection on them and their teachers, not the style itself.   



KPM said:


> "Traditional" arts place too much value on the idea of "lineage."


Agreed. Knowing one's lineage and the history associated with it is important. However, when it's used to put other lineages down it comes off as childish.



KPM said:


> If a student does something that the teacher doesn't like, they are "disowned" or kicked out of the lineage. Then the teacher often devalues and dismisses that students background and training to try and discredit them. Leung Ting and William Cheung have done this to many students over the years. That was done to me as well.


I can't speak of the WC lineage disputes, though I aware of the turmoil and history. However, I've encountered multiple traditional MA instructors who encouraged me to cross train, but only one that acted similarly to what you describe.    



KPM said:


> "Traditional" arts often have a very narrow and specific way of defining their method and techniques. So if you depart from that, you are no longer doing their art....and, once again, you may get disowned from the lineage!


There are schools like that, but there are many other that have a more open mind to training. 


Traditional MA is a mixed bag when it comes to quality. I agree with most of your comments and have seen a lot of what you speak of from my own experiences. However, they only represent a small minority of my experiences overall.


----------



## Anarax (Jul 7, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> A lot of that seems more targeted at TCMA than TJMA, in my view.



That's my experience as well. IMO, Chinese MA is the most political and experiences a lot of the problems KPM refers to.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 7, 2018)

For the most part it isn't what martial art you train. What matters is how to train and practice.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 7, 2018)

Your school cannot stop you from sparring after school. It's your own responsibility to develop your sparring experience when you are young.


----------



## dvcochran (Jul 7, 2018)

MetalBoar said:


> 1. I guess I don't see this as a problem inherent to TMA, more a symptom of what has captured the consumers' interest. I think there are and have always been a fair number of people who don't really want to spar and then another subset of people who REALLY want to spar and a few in between. For a long time boxing was not accessible for the majority of martial arts "hobbyists" (for lack of a better term) because most of the good boxing gyms were, and largely still are, only interested in potential pros. This meant that for a long time all those people who wanted to spar, but weren't interested in pro boxing, did TMA and there were a fair number of TMA schools that offered sparring to attract these customers.
> 
> With the incredible visibility that MMA/BJJ achieved during the 90's and their accessible gym culture, a lot of those people who really want to spar either started in, or moved to, those schools. At the same time that this transition was happening, the US was getting a lot safer. I suspect a lot of people who were on the fence about sparring didn't have an interest in the level of commitment necessary for MMA, especially in conjunction with societal changes that made it feel a lot less likely they might need to actually defend themselves. So, while they might have some interest in some sparring, it wasn't a big deal for them. TMA schools now had a majority customer base that either didn't want to spar or didn't care much about sparring and therefor an incentive to do less and less. So, while not a problem with TMA themselves, this has become a problem for many TMA schools and it is self re-enforcing.
> 
> ...


Man, that was good.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 7, 2018)

Anarax said:


> I agree 100% with the Chi Sau comment. *Replacing* sparring with Chi Sau is counter-productive.



Add pummeling and takedowns.


----------



## mrt2 (Jul 7, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Your school cannot stop you from sparring after school. It's your own responsibility to develop your sparring experience when you are young.


There is something to that.  The day I started Tang Soo Do way back in 1979, as I put on my Dobok for the first time and come into the gym, waiting for the instructor to come out, there was a teenage green belt and a teenage red belt, sparring.  And they were really going at it hard!  The green belt went onto become one of the best tournament fighters in our school's history, traveled around the world, and owns a chain of martial arts studios on the East Coast.  These folks showed up at the gym to spar before white belt class, over an hour before the regular class was supposed to start.

That was dedication, and I agree.  If you want to do a lot of sparring and application, then do a lot of sparring and application of your technique.


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 8, 2018)

Danny T said:


> For the most part it isn't what martial art you train. What matters is how to train and practice.



This is the key. I think I've said this in other threads as well. 
I think you can take someone with just the basics of WC and train the crap out of them with intense pressure and realistic drilling, fight conditioning, etc and they will do just fine.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 8, 2018)

Anarax said:


> Knowing one's lineage and the history associated with it is important.


I'll go a step further, Anarax. While this can be useful information, I'm not sure how important it is. I'll use my primary art as an example. Because I know NGA has roots in Daito-ryu, most likely taught by Kitaro Yoshida, I know it has near-direct links to Ueshiba's Aikido, more direct links to all the current lines of Daito-ryu, and some pretty thin indirect links (through Kitaro) to Yanagi-ryu. That's useful information, but I'm not sure it's that important. I've talked with students who, though they had to know that at some point to pass their yellow belt (first colored belt) test in the NGAA, have long since forgotten it or confused it. Why? Because it doesn't really matter to their training. It matters for those of us investigating to look for where principles came from (usually, because we either don't really "get" a technique, or because we're looking for a better way than what we know), but to the average student, it's just trivia. A clear case is the fact that we are _almost sure_ Kitaro is the source of the Daito-ryu base of NGA, but we can't be sure. A knowledgeable instructor in another art tried to help us with researching that, but the Daito-ryu records are somewhat fragmented and might not even be complete at this point. His final response to us was (paraphrased), "I wouldn't worry about it. It doesn't really matter whether Morita trained under Kitaro, or he invented NGA entirely on his own from a bunch of made-up techniques. It's the effectiveness of the art that matters. Go train."

This is why it bugs me when I see so much emphasis on lineage. It doesn't seem important enough to really deserve the air time it gets. My "lineage" in NGA is interesting, but I've only ever used it to help folks understand what to expect (some known differences between the two men who were once the ranking active NGAA instructors). If someone were to claim to have learned their NGA from Bryce Lee (who left the NGAA and probably stopped calling it NGA some 20+ years ago), that wouldn't really tell me anything useful.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 8, 2018)

Anarax said:


> There are schools like that, but there are many other that have a more open mind to training.


And that can even vary within a school, as it's quite dependent upon the instructor. I imagine if I could deliver personality assessments, those results would probably be a better predictor of this than would knowing which art they teach.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 8, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Your school cannot stop you from sparring after school. It's your own responsibility to develop your sparring experience when you are young.


I agree, and disagree, all at the same time, John. 

The student should take responsibility for this, but so should the instructor. Best outcome is if the instructor is using sparring as a teaching tool, and the student is using sparring as a learning and vetting tool - especially if the latter includes extra-art sparring.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 8, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Add pummeling and takedowns.


Doesn't that change the drill into sparring?


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 8, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Doesn't that change the drill into sparring?



I don't think it has to... I mean, you can have "drills" that introduce and train these aspects before moving on to more dynamic activities like sparring, etc.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 8, 2018)

wckf92 said:


> This is the key. I think I've said this in other threads as well.
> I think you can take someone with just the basics of WC and train the crap out of them with intense pressure and realistic drilling, fight conditioning, etc and they will do just fine.



The issue is efficiency. If the system you train is less efficient then you have to be better at it to overcome someone working less hard.

And that is entirely within the system. 

And wing chun can be a great example. So if you did chun striking but did not include head movement. You then have to address every single punch coming at you, deal with it and fire something back. 

And that is legitimately hard work at speed.

If you used head movement then eve statistically less strikes will land. And so you will have a better time avoiding shots.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 8, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Doesn't that change the drill into sparring?



Sparring is a drill.


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 8, 2018)

drop bear said:


> The issue is efficiency. If the system you train is less efficient then you have to be better at it to overcome someone working less hard.
> 
> And that is entirely within the system.
> 
> ...



Fair points. 
Not to get into the weeds but I suppose it would depend on whether a particular flavor of WC taught head movement as part of the system. hahaha


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 8, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Sparring is a drill.



Exactly.
Everything is a drill until it's go time!


----------



## Danny T (Jul 8, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Add pummeling and takedowns.


Chi sao is pummeling. The problem is with those who don't go beyond just pummeling.
Chi sao as pummeling has different layers first is to learn the moves and the intertwining of the arms (poon sao), just going through the motions and sticking with each other. Then there is the addition of pressure and moving about (luk sao), working for positional control. And finally there is the free action of getting positional control and doing something with it; with wrestling it would be a shoot, drag or duck under and take the back/takedown; with wc to punch, to trap the legs and sweep or takedown. Unfortunately for many in wc (from what I've seen) they stay in the chi sao mode never actually sparring or fighting with it. How good would one be as a wrestler if only doing pummeling and takedown drills. These are but a part of the whole of training. Sad that many wc practitioners stop with chi sao.


----------



## dvcochran (Jul 8, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> I'll go a step further, Anarax. While this can be useful information, I'm not sure how important it is. I'll use my primary art as an example. Because I know NGA has roots in Daito-ryu, most likely taught by Kitaro Yoshida, I know it has near-direct links to Ueshiba's Aikido, more direct links to all the current lines of Daito-ryu, and some pretty thin indirect links (through Kitaro) to Yanagi-ryu. That's useful information, but I'm not sure it's that important. I've talked with students who, though they had to know that at some point to pass their yellow belt (first colored belt) test in the NGAA, have long since forgotten it or confused it. Why? Because it doesn't really matter to their training. It matters for those of us investigating to look for where principles came from (usually, because we either don't really "get" a technique, or because we're looking for a better way than what we know), but to the average student, it's just trivia. A clear case is the fact that we are _almost sure_ Kitaro is the source of the Daito-ryu base of NGA, but we can't be sure. A knowledgeable instructor in another art tried to help us with researching that, but the Daito-ryu records are somewhat fragmented and might not even be complete at this point. His final response to us was (paraphrased), "I wouldn't worry about it. It doesn't really matter whether Morita trained under Kitaro, or he invented NGA entirely on his own from a bunch of made-up techniques. It's the effectiveness of the art that matters. Go train."
> 
> This is why it bugs me when I see so much emphasis on lineage. It doesn't seem important enough to really deserve the air time it gets. My "lineage" in NGA is interesting, but I've only ever used it to help folks understand what to expect (some known differences between the two men who were once the ranking active NGAA instructors). If someone were to claim to have learned their NGA from Bryce Lee (who left the NGAA and probably stopped calling it NGA some 20+ years ago), that wouldn't really tell me anything useful.


Agreed. I can easily trace our lineage through Seoung Eui Shin back to Hwang Ki. But in reality most of the positioning of Korean styles were heavily politically related. So what good does it do to explain the Kwan's to a white belt? The current climate of your Dojang and it's instructors are what your students will remember.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 8, 2018)

wckf92 said:


> I don't think it has to... I mean, you can have "drills" that introduce and train these aspects before moving on to more dynamic activities like sparring, etc.


That's true. If you just progress to takedowns and such, and immediately reset to restart chi sao, it doesn't really turn into sparring yet. Maybe an interesting progression point between the two.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 8, 2018)

drop bear said:


> The issue is efficiency. If the system you train is less efficient then you have to be better at it to overcome someone working less hard.
> 
> And that is entirely within the system.
> 
> ...


And this is a realistic commentary on a lot of JMA, as I've seen them, as well. Most of my training didn't address head movement and level changes nearly enough, leading to exactly the issue you point out.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 8, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Sparring is a drill.


I agree that sparring can fit within the common usage of "drill". My question was whether making that change to that particular drill changes it to sparring. As someone else commented, it doesn't have to.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 8, 2018)

wckf92 said:


> Fair points.
> Not to get into the weeds but I suppose it would depend on whether a particular flavor of WC taught head movement as part of the system. hahaha


And then we get into the question of whether head movement - if added to what a WC instructor teaches - is part of WC, or an add-on. Does it become "WC with head movement added" or "that WC that includes head movement"? I think the distinction is entirely semantics, but becomes the basis of a lot of debate and acrimony within some circles of TMA.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 8, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> And then we get into the question of whether head movement - if added to what a WC instructor teaches - is part of WC, or an add-on. Does it become "WC with head movement added" or "that WC that includes head movement"? I think the distinction is entirely semantics, but becomes the basis of a lot of debate and acrimony within some circles of TMA.


1. most martial arts that are considered traditional were designed to defend against thugs and opportunists type criminals and not against other trained fighters. 
2. most practitioners of said tma never fight in a self defense situation.
3. competitive fighting mindset is different than self defense mindset.
4. most sparring is stand your ground fighting and not get the hell out self defense.
5. head movement can be an excellent action when you are in a stand your ground 'I'm not going anywhere' situation. Not so much in a direct attack or direct counter-attack and go situation. Getting out of an attackers chosen ambush zone is imperative for surviving an assault by a criminal even more so if they are armed. Standing in front of your attacker, slipping, bobbing and weaving is not a very good plan.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 8, 2018)

Danny T said:


> 1. most martial arts that are considered traditional were designed to defend against thugs and opportunists type criminals and not against other trained fighters.
> 2. most practitioners of said tma never fight in a self defense situation.
> 3. competitive fighting mindset is different than self defense mindset.
> 4. most sparring is stand your ground fighting and not get the hell out self defense.
> 5. head movement can be an excellent action when you are in a stand your ground 'I'm not going anywhere' situation. Not so much in a direct attack or direct counter-attack and go situation. Getting out of an attackers chosen ambush zone is imperative for surviving an assault by a criminal even more so if they are armed. Standing in front of your attacker, slipping, bobbing and weaving is not a very good plan.


There's no reason those two approaches can't intersect. I can get in more easily to control the situation (assuming running isn't a safe option) if I can get past his punches. My chance of getting past those punches goes up if I have some rudimentary head movement and level changing ability. That opens up more striking and grappling options for me, and even buys some time to find a useful opening. Simply exiting his ambush zone isn't usually going to be an immediate option without first gaining some control.

I agree the mindset is different, but useful tools overlap considerably.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 8, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Sparring is a drill.


- Drill is your opponent give you that chance and you have to finish it.
- Sparring is your opponent "won't" give you that chance and you still have to finish it.

Drill is like "making love". Sparring is like "raping someone."


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 8, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Most of my training didn't address head movement and level changes nearly enough, leading to exactly the issue you point out.


Both head movement and level change can be learned in 2 men forms.

When you throw a

- hook punch,
- crescent kick,

your opponent will dodge under it.

The issue is some MA systems such as WC doesn't have 2 men forms. IMO, it's a good idea to create the 4th WC forms that include all of these.


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 8, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Both head movement and level change can be learned in 2 men forms. The issue is some MA system such as WC doesn't have 2 men forms.



Yes it does...they are called drills!


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 8, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Both head movement and level change can be learned in 2 men forms.
> 
> When you throw a
> 
> ...


Even in those MA that don't use forms much (NGA traditionally has a bunch of very short 2-man forms sprinkled around, but that's all), they sometimes don't get into any of that in other drills. It's pretty easy to work in, either as a separate exercise, or within existing drills.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 8, 2018)

wckf92 said:


> Yes it does...they are called drills!


Unless you can standardize WC drills, otherwise drills will be different between schools.

In the past 2 months, I just realized that some solo training are missing in my system (such as scoop, tie). I created both drills (short forms) and added into my system. This way, my next generation will have those information in their training.


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 8, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Unless you can standardize WC drills, otherwise drills will be different between schools.
> 
> In the past 2 months, I just realized that some solo training are missing in my system (such as scoop, tie). I created both drills (short forms) and added into my system. This way, my next generation will have those information in their training.
> 
> If I can integrate MT "flying knee" into my system, nothing is impossible.



While I somewhat agree that standardized drills across the entire WC community may be useful to a point...the mark of a good instructor is that he/she can create system-compliant drills for an individual student for furthering their understanding of the system. Having said that...I definitely disagree that WC needs a "4th form" (I'm assuming you meant hand form?). 

Besides...standardized drills for EVERYONE just sounds boring! hahaha


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 8, 2018)

wckf92 said:


> the mark of a good instructor is ...


You can't depend on a good king to lead a country. If you have good constitution, any average president can lead that country.

IMO, if a MA system is designed well, any average instructor should be able to pass it down to the next generation.


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 8, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> You can't depend on a good king to lead a country. If you have good constitution, any average president can lead that country.
> 
> IMO, if a MA system is designed well, any average instructor should be able to pass it down to the next generation.



I agree...but you changed the topic. IMHO Wing Chun is just fine the way it is. And I imagine there are good folks out there passing it down just as it was/is designed; without adding flying knees to it.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 8, 2018)

wckf92 said:


> Fair points.
> Not to get into the weeds but I suppose it would depend on whether a particular flavor of WC taught head movement as part of the system. hahaha



In this case it isn't because all I was trying to show was system in isolation.

And why it needs to be as efficient as possible to combine with good training and genetics.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 8, 2018)

wckf92 said:


> I agree...but you changed the topic. IMHO Wing Chun is just fine the way it is. And I imagine there are good folks out there passing it down just as it was/is designed; without adding flying knees to it.



There is a thing on YouTube that shows Christmas as it is celebrated today is a mash up of Christian, pagan and roman beliefs.

Yet we consider it a Christian holiday.

When we look at what is or isn't chun it is only based on our biases.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 8, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> You can't depend on a good king to lead a country. If you have good constitution, any average president can lead that country.
> 
> IMO, if a MA system is designed well, any average instructor should be able to pass it down to the next generation.


I’m not convinced a system -no matter how good - can overcome the mediocrity of an instructor.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Jul 8, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Sparring is a drill.


Yes and No.  It just depends on what type of sparring is being done. For me it was a 50% drill and 50% applications training in the context of a resisting opponent.  The only reason I say that the applications training wasn't a drill is because nothing was predetermined in terms of random attacks, evasions, and defenses.  I don't train like kung fu wang by forcing myself to do a specific attack or defense.  For me that often makes me and students force techniques.  My training belief is that one should be able to use kung fu from any position that they find themselves in, which is the reason why I have so many videos demonstrating my ability to do various types of techniques and concepts.  I  

Depending on how someone uses sparring it will either be a drill or it won't be.  For me drills are things that are done over and over in the context of repetition of a technique.  Only using a sweep during sparring would make it a drill for me.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Jul 8, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Drill is like "making love". Sparring is like "raping someone."


I must honestly say that this doesn't fit me at all.  I laugh and smile a lot when I'm sparring.  lol. 



Kung Fu Wang said:


> You can't depend on a good king to lead a country. If you have good constitution, any average president can lead that country.


ha ha ha.. I know where my mind went right away lol. 



Kung Fu Wang said:


> IMO, if a MA system is designed well, any average instructor should be able to pass it down to the next generation.


A few years ago I would have thought the same thing, but an average instructor could vary.  The question becomes, "Average in what?"

Let's take the example of your leader.   If you leader doesn't understand how processes actually work, then all you'll get is a leader that will tell you a bunch of theories of how he or she thinks things work.  This often becomes a problem because it's not grounded in a realistic understanding of the methods, concepts, nor of the opponents.

This is exactly what is happening with many of today's martial arts masters.  They understand how to do the technique and they know a lot of techniques, but they don't have enough understanding of the technique to apply the techniques.

So when you say "Average Instructor"  one has to put it into context of "Average in what?  From what I've been told of TMA and what I'm learning.  Anyone who has the ability to use the techniques in sparring and against different systems is far from being average.

Anyone who is a good teacher is far from being an Average teacher.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 8, 2018)

JowGaWolf said:


> "Average in what?"


Can we write down all information from any given MA system in great detail? Can students learn directly from those information? If it's possible then average instructor won't even be needed.

If we can teach a robot how to fight, we should be able to teach a human being how to fight.


----------



## Anarax (Jul 9, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> I'll go a step further, Anarax. While this can be useful information, I'm not sure how important it is. I'll use my primary art as an example. Because I know NGA has roots in Daito-ryu, most likely taught by Kitaro Yoshida, I know it has near-direct links to Ueshiba's Aikido, more direct links to all the current lines of Daito-ryu, and some pretty thin indirect links (through Kitaro) to Yanagi-ryu. That's useful information, but I'm not sure it's that important. I've talked with students who, though they had to know that at some point to pass their yellow belt (first colored belt) test in the NGAA, have long since forgotten it or confused it. Why? Because it doesn't really matter to their training. It matters for those of us investigating to look for where principles came from (usually, because we either don't really "get" a technique, or because we're looking for a better way than what we know), but to the average student, it's just trivia. A clear case is the fact that we are _almost sure_ Kitaro is the source of the Daito-ryu base of NGA, but we can't be sure. A knowledgeable instructor in another art tried to help us with researching that, but the Daito-ryu records are somewhat fragmented and might not even be complete at this point. His final response to us was (paraphrased), "I wouldn't worry about it. It doesn't really matter whether Morita trained under Kitaro, or he invented NGA entirely on his own from a bunch of made-up techniques. It's the effectiveness of the art that matters. Go train."
> 
> This is why it bugs me when I see so much emphasis on lineage. It doesn't seem important enough to really deserve the air time it gets. My "lineage" in NGA is interesting, but I've only ever used it to help folks understand what to expect (some known differences between the two men who were once the ranking active NGAA instructors). If someone were to claim to have learned their NGA from Bryce Lee (who left the NGAA and probably stopped calling it NGA some 20+ years ago), that wouldn't really tell me anything useful.



I think having a base knowledge of what your style(not just the name) is and where it comes from is important. Being able to recite all the masters in your lineage by date isn't really important at all. 

I mostly approach it from a contextual perceptive when it comes to style history. Being able to answer questions about Kali like "why do you guys start with weapons?" or "why don't you guys have high kicks?', I can answer them as a practitioner of that art. I think students should be aware of the how the historical background shaped the technical components of the art.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 9, 2018)

drop bear said:


> There is a thing on YouTube that shows Christmas as it is celebrated today is a mash up of Christian, pagan and roman beliefs.
> 
> Yet we consider it a Christian holiday.
> 
> When we look at what is or isn't chun it is only based on our biases.


----------



## now disabled (Jul 9, 2018)

Traditional Arts :- My limited knowledge (japanese arts) would make me say that alot of the arguments over them has come more in the late 20th to early 21st century and that probably has more to do with the way society has evolved as in it is easier to check now than it ever was. Also there are far more "researchers" out there now who dig into things sometimes for their own good sometimes for the common good (I do use that term loosely) than ever there was. 

I was always told that no matter the tradition claimed or not all the arts evolved over time so what it started out as, will have changed eg. what started out as a battlefield art changed when there were no battles (or it ceased to exist) ... Instructors had to earn a living so they adapted this to the time they were in. 
Lineages I have seen some very very heated arguments over and it never gets settled fully, personally I do look at the lineage (I have time now) but always with an open mind as to it might not be exactly as it claimed or has embellishments added, be they back in history or be they fairly modern. I also would add that when reading old scrolls (translations) you are dependent on the translator getting it right (not only the right word or words but the right context and the context at the time it was written not the context of today) and not adding their own to it or taking away from it. 

Really are their any traditional unchanged arts?


----------



## APL76 (Jul 9, 2018)

now disabled said:


> Traditional Arts :- My limited knowledge (japanese arts) would make me say that alot of the arguments over them has come more in the late 20th to early 21st century and that probably has more to do with the way society has evolved as in it is easier to check now than it ever was. Also there are far more "researchers" out there now who dig into things sometimes for their own good sometimes for the common good (I do use that term loosely) than ever there was.
> 
> I was always told that no matter the tradition claimed or not all the arts evolved over time so what it started out as, will have changed eg. what started out as a battlefield art changed when there were no battles (or it ceased to exist) ... Instructors had to earn a living so they adapted this to the time they were in.
> Lineages I have seen some very very heated arguments over and it never gets settled fully, personally I do look at the lineage (I have time now) but always with an open mind as to it might not be exactly as it claimed or has embellishments added, be they back in history or be they fairly modern. I also would add that when reading old scrolls (translations) you are dependent on the translator getting it right (not only the right word or words but the right context and the context at the time it was written not the context of today) and not adding their own to it or taking away from it.
> ...



I have it on good authority that the Tenshi Koden Katori Shinto Ryu's secret scrolls are really KFC vouchers.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 9, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> A lot of that seems more targeted at TCMA than TJMA, in my view.



Which raises a question... why are the traditional Chinese martial arts being targeted at a higher rate then the Japanese ones?

And this also raises a parallel question. Why do some forms of Japanese ju-jutsu get a lot more heat and criticism than other JJJs?


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 9, 2018)

I would say some MA do not spar, nor should they.

I will give two examples
Kyudo and Iaido.

Both use sharp live steel.
I cannot see a means to safely engage in fully resisting arrows being shot at me, or someone quick drawcutting a 3 foot long two handed razor at me.

They are both effective martial arts, in their specific roles, without the needs of fully noncompliant and resisting opponents.


----------



## now disabled (Jul 9, 2018)

APL76 said:


> I have it on good authority that the Tenshi Koden Katori Shinto Ryu's secret scrolls are really KFC vouchers.



yep if your looking at those scrolls then they will be ummm suspect lol...

However if your looking at Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu ...you may get a few more folks arguing lol


----------



## now disabled (Jul 9, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> Which raises a question... why are the traditional Chinese martial arts being targeted at a higher rate then the Japanese ones?
> 
> And this also raises a parallel question. Why do some forms of Japanese ju-jutsu get a lot more heat and criticism than other JJJs?




TCMA that could be more a political thing than any other reason and some forms of JJJ to me things like that go in cycles as in like what I posted earlier things are being "dug up" and contested and argued over or merely some studying one form see it as superior to another (go back in time and there was always (imo) competition (if that the correct word) between ryu, It was probably easier settled then lol as in whose students lived longest lol ...ok that is tongue in cheek...)


----------



## APL76 (Jul 9, 2018)

now disabled said:


> yep if your looking at those scrolls then they will be ummm suspect lol...
> 
> However if your looking at Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu ...you may get a few more folks arguing lol


Yeah, it was just a funny story a friend of mine who has been training in it for aover 20 years told me.


----------



## APL76 (Jul 9, 2018)

Just in case I get accused of keeping secrets to myself.


My friend had already gotten some (?? one of?? I don't know) of these scrolls, another guy had just been given one, and a third guy, who didn't have any was desperate to know what was in them. He asked my friend who told him he wasn't allowed to tell him, then the other guy (who had just gotten one) said to the third guy something like "hay, I’ll tell you what’s in them". The third guy got excited thinking he was about to be let in on the secret and eagerly went to hear what was in these secret scrolls and was told "they are vouchers for KFC", much to his disgust and everyone elses amusement.


----------



## now disabled (Jul 9, 2018)

APL76 said:


> Just in case I get accused of keeping secrets to myself.
> 
> 
> My friend had already gotten some (?? one of?? I don't know) of these scrolls, another guy had just been given one, and a third guy, who didn't have any was desperate to know what was in them. He asked my friend who told him he wasn't allowed to tell him, then the other guy (who had just gotten one) said to the third guy something like "hay, I’ll tell you what’s in them". The third guy got excited thinking he was about to be let in on the secret and eagerly went to hear what was in these secret scrolls and was told "they are vouchers for KFC", much to his disgust and everyone elses amusement.




Oh good old human nature lol... Everyone wants to know secrets lol... maybe what folks should think of is if you do get given a scroll from a school then (if you have studied there) then you already have the "secrets" (up to the level you have attained ...kinda ...sorta...).

I am sure as time passes scrolls will turn up in the public domain that will be translated and marketed as secret teachings ...are they secret ...yes and no lol ...but certainly they will not in any way give anyone any more "power" than anything else lol if they are in fact genuine then for what ever school or system they were written all they give is an insight to the past at the time they were written and the not a whole lot else


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 9, 2018)

now disabled said:


> Everyone wants to know secrets lol...


I would like to know the formula of Coca-Cola.


----------



## now disabled (Jul 9, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I would like to know the formula of Coca-Cola.



would that be the original one or the one that has evolved lol?


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 9, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I would like to know the formula of Coca-Cola.



Coca-Cola (Coke) had cocaine in it, in varying amounts, from 1886 – 1929. At the time cocaine was legal and treated as a otc medicine.


----------



## Anarax (Jul 10, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> The student should take responsibility for this, but so should the instructor. Best outcome is if the instructor is using sparring as a teaching tool, and the student is using sparring as a learning and vetting tool - especially if the latter includes extra-art sparring.



Sparring is probably one of the most misunderstood components for MA beginners. What I've seen many times is new students too eager to begin sparring. They overlook the importance of learning the movements and techniques first. Not to say they need to master the techniques before sparring, but at least understand the fundamentals for safety reasons. Basic stances, break falls, etc. 

For example, one of our beginners wanted to spar after class and he "blocked" a very slow kick with a "technique" we never taught him. He broke two of his fingers and is now out of training for a while because of it. I've checked kicks from beginners with my shin and unintentionally hurt them.  

Sparring is crucial, but there should be a basic understating of the fundamentals or they'll hurt themselves. I agree that sparring or other additional training after class is a great idea. I sometimes ask my instructor if I can spar after class and he always obliges.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 10, 2018)

.


----------



## KPM (Jul 10, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> I would say some MA do not spar, nor should they.
> 
> I will give two examples
> Kyudo and Iaido.
> ...




Many FMA styles are centered around use of a sharp blade.  But they manage to figure out ways to safely spar using training substitutes.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Jul 10, 2018)

Anarax said:


> He broke two of his fingers and is now out of training for a while because of it.


Accidents and getting hurt is part of learning, now that one student has become the best spokes person for "why you block a certain way."  I'm not a beginner but from time to time, pain reminds me of why things are done a certain way and it usually only takes one or two incidents to drill it home.



Anarax said:


> Sparring is crucial, but there should be a basic understating of the fundamentals or they'll hurt themselves


Getting hurt is part of the learning process and it will happen from time to time.  As long as the act of causing is managed and doesn't come from negligence.  By this I mean, you should have a higher incident of people hurting themselves from time to time, than you do from students hurting each other (with the exceptions of joint locks and conditioning). 

More experienced students should always play at the same level of the beginner by lowering power and speed as needed.  If the student is unable to do this, then someone needs to monitor the sparring to make sure that things do not rise above a healthy level of sparring.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 10, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> Which raises a question... why are the traditional Chinese martial arts being targeted at a higher rate then the Japanese ones?


I think you misread my comment. I meant the OP's comments in that area were targeted at the TCMA community (which he comes from, at least in part).



> And this also raises a parallel question. Why do some forms of Japanese ju-jutsu get a lot more heat and criticism than other JJJs?


I'm not aware of that, but I'd expect it has to do with either exposure (lesser-known arts will have few detractors) or some specific technical bit about the JJJ in question.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 10, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> I would say some MA do not spar, nor should they.
> 
> I will give two examples
> Kyudo and Iaido.
> ...


If Kyudo isn't teaching defense against that arrow, then "sparring" wouldn't fit the art, anyway. Hunting would be a more appropriate test of the skills. Iaido absolutely can spar. There's no reason they can't put aside the live, sharp steel and spar with something different (bokken, the bamboo swords used in Kendo, or even unsharp iaito for light, technical sparring). This is akin to putting on gloves to spar, and disallowing moves that are most likely to injure your partner in some meaningful way. Whether that is useful to the art or not is a separate discussion.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 10, 2018)

JowGaWolf said:


> I'm not a beginner but from time to time, pain reminds me of why things are done a certain way and it usually only takes one or two incidents to drill it home.


If it ever only takes you one incident, you learn faster than me.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 10, 2018)

Anarax said:


> Sparring is probably one of the most misunderstood components for MA beginners. What I've seen many times is new students too eager to begin sparring. They overlook the importance of learning the movements and techniques first. Not to say they need to master the techniques before sparring, but at least understand the fundamentals for safety reasons. Basic stances, break falls, etc.
> 
> For example, one of our beginners wanted to spar after class and he "blocked" a very slow kick with a "technique" we never taught him. He broke two of his fingers and is now out of training for a while because of it. I've checked kicks from beginners with my shin and unintentionally hurt them.
> 
> Sparring is crucial, but there should be a basic understating of the fundamentals or they'll hurt themselves. I agree that sparring or other additional training after class is a great idea. I sometimes ask my instructor if I can spar after class and he always obliges.


I don't see that so much, but it's probably because of the nature of the difference in curriculum. With grappling, the drills seem to satisfy that desire to interact and try stuff out, since every drill must be a 2-person drill.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 10, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> If Kyudo isn't teaching defense against that arrow, then "sparring" wouldn't fit the art, anyway. Hunting would be a more appropriate test of the skills. Iaido absolutely can spar. There's no reason they can't put aside the live, sharp steel and spar with something different (bokken, the bamboo swords used in Kendo, or even unsharp iaito for light, technical sparring). This is akin to putting on gloves to spar, and disallowing moves that are most likely to injure your partner in some meaningful way. Whether that is useful to the art or not is a separate discussion.



really?   i might be in a ornery mood today so forgive me...but i expected more from you on this one.
Sparring within Iaido or hunting with a Yumi is about as appropriate as wiping your mouth with your tie after a messy meal.
yes the origins of the formal tie started as a napkin but to link any of these three concepts and activities together is totally missing the point.
just as you wouldnt sit down to write a short story using calligraphy.  (i wonder if i can change my MT font to calligraphy?)


----------



## marques (Jul 10, 2018)

On the other hand, some “modern” arts jump to the application, even competition with very little training (months) and very little skill. They risk their health in training, in preparation for and during competitions.

Some “modern” arts still follow the same patterns as the old ones. What you say is not exclusive of “traditional” arts.

Nothing is perfect, no one is perfect; it is really hard to find something balanced and convenient. :|


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 10, 2018)

marques said:


> On the other hand, some “modern” arts jump to the application, even competition with very little training (months) and very little skill. They risk their health in training, in preparation for and during competitions.|


When I was a kid, I didn't learn how to swim. I read book and taught myself how to float. I went to a small river, soon I figured out how to swim. All my life I have never had any formal swimming lesson. But I can swim in the ocean for 2 miles without any problem.

If we compare swimming with MA training, we learn how to swim in the water, we don't learn how to swim on the dry land. We learn MA skill through partner drills. We don't learn MA skill through form.

The major problem of traditional MA is the timing is all wrong. When you are

- young, you want to accumulate as much sparring experience as possible.
- older, you will have the rest of your life to enhance your foundation.

Unfortunately, the traditional MA has this all in backward. A traditional MA guy may spend 20 years training to build his foundation. He may still think that he is not ready for sparring. When he is ready to spar, he may be too old.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 10, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> really?   i might be in a ornery mood today so forgive me...but i expected more from you on this one.
> Sparring within Iaido or hunting with a Yumi is about as appropriate as wiping your mouth with your tie after a messy meal.
> yes the origins of the formal tie started as a napkin but to link any of these three concepts and activities together is totally missing the point.
> just as you wouldnt sit down to write a short story using calligraphy.  (i wonder if i can change my MT font to calligraphy?)


I'm only passingly familiar with either of those arts, so your point is probably over my head, Hoshin. My point was simply that there's a way to spar in one of those arts and possibility for a different way to "test" the skills involved. Whether those activities are appropriate to those arts or their aims, I have no idea.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 10, 2018)

Another problem of the traditional MA is that it use the AI "forward search" method. You start to build MA foundation before you even know what your goal is. IMO, the AI "backward search" that you define your goal, you then find a path to reach it is much better. For example, if your goal is "to be able to sweep down everybody on this plant." You will then find a MA style that can help you to develop "foot sweep". This way, you will never be restricted by any MA style.

When people said,

- My style doesn't do this.
- This is against my style principle.
- This will make my style un-pure.
- I agree with everything that you have said, but what does that have to do with my style?
- ...

That person just allows his MA style to put unnecessary restriction on himself.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 10, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When I was a kid, I didn't learn how to swim. I read book and taught myself how to float. I went to a small river, soon I figured out how to swim. All my life I have never had any formal swimming lesson. But I can swim in the ocean for 2 miles without any problem.
> 
> If we compare swimming with MA training, we learn how to swim in the water, we don't learn how to swim on the dry land. We learn MA skill through partner drills. We don't learn MA skill through form.
> 
> ...



There is a concern I have with the young consuming mass quantities ......





of sparring.


MTBI.
Mild traumatic brain injury, and regular traumatic brain injury. This is a brain dysfunction caused by an outside force, usually a violent blow to the head.
It's fairly commonCommon.
More than 200,000 US cases per year

Treatable by a medical professional
Requires a medical professional.

Lab tests or imaging often required
Traumatic brain injury often occurs as a result of a severe sports injury or car accident.
Immediate or delayed symptoms may include confusion, blurry vision, and concentration difficulty. Infants may cry persistently or be irritable.
Treatment may involve rest, medication, and surgery.


My big concern is young men and women have a lot of power, and puberty and the constant growth induced coordination issues.

When it comes to mbti, the injuries are cumulative and compounding. The more it gets damaged, the easier it is damaged and the NFL, and high school football associations in Texas are becoming very aware of this.




So to mitigate you can try to reduce head or face strikes in sparing, or spar using reduced power.
But those both have an effect on training.

In the real world, you will avoid punching someone in the face. 

A very powerful argument can be made that in a real fight you should strike the opponent in the face and head, Early, Often and as Hard as you can without losing your center.

If Elon Musk could build us robotic sparing partners this would help.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 10, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> Mild traumatic brain injury, ... More than 200,000 US cases per year.


- Soldiers die in the battle field.
- Swimmers die in the water.
- Mountain climbers die in the mountain.
- MA guys die in the ring (or on the mat).
- ...

We all choose our own life path.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 10, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> - Soldiers die in the battle field.
> - Swimmers die in the water.
> - Mountain climbers die in the mountain.
> - MA guys die in the ring (or on the mat).
> ...



There are a number of reasons why the Okinawan people are the longest lived humans on the planet. And Karate is a huge part of daily life. 

Their method of kumite sparring is healthy.
But their full contact tournaments are very aggressive and realistic.

You dont have to train in a way that reduces your years, or quality of life. The Okinawan culture proves this.


----------



## Anarax (Jul 10, 2018)

JowGaWolf said:


> Accidents and getting hurt is part of learning, now that one student has become the best spokes person for "why you block a certain way." I'm not a beginner but from time to time, pain reminds me of why things are done a certain way and it usually only takes one or two incidents to drill it home.


I agree that pain is feedback we can learn from, but there's an entire spectrum of injuries. I just don't like it when students get mid-term(usually a few months) injuries that hinder their training.  



JowGaWolf said:


> More experienced students should always play at the same level of the beginner by lowering power and speed as needed. If the student is unable to do this, then someone needs to monitor the sparring to make sure that things do not rise above a healthy level of sparring.


We always go light with new students, but sometimes beginners rush to respond to a technique and they injure themselves in the process. He tried to neutralize a slow kick quickly with a horrible technique with his fingers absorbing the kick. There was no escalation, just poor technique that resulted in injury.


----------



## Anarax (Jul 10, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> There are a number of reasons why the Okinawan people are the longest lived humans on the planet. And Karate is a huge part of daily life.
> 
> Their method of kumite sparring is healthy.
> But their full contact tournaments are very aggressive and realistic.
> ...


 
Well said, there's a fine line between training hard and training recklessly. Many pro-fighters have said their gyms have dialed back the sparring intensity and have a more technique-focused/strategic-focused sparring sessions. Though sparring is still an important part of their training, they've adopted methods to achieve the same result without the recklessness. Someone once said it's upgrading your software without damaging your hardware.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 10, 2018)

Anarax said:


> Well said, there's a fine line between training hard and training recklessly. Many pro-fighters have said their gyms have dialed back the sparring intensity and have a more technique-focused/strategic-focused sparring sessions. Though sparring is still an important part of their training, they've adopted methods to achieve the same result without the recklessness. Someone once said it's upgrading your software without damaging your hardware.


 
Here is a very interesting perspective offered by a great in the martial arts, Hanshi Patrick McCarthy.


----------



## MetalBoar (Jul 10, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> - Soldiers die in the battle field.
> - Swimmers die in the water.
> - Mountain climbers die in the mountain.
> - MA guys die in the ring (or on the mat).
> ...


I agree that pretty much any activity has risk and that martial arts are generally less risky than many others. I'm also pro-sparring, but @TSDTexan has a couple of points that I think are worth taking into consideration. My brain is kind of important to me and I'd rather not damage it any more than necessary. I think it is worth while to take things like MTBI/CTE into consideration when constructing drills and participating in sparring. I don't think that it means I shouldn't ever spar, just that I want to be smart about it to the degree that I can.

Unfortunately, the last time I looked into this sort of thing there wasn't a lot of conclusive info out there about how risky MA training is for the brain, nor what could be done to make sparring safe in this regard. This was specially true for the enthusiastic amateur rather than the professional. For the most part it looked like martial arts were pretty safe in terms of brain injury, but the data they were using didn't seem to differentiate between Tai Chi for seniors and the serious MMA gym. Even at the higher end of amateur and pro level, where there was some data, there seemed to be a lot of conflicting information.  

At the time, some reports claimed that head gear and gloves reduced the risk of brain injury and others claimed they increased it because they allowed for a much great volume of low grade injury. I asked some friends who had done Muay Thai/Boxing/BJJ for a number of years what they thought and their opinions were all over the map. I found it interesting that I heard more than once that the only _serious _concussion that any of these guys had gotten was from a wild and unintentional knee or something similar in BJJ. I don't know where the research is now, but I'm guessing that it's progressed a lot as CTE was just entering the public consciousness last time I looked. If anyone has a clear-ish picture I'd love to hear it.

As @TSDTexan said, obviously you can reduce the risks of head injury if you make the head an illegal target in sparring or you spar with limited force, but that does ingrain habits that are counterproductive for self defense applications. If anyone here practices this way, what do you do in your training to overcome this issue?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 10, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> There is a concern I have with the young consuming mass quantities ......
> View attachment 21581
> 
> of sparring.
> ...


It's pretty easy to avoid in most sparring, though. Keep it light and technical, and pay special care to head/face shots (even disallowing them at times). Sparring doesn't have to have much power to be useful, and those who want to explore power don't need to do so every time.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 10, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> There are a number of reasons why the Okinawan people are the longest lived humans on the planet. And Karate is a huge part of daily life.
> 
> Their method of kumite sparring is healthy.
> But their full contact tournaments are very aggressive and realistic.
> ...


Do the Okinawans do something different in their sparring?


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 10, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Do the Okinawans do something different in their sparring?


well old school kumite sparring in Okinawa isn't what you think it is.
it's more a drill than a free style sparing match.






At first it is very much like a demonstration.
over time the intensity is dialed up.

at advanced levels everything is done with full power, after a high level of control has been developed.

see this video for what I am talking about




Which is full power, all out continuously striking in a prearranged sequence (usually) Some instructors don't care about the order of the striking techniques as long as the specified list of techniques are applied.

Look at the head punching in the all Okinawan karate championship.very controlled. pulling the punch. it is understood







This is not the full contact All Okinawan Karate championship btw.

which will be this shown in this video


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 10, 2018)

MetalBoar said:


> I agree that pretty much any activity has risk and that martial arts are generally less risky than many others. I'm also pro-sparring, but @TSDTexan has a couple of points that I think are worth taking into consideration. My brain is kind of important to me and I'd rather not damage it any more than necessary. I think it is worth while to take things like MTBI/CTE into consideration when constructing drills and participating in sparring. I don't think that it means I shouldn't ever spar, just that I want to be smart about it to the degree that I can.
> 
> Unfortunately, the last time I looked into this sort of thing there wasn't a lot of conclusive info out there about how risky MA training is for the brain, nor what could be done to make sparring safe in this regard. This was specially true for the enthusiastic amateur rather than the professional. For the most part it looked like martial arts were pretty safe in terms of brain injury, but the data they were using didn't seem to differentiate between Tai Chi for seniors and the serious MMA gym. Even at the higher end of amateur and pro level, where there was some data, there seemed to be a lot of conflicting information.
> 
> ...



good gloves, and a used quality full face motorcycle helmet with the visor removed or a bogu type helmet. I have several types of sparring.
like this






I allow light contact face and head. 10% power, with the requirement that when you successfully land those, you remember them, and head over to do bag work and visualize what landed and work the bag at full power for 10 strikes. Visualize the shot that landed first and then strike. Repeat.

also using focus pads.  video related.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 10, 2018)

MetalBoar said:


> My brain is kind of important to me and I'd rather not damage it any more than necessary.


This is why the "rhino guard" is created. It may not be able to protect your body. But it can protect your head better than anything else.


----------



## Buka (Jul 10, 2018)

Maybe times have changed, I don't know, maybe it depends on where people are from - but the Okinawan karate friends I've had, Uechi, Shotokan, Kyokushin, Isshin and Goju spar really hard.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 10, 2018)

Buka said:


> Maybe times have changed, I don't know, maybe it depends on where people are from - but the Okinawan karate friends I've had, Uechi, Shotokan, Kyokushin, Isshin and Goju spar really hard.



Absolutely. This has been my own experience as well.

May I ask how many of them were kyu belts? 

Typically, they (the Okinawan instructors that I have asked) dont want you to spar at full power until you have made progress in body conditioning.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Jul 10, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> If it ever only takes you one incident, you learn faster than me.


ha ha ha.. only for the serious mistakes that results in serious injury.


----------



## Buka (Jul 10, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> Absolutely. This has been my own experience as well.
> 
> May I ask how many of them were kyu belts?
> 
> Typically, they (the Okinawan instructors that I have asked) dont want you to spar at full power until you have made progress in body conditioning.



They were all Black Belts. 

I have a great picture some place of a seminar that a friend taught. There's about fifty Black Belts in white gis and me and my buddy in black gis. We stuck out like flies in soup.


----------



## now disabled (Jul 10, 2018)

Buka said:


> They were all Black Belts.
> 
> I have a great picture some place of a seminar that a friend taught. There's about fifty Black Belts in white gis and me and my buddy in black gis. We stuck out like flies in soup.



Did you blame the with for mixing up the laundry and your gi turned black by mistake lol?...(no offence meant just I could imagine the looks you got )


----------



## JowGaWolf (Jul 10, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> You dont have to train in a way that reduces your years, or quality of life.


This is a big part of training for me.  MMA fighters are learning this to be true as well.



Anarax said:


> I agree that pain is feedback we can learn from, but there's an entire spectrum of injuries. I just don't like it when students get mid-term(usually a few months) injuries that hinder their training.


Same here, but I don't know many people who do sparring who haven't been injured in some shape or form.  Just like I don't know anyone who runs track who hasn't pulled a muscle, anyone who plays basketball who has never twisted their ankle,  or a chef who has never cut their fingers with a knife.  I think sometimes people forget that it's *MARTIAL* arts.  Where martial arts is defined as, 

_*Wikipedia* - Martial arts_ are codified systems and traditions of combat practices
Or *MARTIAL* is defined as: 

of, relating to, or suited for war or a warrior
When I taught kung fu, I would always be straight forward with the new students and potential students.  I would tell them  "You are going to get hurt, but as long as everyone follows the rules the serious injuries will be kept to a minimum and rare."

I personally don't like when I get injured because I can't train, but it's something that is normal in a most Physical Activities. Gymnastics, football, soccer, tennis, golf, swimming, baseball, lacrosse, diving, cycling, boxing, basketball and so on.  All have athletes who have been injured badly enough where they weren't able to train.  It just comes with the turf and the most you can really hope for with a student is that they don't keep making the same dangerous mistakes over and over.   But if the instructor does see it, then he or she should pull the student from sparring until the student's skill level increases.



Anarax said:


> We always go light with new students, but sometimes beginners rush to respond to a technique and they injure themselves in the process. He tried to neutralize a slow kick quickly with a horrible technique with his fingers absorbing the kick. There was no escalation, just poor technique that resulted in injury.


Totally agree.  I've seen that as well and try to snuff it out as quickly as possible,  not only for the student's sake but also for the safety of other students.  I think patience is the most difficult thing for many people to understand and learn.  Especially in this "Instant satisfaction" environment that we live in.


----------



## now disabled (Jul 10, 2018)

The point you make about instant satisfaction is a very valid one in the times we live in ...people want things yesterday and then complain when they don't get it ... Maybe that has to do with movies , books and the wonderful internet lol....


----------



## JowGaWolf (Jul 10, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> well old school kumite sparring in Okinawa isn't what you think it is.
> it's more a drill than a free style sparing match.


The kick at 0:41 is the same kick I almost broke my arm on.  My instinct isn't to hit it from the side. It is to hit down on the rising kick.  Normally I'm good about not doing that but one day instinct came back in full force.  It was a good block in terms of timing.  But the technique used was incorrect.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 10, 2018)

Buka said:


> They were all Black Belts.
> 
> I have a great picture some place of a seminar that a friend taught. There's about fifty Black Belts in white gis and me and my buddy in black gis. We stuck out like flies in soup.



Then being dan grade, they would have conditioned bodies, able to take a hard kumite beating.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 10, 2018)

now disabled said:


> The point you make about instant satisfaction is a very valid one in the times we live in ...people want things yesterday and then complain when they don't get it ... Maybe that has to do with movies , books and the wonderful internet lol....



now if only there was a martial art that could let you fight like Bruce Lee in enter the dragon that only required 10 minutes of training a week. 
training that consists of eating apple fritters, a sipping on some high quality single malt scotch, and a few jumping Jack's, while glaring at a weight set, a makiwara, and a heavy bag.

and was Free to learn, and came with lots of titles and certificates!


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 10, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> well old school kumite sparring in Okinawa isn't what you think it is.
> it's more a drill than a free style sparing match.


I didn't really have a preconceived idea of what it would be.



> At first it is very much like a demonstration.
> over time the intensity is dialed up.
> 
> at advanced levels everything is done with full power, after a high level of control has been developed.
> ...


So, what is different in their sparring from what goes on outside Okinawa?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 11, 2018)

One big problem with the traditional MA training is the distance. Many traditional MA styles like to start training from the arm contact range. It's not that easy to make your arm to contact on your opponent's arm. You first have to deal with your opponent's kick. When you try to contact your opponent arm, if he rotates his arm the same direction as your arm moving path, the arms will never be able to make any contact.

The best training distance is your opponent comes in from 6 feet away and tries to knock your head off. Why can't traditional MA make such training more realistic? You are going to spend your training time to develop something any way. Why not try to develop something more useful?

IMO, this is more realistic training range. A lot of thing can happen when you try to close that distance.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 11, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> One big problem with the traditional MA training is the distance. Many traditional MA styles like to start training from the arm contact range. It's not that easy to make your arm to contact on your opponent's arm. You first have to deal with your opponent's kick. When you try to contact your opponent arm, if he rotates his arm the same direction as your arm moving path, the arms will never be able to make any contact.
> 
> The best training distance is your opponent comes in from 6 feet away and tries to knock your head off. Why can't traditional MA make such training more realistic? You are going to spend your training time to develop something any way. Why not try to develop something more useful?
> 
> IMO, this is more realistic training range. A lot of thing can happen when you try to close that distance.





A lot of fights that I have seen happen started with a shove, or a mad guy poking his index finger in the face or chest of the other guy.
 very close quarter.

Here is some application out of Nihanchi kata, also found in a few other kata as well.




some more grappling tuite in close


----------



## now disabled (Jul 11, 2018)

This may not go down to well lol

Traditional MA ... where they not born out of a different time and age when requirements were very different? Could it not be that over the time span from formation to now things have been taken out or added in ? I mean what was relevant in the 16th or 17th cent at inception may be different to now. Also through the intervening years (I'm thinking Japan mostly and just my opinion) going from a period or periods of war and pretty much constant battle to a period of peace (Edo period) where almost complete central control was exerted could it be that certain concepts or "drills" were removed, being that they were deemed not necessary anymore? 
Might also be worth taking into account that in the past MA wasn't as accessible to everyone as it is now, again Japan, just my opinion again but why would a person wish to get into empty hand arts when he could carry a sword (I'm talking Samurai class here) and was it even remotely possible that during that period that the lower classes actually studied any of the arts? I mean by that at recognized schools? I do not know for certain and I am no expert but I would think it unlikely (others with more knowledge will be able to correct that) thereby would the traditional schools not concentrate on what was in demand (or they were told was in demand) as opposed to what actually worked for the masses? 
To me the traditional arts are and always have evolved etc (maybe not for the good or the bad) and it period dominant what they kept or dismissed. Could it be just a 21st cent ting that we are picking on the traditional arts as we do not see them as relevant in todays world? Or could it be that the students and masters of those arts/schools are either being so aloof and not interested in anything but what they were instructed to pass on or that they have written down they are unwilling to admit to flaws etc and not evolve ? Or could it be they are not interested in today they want to live in the past? Or is it they see themselves as guardians of what they are the keepers of and are afraid to evolve as they do not wish to be recorded as the one who changed and rocked the boat? 
 To my mind even fairly modern systems which have there roots in the past (modern being a loose term on this thread) have changed some fairly dramatically and from not that long ago (ie WWII as that did have an effect on certain arts in again Japan) 

So what is Traditional in effect are we not just employing todays standards on Arts and systems that are out of context in time? Are we being overly hard on them? 

I am no expert just have pondered on things I have seen written etc (not just here btw) and


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 11, 2018)

now disabled said:


> This may not go down to well lol
> 
> Traditional MA ... where they not born out of a different time and age when requirements were very different? Could it not be that over the time span from formation to now things have been taken out or added in ? I mean what was relevant in the 16th or 17th cent at inception may be different to now. Also through the intervening years (I'm thinking Japan mostly and just my opinion) going from a period or periods of war and pretty much constant battle to a period of peace (Edo period) where almost complete central control was exerted could it be that certain concepts or "drills" were removed, being that they were deemed not necessary anymore?
> Might also be worth taking into account that in the past MA wasn't as accessible to everyone as it is now, again Japan, just my opinion again but why would a person wish to get into empty hand arts when he could carry a sword (I'm talking Samurai class here) and was it even remotely possible that during that period that the lower classes actually studied any of the arts? I mean by that at recognized schools? I do not know for certain and I am no expert but I would think it unlikely (others with more knowledge will be able to correct that) thereby would the traditional schools not concentrate on what was in demand (or they were told was in demand) as opposed to what actually worked for the masses?
> ...




You raise a lot of points to address.
I think the big problem is that there is a lot of cultural issues (baggage) that is pre-loaded in most Asian traditional martial arts.

In the west, we have a predominantly nonconformist society that prizes individuality and free expression and is willing to challenge authority in the pursuit of truth and realism.

We don't take something just based on their word alone, we demand to see evidence that supports a truth claim.

This can be problematic especially in martial arts where school traditions, lineage traditions, organizational traditions and social traditions push a dont ask too many questions, dont make the teacher, or high ranking organizational officials lose face.
It's TRUE because we say it's TRUE....

So bad practices and the like get handed down, and the status quo maintains it.

This is where pressure testing and open communication in the rise of the western MMA has done a lot to cause a change.... adaptation and evolution.

Fix what's broken, or become extinct.

A lot of people don't see the need for long opening and closing ceremonies in order to learn a MA.
But some go to traditional martial arts because they want those social courtesies and traditions that help a person become a better person.

The want a "Do" because it fills an unspoken, felt need within.

The problem is there are thousands of scam artists willing to create shambala and let you learn an art that's 1000s of years old... that will make you powerful, and will even make you a black belt in 12 months if you sign this contract.
This is a bad thing.

But you have alternatives as well. Amid the confusion of many broken traditional MAs, you have good ones too.

as well as nontraditional ones

No-Gi BJJ as practiced in a number of north american gyms is culturally a western martial art.
A few gyms have no pomp and circumstance, no bowing, and the Brazilian and US Flags are decorative and have no rituals attached.

They are as western as fencing or boxing.


----------



## now disabled (Jul 11, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> You raise a lot of points to address.
> I think the big problem is that there is a lot of cultural issues (baggage) that is pre-loaded in most Asian traditional martial arts.
> 
> In the west, we have a predominantly nonconformist society that prizes individuality and free expression and is willing to challenge authority in the pursuit of truth and realism.
> ...



I agree with your statements 

The cultural aspect is imo very true as many westerners as you rightly point out don't fully "get" that. 

Yes I agree that some are looking for the "DO" and a path that crux is do they understand the "DO" and if not are they then ready to shout that it all rubbish or the like? 

The traditional arts to me are more of a lifetime study and not a path to becoming a super hero 

Yes unfortunately there are a load of scams out there and claims of tradition that ummm are at best a leap of faith at worst a load of sh*t lol and in this day and age so many are looking for power and secrets it does cause a total balls up when they find out what they doing isn't exactly what they thought they were or indeed they have to apply this 1000 year old art and they find it ummm doesn't work lol or conversely if they are studying a true and legit traditional art they are unable to apply it to today (now that could be because it doesn't apply or the teacher hasn't taught properly in as much as saying how it could apply or they themselves are just not "good" enough - and that is the thing I feel is a very big problem people do not self evaluate themselves properly, they think cause they got a BB they are better than they are)


----------



## jobo (Jul 11, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> There are a number of reasons why the Okinawan people are the longest lived humans on the planet. And Karate is a huge part of daily life.
> 
> Their method of kumite sparring is healthy.
> But their full contact tournaments are very aggressive and realistic.
> ...


Of the 5 places the have the longest living people only Okinawa has karate as part of their culture, it would be somewhat wrong therefore to take that as a Main reason for their longevity, With out considering other possibles

The common factors between the different cultures are a healthy diet , an out doOr it life style and a strong sense of community,  and  4 of the 5 are relatively small islands , the 5th being an isolated religious community,which isolated them from other cultures to some degree, and that isolation suggests a genetic markeR may be at play


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 11, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> There are a number of reasons why the Okinawan people are the longest lived humans on the planet. And Karate is a huge part of daily life.


the major reason for the longevity of the Okinawan people is probably good genetics followed by a good diet.  the second half of this statement needs to be qualified,  only small portion of Okinawan's do karate. it would be a bit stereotypical to suggest all Okinawan's or all "Asian" people do martial arts.



TSDTexan said:


> well old school kumite sparring in Okinawa isn't what you think it is.
> it's more a drill than a free style sparing match.



this is a bit misleading or perhaps a bit misunderstood.  in the west we have the tendency to translate kumi-te to sparring.  this is not quite right.  it can be said sparring is kumi-te but kumi-te is not always sparring.  kumi-te also includes drills and pre arranged sequences.  so from this perspective there is a continuum,  1 step drills...partner drills ,,,linked sequences...pre arranged sparring like sequences...then there is Jiyu kumi-te (i think i spelt that correct) which is "free" sparring.  there is a progression within kumi-te but it does not directly correlate to ones rank or experience.

and old school (pre 1960) sparring is actually more like a street fight..no holds barred.  there was no circle around, feel your opponent out...this is competition and old karate did not do this.  in old okinawan sparring the concept of todays competition was not evolved yet...that came latter from main land Japan, mostly around the 1950,s and 1960's.


----------



## now disabled (Jul 11, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> the major reason for the longevity of the Okinawan people is probably good genetics followed by a good diet.  the second half of this statement needs to be qualified,  only small portion of Okinawan's do karate. it would be a bit stereotypical to suggest all Okinawan's or all "Asian" people do martial arts.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




From your last paragraph do you think and feel that things were effected by the occupation? What are your thoughts on did that lead to the concepts of today's competition ?


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 11, 2018)

now disabled said:


> From your last paragraph do you think and feel that things were effected by the occupation? What are your thoughts on did that lead to the concepts of today's competition ?


i need to define what you mean by "occupation" because it can be divided between Okinawa and Japan in general.
there is the actual American occupation of the Ryukyu island "The Typoon of Steel".  American took control of Okinawa after WWII an only gave the Islands back to Japan in 1972 with more of a partnership then full ownership.  and American presence is an ongoing political problem with the Okinawan's bearing the hardship.  

Okinawa Under U.S. Occupation, 1945–1972
_ "The occupation force was composed not of combat troops who had seen at least a portion of the 1945 calamity but of “callow youth,” as one of their officers called them, who were “demanding [their] creature comforts from the armed services.” Or from the Okinawans, just under a hundred of whom they robbed, raped, otherwise assaulted and murdered during the first six months of 1949 alone: predictable distractions of occupation troops banished to the impoverished island.

Those youths felt condescension or scorn for the primitives eking out an existence without commerce or currency. Especially during the first years after the war, when family land was the sole source of self-support and the Army paid no compensation for its appropriations for the military use, scavenging natives lived in miserable poverty, some in areas ravaged by malaria, all in deep shock and bewilderment. The island became a heap of war surplus and smelly junk. A witness described an Assistant Secretary of the Army as “flabbergasted with what he saw” during an unannounced inspection in 1949. Some of the worst outrages were remedied, but native hardship remained severe until the late 1950s."
_
i think this statement says a lot about the Okinawan attitudes;
_"Destitute Okinawans looked back at the war as confirmation that the island’s salvation lay in pacifism. Not all regretted having fought for Japan, especially some of the young and the elite. But a handful of exceptions proved the rule of enormous regret and corresponding mistrust of everything military. If most Japanese turned fervently antimilitarist after the war, most Okinawans, whose losses made the [Japanese] 32nd Army’s destruction seem almost slight by comparison, did so with stronger feeling."_

so yes Okinawa's occupation effects the peoples attitudes and the were eager to embrace the "pacifist" view of karate that was started in the main land Japan. 
we also have to look at the American population on the island and the fact that they pay good money to learn karate.  it pays the bills!!   American service men like competition.  young men could are less about all the "lotus eating Zen crap" and want to learn to fight.  especially the new breed of combative training that the American service provides is heavy on the MMA stuff and the ideological mentality that goes along with it.  there is no doubt that there is heavy outside influence on karate, both American and Japanese.

the continuing American occupation is a heavy topic.   then there is the Pre and post war effects of Japan as a whole that effected the development of karate...thats fodder for another post.


----------



## jobo (Jul 11, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> i need to define what you mean by "occupation" because it can be divided between Okinawa and Japan in general.
> there is the actual American occupation of the Ryukyu island "The Typoon of Steel".  American took control of Okinawa after WWII an only gave the Islands back to Japan in 1972 with more of a partnership then full ownership.  and American presence is an ongoing political problem with the Okinawan's bearing the hardship.
> 
> Okinawa Under U.S. Occupation, 1945–1972
> ...


After the Japanese treatment of British and Australian captives I have no sympathy at all for how they were treated,


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 11, 2018)

jobo said:


> Of the 5 places the have the longest living people only Okinawa has karate as part of their culture, it would be somewhat wrong therefore to take that as a Main reason for their longevity, With out considering other possibles
> 
> The common factors between the different cultures are a healthy diet , an out doOr it life style and a strong sense of community,  and  4 of the 5 are relatively small islands , the 5th being an isolated religious community,which isolated them from other cultures to some degree, and that isolation suggests a genetic markeR may be at play



How did you infer that from the context of the response I had made ? 

I never said karate alone gave them their longer life span.

in fact, I was stating that the way one trains can shorten life, or the quality of it. 

And used the Okinawan people as an example of a group that has healthy training practices that dont do that.

Yes, their other lifestyle choices also effect population longevity.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 11, 2018)

jobo said:


> After the Japanese treatment of British and Australian captives I have no sympathy at all for how they were treated,



Okinawan people were subjugated by the Japanese.

They were a separate culture just like the Koreans.
Part of the terms of surrender were that Japan would release Korea, Okinawa and all territories that it had claimed during the war.

The Japanese gave up everything but the Okinawan islands. They sweettalked the Allied Forces GHQ to disregard the terms of surrender, and advised the US to build Military bases there.

Dont misdirect your antipathy to the tail.
Direct it to the Meji War Machine, and the Emperor  




This guy. He could have order the fair treatment of allied POWs.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 11, 2018)

jobo said:


> After the Japanese treatment of British and Australian captives I have no sympathy at all for how they were treated,


As @TSDTexan  said
the Okinawan's were there own kingdom, their own king, their own distinct language and politics.  for the most part of history they were closer to the Chinese then the Japanese.  besides most countries all have their own share of blood on their hands and their own horror stories.  lets not forget England was more then happy to arrest and round up the Jew's and ship them on a direct train to Auschwitz.  he who casts stones...you know...

but i digress..
the question was about how it effected the competition influx into karate.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 11, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> As @TSDTexan  said
> the Okinawan's were there own kingdom, their own king, their own distinct language and politics.  for the most part of history they were closer to the Chinese then the Japanese.  besides most countries all have their own share of blood on their hands and their own horror stories.  lets not forget England was more then happy to arrest and round up the Jew's and ship them on a direct train to Auschwitz.  he who casts stones...you know...
> 
> but i digress..
> the question was about how it effected the competition influx into karate.



The Meji war machine... it wanted healthy conscripts. The war machine saw that, if you introduced Te into the elementary, middle, high schools and started youths into Martial arts training that had been dumbed down into something that could be taught quickly.... you would need to substitute a lot of things that were sacrificed in the overhaul.

So we get Kihon drilling, and dueling mindsets from Kendo, and Judo. Kumite changes from Yakusoku 約束  (Promise) Kumite as the standard practice into Jiyu 自由 (Free) Kumite... like randori with fists and kicks.

If anything we can lay this at the feet of the DNBK.
Combative Sports for the sake of militarizing society.

This is all an oversimplification, it was far more nuanced. But these are the things that stick out the most from my research.


----------



## jobo (Jul 11, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> As @TSDTexan  said
> the Okinawan's were there own kingdom, their own king, their own distinct language and politics.  for the most part of history they were closer to the Chinese then the Japanese.  besides most countries all have their own share of blood on their hands and their own horror stories.  lets not forget England was more then happy to arrest and round up the Jew's and ship them on a direct train to Auschwitz.  he who casts stones...you know...
> 
> but i digress..
> the question was about how it effected the competition influx into karate.


England rounded up Jews and sent them to Poland ??????, or rather direct to Poland as you say, There was no direct train from England to Poland in the 40s the UK is an island you know,,, there's not now for that matter You have to change at paris, I think you making that up, Perhaps you have some sort of link To support this wild claim???? we were all ready at war with Germany when Auschwitz was built, ( 1940) 1942 before it was used to house jews)why would we send them Jews when they were bombing is do you think ?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 11, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> The Meji war machine... it wanted healthy conscripts. The war machine saw that, if you introduced Te into the elementary, middle, high schools and started youths into Martial arts training that had been dumbed down into something that could be taught quickly.... you would need to substitute a lot of things that were sacrificed in the overhaul.
> 
> So we get Kihon drilling, and dueling mindsets from Kendo, and Judo. Kumite changes from Yakusoku 約束  (Promise) Kumite as the standard practice into Jiyu 自由 (Free) Kumite... like randori with fists and kicks.
> 
> ...


I do think that's a vast oversimplification. And a misunderstanding of what happened, and the reasons for it. I may be wrong in my conclusions - others here have far more knowledge on the nuances of the post-meiji changes in MA in Japan.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 11, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> I do think that's a vast oversimplification. And a misunderstanding of what happened, and the reasons for it. I may be wrong in my conclusions - others here have far more knowledge on the nuances of the post-meiji changes in MA in Japan.



Start about the 13 minute period.
A serious researcher speaking on the the competitive sportifiction of karate.
My own research led me to the same overall view of the events.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 11, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> I do think that's a vast oversimplification. And a misunderstanding of what happened, and the reasons for it. I may be wrong in my conclusions - others here have far more knowledge on the nuances of the post-meiji changes in MA in Japan.







It was under the authority of the DNBK, that we see the Okinawan art becoming the Japanese art.

The DNBK oversaw the creation of Judo, and Kendo.

Japanese Karate was officially born on December of 1933.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 11, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> The Meji war machine... it wanted healthy conscripts. The war machine saw that, if you introduced Te into the elementary, middle, high schools and started youths into Martial arts training that had been dumbed down into something that could be taught quickly.... you would need to substitute a lot of things that were sacrificed in the overhaul.
> 
> So we get Kihon drilling, and dueling mindsets from Kendo, and Judo. Kumite changes from Yakusoku 約束  (Promise) Kumite as the standard practice into Jiyu 自由 (Free) Kumite... like randori with fists and kicks.
> 
> ...


Karate was changed and used as propaganda. It's purpose was to instill national pride and foster the "samurai spirt" if you want to call it that. It was more a die for the cause brain washing institution.  But non the less karate was high jacked for the war effort.  However the sport mentality was mostly a case of survival after the war when America dictated all "national education PT" be stopped. This included martial arts.  However on the grounds that karate and judo were deemed sports, it was allowed.  Without this sport component martial arts would have been banned.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 11, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> Karate was changed and used as propaganda. It's purpose was to instill national pride and foster the "samurai spirt" if you want to call it that. It was more a die for the cause brain washing institution.  But non the less karate was high jacked for the war effort.  However the sport mentality was mostly a case of survival after the war when America dictated all "national education PT" be stopped. This included martial arts.  However on the grounds that karate and judo were deemed sports, it was allowed.  Without this sport component martial arts would have been banned.



You will find no disagreement from me in any statement made here in. I will specify, that the following phrase:

America dictated all "national education PT" be stopped. This included martial arts"

Be modified to the following:

Allied Forces GHQ dictated almost all "national education PT" be stopped. This included all Japanese Budo martial arts, and an exception was allowed for Korean Martial Arts."

Sources:

When American GHQ announced the martial arts ban in 1945, students of Kanken Toyama's Shūdōkan opened a dojo studio called Kanbukan (韓武舘) to avoid the ban.[2]

Attempting to create a more subtle name to disguise the organization, students used the name Kanbukan, which means "The Dojo of Martial Arts of Korea".

The director was a Korean called Geka Yung, while a top student of Toyama called Hiroshi Kinjo was the instructor. 

He performed partner practice with direct blows using a Bōgu (防具 protector) from Kendo. This is Bōgutsuki karate.[1][3]

In 1951 the ban was relaxed and Kanbukan was renamed Renbukan. In 1954 Renbukan hosted the world's first national karate convention.

In 1959, with the purpose to nationally organize Karate, the organization established the All Japan Karatedo Federation (JKF) and made Shūdōkan its overall headquarters.[4] 

The JKF appointed Choko Sai as chairman, Yasuhiro Konishi (Shindo Jinen-ryu) and Hiroshi Kinjo (Kanbukan) as vice-chairmen, Kanken Toyama and Hiroyasu Tamae (Otou-ryu) as Shihan, and Hironori Otsuka (Wado-ryu), Tatsuo Yamada(Nippon Kenpo Karate), Shinkin Gima (Shotokan-ryu), Isamu Tamotsu (Shorinji-ryu) and Tsuyoshi Chitose(Chito-ryu) as officers of JKF.

JKF Renbukai - Wikipedia

In short Koreans saved Japanese Karate!


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 11, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> Start about the 13 minute period.
> A serious researcher speaking on the the competitive sportifiction of karate.
> My own research led me to the same overall view of the events.


I'll agree it's probable the military had these kinds of motives and looked to foster some of this. I don't think that's the only driving factor in what happened - the explanation ignores the motivations of the other proponents involved.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 11, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> I'll agree it's probable the military had these kinds of motives and looked to foster some of this. I don't think that's the only driving factor in what happened - the explanation ignores the motivations of the other proponents involved.



The river is wide, many are the headwaters. Some are large, some are small.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 12, 2018)

@TSDTexan ,
I used the term National Education, but there is a particular term and wording that they used. I just can't remember it at the moment.  I have posted about this topic before and I may have even posted a link to the actual document.


----------



## now disabled (Jul 12, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> @TSDTexan ,
> I used the term National Education, but there is a particular term and wording that they used. I just can't remember it at the moment.  I have posted about this topic before and I may have even posted a link to the actual document.



I think I know what you mean 

Are you talking about the Imperial Rescript on Education ?


----------



## now disabled (Jul 12, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> @TSDTexan ,
> I used the term National Education, but there is a particular term and wording that they used. I just can't remember it at the moment.  I have posted about this topic before and I may have even posted a link to the actual document.



Or the Imperial Rescript to Soldiers and Sailors ?


----------



## now disabled (Jul 12, 2018)

Am I right in saying that the DNBK was purged ? 

As were other more "secret" groups


----------



## now disabled (Jul 12, 2018)

I guess when I mentioned the occupation etc I opened a door of huge dimensions (and rightly so it is a huge and vast ranging topic and of many diverse influences) what I was getting at and I was probably unclear on was like when the Tokugawa established their Shogunate and the Ryu adapted and changed and evolved due to that influence ... Did the occupation (I believe it did) again influence the change of the schools? How they taught, To whom they taught and what they actually taught? 

One thing I have noticed (and purely my own opinion) is that the Japanese may not actually create a "thing" themselves but they are very good at adapting a thing making it their own and then exporting it for gain. There by ...they did not invent the arts but (due to the Pacific War and subsequent occupation) they did export them and fairly successfully, The question is to me what did they export and now due to the world being so globally connected a people researching more and more and again because of the technology to share said are we not getting very hung up on what is tradition and what is not?, where it came from and why? and is it that in the 21st cent we are guilty of trying to grab the past for justification etc and are we not really guilty of looking back through tinted glasses and taking things out of context?


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 12, 2018)

now disabled said:


> I think I know what you mean
> 
> Are you talking about the Imperial Rescript on Education ?



no.  i was talking about a document by the US Governement.

Imperial Rescript on Education - Wikipedia

_The *Imperial Rescript on Education (教育に関する勅語 Kyōiku ni Kansuru Chokugo)* was signed by Emperor Meiji of Japan on 30 October 1890 to articulate government policy on the guiding principles of education on the Empire of Japan. The 315 character document was read aloud at all important school events, and students were required to study and memorize the text._
_
The Rescript requested of the people that they "furthermore advance public good and promote common interests; always respect the Constitution and observe the laws; should emergency arise, offer yourselves courageously to the State; and thus guard and maintain the prosperity of Our Imperial Throne coeval with heaven and earth".

The basis of the Rescript was that Japan's unique kokutai (system of government) was based on a historic bond between benevolent rulers and loyal subjects, and that the fundamental purpose of education was to cultivate virtues, especially loyalty and filial piety.

After the end of World War II in Asia following the surrender of Japan, the American occupation authorities forbade the formal reading of the Imperial Rescript in schools, and the National Diet officially abolished it on 19 June 1948._


----------



## now disabled (Jul 12, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> no.  i was talking about a document by the US Governement.
> 
> Imperial Rescript on Education - Wikipedia
> 
> ...




ok my apologies


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 12, 2018)

now disabled said:


> I guess when I mentioned the occupation etc I opened a door of huge dimensions (and rightly so it is a huge and vast ranging topic and of many diverse influences) what I was getting at and I was probably unclear on was like when the Tokugawa established their Shogunate and the Ryu adapted and changed and evolved due to that influence ... Did the occupation (I believe it did) again influence the change of the schools? How they taught, To whom they taught and what they actually taught?
> 
> One thing I have noticed (and purely my own opinion) is that the Japanese may not actually create a "thing" themselves but they are very good at adapting a thing making it their own and then exporting it for gain. There by ...they did not invent the arts but (due to the Pacific War and subsequent occupation) they did export them and fairly successfully, The question is to me what did they export and now due to the world being so globally connected a people researching more and more and again because of the technology to share said are we not getting very hung up on what is tradition and what is not?, where it came from and why? and is it that in the 21st cent we are guilty of trying to grab the past for justification etc and are we not really guilty of looking back through tinted glasses and taking things out of context?



good questions.   a lot to try to unpack there.
i think something that is generally over looked and something i try to always point out is that there has to be a distinction between Okinawan martial arts.. (i refer to this as Tode)  and the martial arts that were brought and further developed on main land Japan starting with Funakoshi ( i call karate)
they are not really the same if we use todays common divisions and to lump them together as just karate causes more problems and incorrect assumptions.  it would be like describing humans, neanderthal and cro magnon as all just people.  

the biggest effect on karate was the transfer from Okinawan to Japan by Funakoshi. that being only one source rather than multiple, creates a single dimentional result.  second is the re appropriation of karate for the war by the Japanese Governement. then the back lash into pacifisim by the Japanese people along with the sport aspect that we already mentioned.  THEN all this is brought back to Okinawa from Japan.  the third factor is the American influx into the Okinawan dojo.  things were codified, dumbed down and passed on to American service men who brought it back to America starting a kind of feed back loop between the two countries.


----------



## Anarax (Jul 12, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> If Elon Musk could build us robotic sparing partners this would help.



Interesting, I was going to start a thread about this.


----------



## Buka (Jul 12, 2018)

I have a question about the OP. 

3. "_Traditional" arts often hold back information. They are somewhat secretive and unwilling to share or talk about what they consider important elements of their system. Among their own students they may teach the "secrets" or the "good parts" to only a select few that demonstrate loyalty over many years. Or they may string out their curriculum over a long period of time simply to keep students coming and paying the tuition_

Is this actually a thing? I've never actually encountered this.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 12, 2018)

Buka said:


> I have a question about the OP.
> 
> 3. "_Traditional" arts often hold back information. They are somewhat secretive and unwilling to share or talk about what they consider important elements of their system. Among their own students they may teach the "secrets" or the "good parts" to only a select few that demonstrate loyalty over many years. Or they may string out their curriculum over a long period of time simply to keep students coming and paying the tuition_
> 
> Is this actually a thing? I've never actually encountered this.



If it is a secret. How would you know?


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 12, 2018)

Anarax said:


> Interesting, I was going to start a thread about this.



ive been dreaming this dream since about '89.
sparring robots....


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 12, 2018)

now disabled said:


> Am I right in saying that the DNBK was purged ?
> 
> As were other more "secret" groups



it was terminated by AF-GHQ in '46 everyone fired! Assets sold off. But it didn't stay dead but seven years.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 12, 2018)

drop bear said:


> If it is a secret. How would you know?


shuuuuuuush...
you arnt allowed to let people know that even the secrets exist.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 12, 2018)

now disabled said:


> I guess when I mentioned the occupation etc I opened a door of huge dimensions (and rightly so it is a huge and vast ranging topic and of many diverse influences) what I was getting at and I was probably unclear on was like when the Tokugawa established their Shogunate and the Ryu adapted and changed and evolved due to that influence ... Did the occupation (I believe it did) again influence the change of the schools? How they taught, To whom they taught and what they actually taught?
> 
> One thing I have noticed (and purely my own opinion) is that the Japanese may not actually create a "thing" themselves but they are very good at adapting a thing making it their own and then exporting it for gain. There by ...they did not invent the arts but (due to the Pacific War and subsequent occupation) they did export them and fairly successfully, The question is to me what did they export and now due to the world being so globally connected a people researching more and more and again because of the technology to share said are we not getting very hung up on what is tradition and what is not?, where it came from and why? and is it that in the 21st cent we are guilty of trying to grab the past for justification etc and are we not really guilty of looking back through tinted glasses and taking things out of context?



Well, the occupation of Okinawa happened in the 1600s by an army of the Satsuma Clan. So that was a very long pre WW2 occupation. But the occupation was a soft occupation, in the sense, that they left Okinawa its kings. And they had the kings pay tribute to the Emperor of China and pretend to be a vassal state of China.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 12, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> no.  i was talking about a document by the US Governement.
> 
> Imperial Rescript on Education - Wikipedia
> 
> ...




Yeah
... this is some of the Meiji War Machine's stuff.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 12, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> good questions.   a lot to try to unpack there.
> i think something that is generally over looked and something i try to always point out is that there has to be a distinction between Okinawan martial arts.. (i refer to this as Tode)  and the martial arts that were brought and further developed on main land Japan starting with Funakoshi ( i call karate)
> they are not really the same if we use todays common divisions and to lump them together as just karate causes more problems and incorrect assumptions.  it would be like describing humans, neanderthal and cro magnon as all just people.
> 
> the biggest effect on karate was the transfer from Okinawan to Japan by Funakoshi. that being only one source rather than multiple, creates a single dimentional result.  second is the re appropriation of karate for the war by the Japanese Governement. then the back lash into pacifisim by the Japanese people along with the sport aspect that we already mentioned.  THEN all this is brought back to Okinawa from Japan.  the third factor is the American influx into the Okinawan dojo.  things were codified, dumbed down and passed on to American service men who brought it back to America starting a kind of feed back loop between the two countries.



Very well said.
It is interesting that in Okinawa... there exists Japanese karate.... and a more primitive Uchinadi/ToDii. It's rarer, but still alive. They don't wear the Gi, or do a lot of the Japanese derived stuff. Some call themselves other things than karate. And they might call themselves a kabudo school, or a Tuite school... or just a family art that isn't taught to the public.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 12, 2018)

Found it.... was looking forever... some good stuff on the Japanese Karate ban... and survival.
Karate, Taekwondo, crecent kicks etc. | Ryukyu Bugei 琉球武芸


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 13, 2018)

JCS: Documentation Regarding the Budo Ban

_"With the end of the war in August 1945, the Ministry of Education regained control of Japan’s physical education curriculum, and this ended the bayonet and grenade throwing in the Japanese public schools. Simultaneously, judo, kendo, kyudo, and karate teachers began returning their instruction to prewar standards. Consequently, most martial art practitioners expected that it wouldn’t be long before tournaments and promotions resumed, similar to what they had been before the war._

_Then, on October 22, 1945, the Supreme Commander Allied Powers (SCAP) notified the Ministry of Education that "dissemination of militaristic and ultranationalistic ideology will be prohibited and all military education and drill will be discontinued." Two months later, on January 4, 1946, SCAP issued Directive 550, which, with its companion Directive 548, required "the removal and exclusion from public life of militaristic and ultra nationalistic persons." One result of these orders was that the Ministry of Education eliminated martial arts from school curricula and another was that the Dai Nippon Butokukai was closed._

_Although new federations quickly arose to take the place of the Butokukai, its closure still left Japan without a central regulatory authority for martial arts for the first time in decades. Meanwhile, from 1946 until 1948, SCAP actively persecuted ("purged") former fascists. Some of the latter were martial art enthusiasts. This added to the confusion about what was legal and what was not, and the result was confusion in Japanese martial art circles that did not begin working itself out until the late 1940s._

_Because of this postwar confusion, there has since arisen the perception that SCAP imposed a Budo Ban on Japan. In reality, however, the "budo" banned was not traditional martial arts such as kendo and judo, but instead the products of state fascism that operated under the same name during the 1930s and 1940s.."_


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 13, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> JCS: Documentation Regarding the Budo Ban
> 
> _"With the end of the war in August 1945, the Ministry of Education regained control of Japan’s physical education curriculum, and this ended the bayonet and grenade throwing in the Japanese public schools. Simultaneously, judo, kendo, kyudo, and karate teachers began returning their instruction to prewar standards. Consequently, most martial art practitioners expected that it wouldn’t be long before tournaments and promotions resumed, similar to what they had been before the war._
> 
> ...




In the footnotes the book
_McCarthy, P. (1999). Ancient Okinawan Martial Arts: Koryu Uchinadi. Rutland, Vermont and Tokyo: C. E. Tuttle._
is cited. I own this book. it's pretty good.

also in the footnotes, was this fact that the there was so budo banning going on.

*Excerpts of Report from the 9th Session of the Committee on Petitions held on 30 August 1946 during the 90th Session of the House of Representatives*

Mr. Bando, member of the Diet-- "Judo is banned, but there are various jujitsu, similar to judo, such as the Azuma school, or Shibukawa school. Also there is karate. Do you mean all these, as well as judo, are banned?"

Mr. Hidaka, government representative--"Yes, it is so. Judo, karate, kyudo, everything that is called by the name of budo is not supposed to be used [in the schools]. That is the understanding we have agreed upon."

----

As I continue to read, and reread this site's page, I am amazed at how much material is presented here.
Thanks for sharing the link @hoshin1600


----------



## now disabled (Jul 14, 2018)

Buka said:


> I have a question about the OP.
> 
> 3. "_Traditional" arts often hold back information. They are somewhat secretive and unwilling to share or talk about what they consider important elements of their system. Among their own students they may teach the "secrets" or the "good parts" to only a select few that demonstrate loyalty over many years. Or they may string out their curriculum over a long period of time simply to keep students coming and paying the tuition_
> 
> Is this actually a thing? I've never actually encountered this.



Maybe it could be that that is referring to the inner teachings. Ie the teachings that were only imparted to a person that was considered at a certain level

or 

it could be a thing that has kinda come to the fore recently with the publication of books with translations of "secret scrolls" 

Imo all the scrolls of all the schools were originally "secret" as well a bit like today if you have the patent on something you ain't gonna share it publicly (might not be a great example)


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 15, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> shuuuuuuush...
> you arnt allowed to let people know that even the secrets exist.


The first rule of Secret Club...


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 15, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> The first rule of Secret Club...


Sometime secret is kept between different MA styles.

In Taiwan, many Chinese wrestlers compete in Judo tournament (and the other way around). Chinese wrestlers like to grab their opponent's jacket and runs in circle. The Chinese wrestler teacher told his students that don't teach that counter to the outside. Something very funny happened in those Judo tournaments. The moment that a Judo guy detects that his opponent is a Chinese wrestler, the moment that the Judo guy will use his own hand to grab on his own cross lapel to prevent his opponent to grab on it.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 15, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Sometime secret is kept between different MA styles.
> 
> In Taiwan, many Chinese wrestlers compete in Judo tournament (and the other way around). Chinese wrestlers like to grab their opponent's jacket and runs in circle. The Chinese wrestler teacher told his students that don't teach that counter to the outside. Something very funny happened in those Judo tournaments. The moment that a Judo guy detects that his opponent is a Chinese wrestler, the moment that the Judo guy will use his own hand to grab on his own cross lapel to prevent his opponent to grab on it.



That's awesome !!!


----------



## Anarax (Jul 17, 2018)

Buka said:


> I have a question about the OP.
> 
> 3. "_Traditional" arts often hold back information. They are somewhat secretive and unwilling to share or talk about what they consider important elements of their system. Among their own students they may teach the "secrets" or the "good parts" to only a select few that demonstrate loyalty over many years. Or they may string out their curriculum over a long period of time simply to keep students coming and paying the tuition_
> 
> Is this actually a thing? I've never actually encountered this.



I think it's very uncommon and will usually be found at bad schools. Early on in my MA training kung fu students kept getting me with a leg kick and it was frustrating. After sparring I asked the instructor how to deal with leg kicks, he refused to offer any help or guidance. I can't say with certainty that it was based on some secretive dynamic of the style itself, or more so his personal preference to not give technical advice when asked.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 17, 2018)

Anarax said:


> I think it's very uncommon and will usually be found at bad schools. Early on in my MA training kung fu students kept getting me with a leg kick and it was frustrating. After sparring I asked the instructor how to deal with leg kicks, he refused to offer any help or guidance. I can't say with certainty that it was based on some secretive dynamic of the style itself, or more so his personal preference to not give technical advice when asked.



two books by Marc De Bremaeker
I recommend "Stopkicks" and "Lowkicks".

Low kicks, because they should be in everyone's arsenal. And you will be able to kick low in your 80s.

And stopkicks.... a sub-art of kicking.... that should be kept secret.

My TKD friends hate sparing with me, because I can do every kick they can (but I don't) and yet I get a huge string of laughs as I systematically shut theirs down... and force them out of their comfort zone into punching. Which they admit they are bad at.
The ITF guys not so much, and they like to get throws off too.

And when they get rattled... its time to start tossing and throwing them.

Which looks a little like this.





Of course the solution is to have better hand game...
but that would be too much like karate for the Korean 1000 year old MA. (insert cheeky winkyface)

Most TKD kwans have overemphasized kicking, to the detriment of the art. For tournament scoring reasons.

The counter to just about every kick is a lowkick.
Here is some info you may want to incorporate.


----------



## Anarax (Jul 17, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> two books by Marc De Bremaeker
> I recommend "Stopkicks" and "Lowkicks".
> 
> Low kicks, because they should be in everyone's arsenal. And you will be able to kick low in your 80s.
> ...



I appreciate the advice, but that was a very long time ago. Thankfully I've had amazing MA instructors since then and they taught me how to deal with leg kicks. FYI. I learned the kung fu students had no grappling game, so I just used single and double leg take-downs to nullify their leg kicks.


----------



## pdg (Jul 23, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> lets not forget England was more then happy to arrest and round up the Jew's and ship them on a direct train to Auschwitz. he who casts stones...you know...



What an absolutely fantastically misinformed and downright incorrect comment.

It's actually astounding in how much it's being wrong.

Utterly, completely wrong.

It's so wrong I could legitimately name it Wrongy McWrongface. And then give it a badge that says "look at me, I'm wrong". After that, I could parade it around town proclaiming through a megaphone how wrong it is and people would laugh and point and throw rotten fruit at it.

As @jobo said, it's even physically impossible for it to have happened since at the time there was no rail link between England and mainland Europe, much less anything near "direct".

Did this happen when Hitler was governer-president of England?


Now, the British don't exactly have an unblemished history, and I'm certainly not going to deny that as a country things were done that I don't agree with and would never defend.

But really, you saying that England was the country responsible for the Jewish genocide that took place during ww2 is honestly a great big shining beacon of ignorance stuck to your head.

The best bit was how you totally ignored Jobo's comment.

(Of course, maybe you actually really did mean Germany and it was just a typo - I mean, the words look so similar.)


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 23, 2018)

pdg said:


> What an absolutely fantastically misinformed and downright incorrect comment.
> 
> It's actually astounding in how much it's being wrong.
> 
> ...



yeah. i dont generally reply to jobo's comments. i dont ignore anyone but if i did he would be on the list.  not that i dont like things he says, we just dont usually get anywhere productive.
this is a side track to the thread and one you seem to be passionate about so ill PM you.


----------



## jobo (Jul 23, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> yeah. i dont generally reply to jobo's comments. i dont ignore anyone but if i did he would be on the list.  not that i dont like things he says, we just dont usually get anywhere productive.
> this is a side track to the thread and one you seem to be passionate about so ill PM you.


But you replied to my comments when you posted that blatant lie about the uk complicity in the holocaust


----------



## TMA17 (Jul 26, 2018)

I like what Tiger Schulmann did.  He evolved and took what was once Karate based and now teaches Muay Thai and BJJ.  Probably one of the best chains that actually have good quality.  I truly believe not all systems or styles are equal and some absolutely need modification to work in a modern fight.

Take several individuals that train for a year in Boxing or MT and several that train in a traditional WC or Karate.  With high confidence the boxers will win because the art is better.

The only way to make WC work well is to modify it and you’ll find that’s what the good ones do like Adam Chan, Tony Watts or Sifu Och.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 26, 2018)

TMA17 said:


> I like what Tiger Schulmann did.  He evolved and took what was once Karate based and now teaches Muay Thai and BJJ.  Probably one of the best chains that actually have good quality.  I truly believe not all systems or styles are equal and some absolutely need modification to work in a modern fight.
> 
> Take several individuals that train for a year in Boxing or MT and several that train in a traditional WC or Karate.  With high confidence the boxers will win because the art is better.
> 
> The only way to make WC work well is to modify it and you’ll find that’s what the good ones do like Adam Chan, Tony Watts or Sifu Och.


In boxing, there are two things that seem to aid it, and one is inherent to the art (as it is today). Firstly, they're specialists. They really only have to learn punches and defenses against punches (plus the footwork, etc. that goes with that). Put 100 hours into learning punches, etc., then compare that to 100 hours of learning punches, kicks, etc. Clearly one will be more efficient for starting. The other advantage is in the training methods commonly used, and those can be employed by any art. They test what they do against each other. Whether in formal competition or not, this is a useful tool. This increases efficiency and such.

There is another area that's harder to figure out how to discuss. There are some things kept in Karate because, well, people like them. Some of those things aren't terribly efficient from a "learn to fight" standpoint, but they interest people so might be considered efficient from a "teach more people some skills" standpoint.

So, if we compared two people - a boxer and a Karateka who received "typical" Karate training - both having 100 hours of training time in a single year, how would they compare? Dunno. Would be interesting to find out. I suspect the boxer would be the superior fighter under most rulesets. But what if you trained the Karateka specifically for that end, rather than following what's typical (whatever that would be)? If the Karateka trained specifically for the upcoming competition for a year (as did the boxer), we might see a different, more evenly-matched, outcome.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 26, 2018)

TMA17 said:


> I truly believe not all systems or styles are equal and some absolutely need modification to work in a modern fight.


This is very true.

For a striking art that doesn't have hook punch, uppercut, roundhouse kick, side kick, foot sweep, the striking art ability is limited.

It's not that hard to have a compete set of the striking tools in your toolbox. If you integrate the missing tools during your life time, you student won't have to do that.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 26, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> In boxing, there are two things that seem to aid it, and one is inherent to the art (as it is today). Firstly, they're specialists. They really only have to learn punches and defenses against punches (plus the footwork, etc. that goes with that). Put 100 hours into learning punches, etc., then compare that to 100 hours of learning punches, kicks, etc. Clearly one will be more efficient for starting. The other advantage is in the training methods commonly used, and those can be employed by any art. They test what they do against each other. Whether in formal competition or not, this is a useful tool. This increases efficiency and such.
> 
> There is another area that's harder to figure out how to discuss. There are some things kept in Karate because, well, people like them. Some of those things aren't terribly efficient from a "learn to fight" standpoint, but they interest people so might be considered efficient from a "teach more people some skills" standpoint.
> 
> So, if we compared two people - a boxer and a Karateka who received "typical" Karate training - both having 100 hours of training time in a single year, how would they compare? Dunno. Would be interesting to find out. I suspect the boxer would be the superior fighter under most rulesets. But what if you trained the Karateka specifically for that end, rather than following what's typical (whatever that would be)? If the Karateka trained specifically for the upcoming competition for a year (as did the boxer), we might see a different, more evenly-matched, outcome.



One thing you left out about the boxer is the insane training regimen, and body conditioning.

Karate-ka usually doesn't train as athletically as Boxers. Nor do most brands of Karate do the conditioning of the body to withstand constant heavy blows to the body.

Your Shotokan tag karate guys dont do this.





So that should be factored in which leads us to ask:


What type of karate?
Goju, or Uechi ryu?
Kyokushin or another standup hardstyle?
Or Karate branch that competes in Kudo where all the sweeps, throws and locking are present.

Which is it... percussive karate, or grappling with strikes karate?

When taken to the endgame 15 to 20 years in...
15,000 to 20,000 thousand hours...

Would Mayweather done well in the UFC against an in his prime George St Pierre, Andy Hug, Joe Lewis Or Wonderboy Thompson?

Or a Prime Morio Higaonna or Kiyohide Shinjo (Mr 9 time All Okinawa Full Contact kumite, Undefeated Champ.)

How about in a no rules, NHB, no referee scenario.
On the street.

After such a long time, the boxing specialist has an opponent who has a vast arsenal, with depth of experience and will begin to find grappling is outside of his boxing skillset.

In much the same way groundfighting forced Standup strikers to evolve.

The 'Te practitioner stands between the Boxer, and the Judoka. Neither Boxer or Thrower Pure but a mixture of both.


----------



## MetalBoar (Jul 26, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> In boxing, there are two things that seem to aid it, and one is inherent to the art (as it is today). Firstly, they're specialists. They really only have to learn punches and defenses against punches (plus the footwork, etc. that goes with that). Put 100 hours into learning punches, etc., then compare that to 100 hours of learning punches, kicks, etc. Clearly one will be more efficient for starting. The other advantage is in the training methods commonly used, and those can be employed by any art. They test what they do against each other. Whether in formal competition or not, this is a useful tool. This increases efficiency and such.
> 
> There is another area that's harder to figure out how to discuss. There are some things kept in Karate because, well, people like them. Some of those things aren't terribly efficient from a "learn to fight" standpoint, but they interest people so might be considered efficient from a "teach more people some skills" standpoint.
> 
> So, if we compared two people - a boxer and a Karateka who received "typical" Karate training - both having 100 hours of training time in a single year, how would they compare? Dunno. Would be interesting to find out. I suspect the boxer would be the superior fighter under most rulesets. But what if you trained the Karateka specifically for that end, rather than following what's typical (whatever that would be)? If the Karateka trained specifically for the upcoming competition for a year (as did the boxer), we might see a different, more evenly-matched, outcome.



I think there are a lot of good points here.

I respect boxing by itself and I think there is also a lot of value in boxing techniques applied more broadly for use in other competitive martial sports, self defense, etc. If you really want to learn stand up striking with the hands it's hard to argue with boxing. I've done a little training in boxing and would definitely do more in the right circumstances.

That being said, I've sparred with people who were OK, if not great, boxers, who were actually fairly poor at free style sparring even if no kicks or ground work was allowed. They were too habituated to expect a particular rule set, big gloves, etc. and had a hard time adapting. I've also sparred with boxers who could clean my clock regardless of the rule set. I've never run into a boxer who wasn't at least kind of competent in a stand up contest, but I think a lot of that is training methodology and self selection.

Training:
@gpseymour touched on this, boxers do test what they've been studying and they specialize. There are real learning benefits to having a limited tool set (not a criticism) and trying it out on a resisting opponent. A limited tool set means that you actually have a chance to get good at what you do. One of the first MA styles I studied had what seemed like an infinite number of techniques and I never felt like there was time to get a handle on any of them. Boxing does not have this problem. Boxing also tends to have pretty intense training routines - a lot of cardio, a lot of bag work, it's hard to be in less than reasonable shape and still be a practicing boxer.

Boxing gyms are also far more frequently professional operations with trainers dedicated to really developing skills in their fighters. They want to produce winning fighters and take them pro, not make money off of a high volume continuous stream of hobbyists. Of course, walking distance from my house is a "boxing school" that doesn't do any sparring at all - just bag work and other drills focused on fitness. If we count that as boxing, which we should if we count "Tai Chi for health" as TCMA, I expect there are a lot of unskilled "boxers" out there.

Self selection:
You don't get a lot of people drawn to boxing who aren't OK with getting hit and hitting others. Because the training is intense, you don't get a lot of casual hobbyists in boxing, and those you do get either become serious or drop out.

Do these things make boxing a better art or do these things mean that it's more likely that the average person who is drawn to boxing and can stick with it is going to be a better fighter than the average practitioner of other arts? It's an important distinction when judging what is "best".



> There are some things kept in Karate because, well, people like them.



I also think gpseymour's point above ^^^ is really relevant to a lot of people and I know it is to me. Personally, I don't care if I'm training in some hypothetically "best" art. I want to do something that's fun and interesting. I'm not interested in learning something that's so watered down or re-focused that it no longer has reasonable combat applications, but I'll be honest, I'm nearly 50 and live in the US, if I felt like my life was regularly threatened I'd spend my time practicing with a hand gun.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 26, 2018)

There is a reason you can't box without being conditioned.

It makes you a better fighter.

It amazes me that this is still discussed in abstract. It should be a factor in any sort of martial arts where results matter.


----------



## Martial D (Jul 26, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> But what if you trained the Karateka specifically for that end, rather than following what's typical (whatever that would be)? If the Karateka trained specifically for the upcoming competition for a year (as did the boxer), we might see a different, more evenly-matched, outcome.



But we don't see that, at all. Karatekas that fight successfully in competition against non karatekas are a unicorn.

Sure, you could argue that most of them don't train right to prepare for actual fighting, but I don't think that's the case. I find it more likely that there is a higher skill bar to reach a level of practical functionality . .much higher...in things like Karate, Wing Chun, TKD, aikido etc etc than things like boxing or Mui Thai, that is, you will need much much more training, and of a wholly different sort than the typical fare.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 26, 2018)

Martial D said:


> But we don't see that, at all. Karatekas that fight successfully in competition against non karatekas are a unicorn.








I guess that makes, Choki Mutobu, Raymond "real deal" Daniels, Wonderboy Thompson, Machida and Andy Hug unicorns.

K1, and Shootfighting saw a number karateka thriving against other styles and arts.

There are plenty of Karate vs Muy Thai fights in which Karate make themselves known.

There are many fights on record of Karate against TKD, WC, Judo.

I think it would be better to say... Karateka are Uncommon in the competitive sport fighting scene.
At least in the semi-pro to pro level.

Yes, pre fight training methodologies play a huge role in that. While Karate can be made to work at a competitive combative sports discipline, that was never the intented purpose of it.

Karate was primarily intended to be a means of defense for self or others, and to reduce or eliminate becoming killed or injured in a fight, and as means of protecting targets as bodyguards, or subduing and controlling a suspected criminal by the Ryukyu officials (usually from the Pechin class) charged with enforcing the laws of the kingdom.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 27, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> One thing you left out about the boxer is the insane training regimen, and body conditioning.
> 
> Karate-ka usually doesn't train as athletically as Boxers. Nor do most brands of Karate do the conditioning of the body to withstand constant heavy blows to the body.
> 
> ...


Actually, I didn't leave that out. That was my point about using similar training methods. Often, when folks compare sport-oriented arts like boxing, they compare me (30-40 years of relatively traditional MA training) to a serious amateur boxer with 5 years of experience and 10-20 recorded fights. They ignore that the amateur boxer they're citing is training for serious competition, and is putting in more effort and time into both his training and his fitness than I am. Yeah, in 5 years of intense training and fitness commitment, someone can become a better fighter than probably 10-20 years of less-intense training. As I age, my ability to keep up with a highly fit 20-something or 30-something decreases each year. As does my ability to maintain intensity, because my body is kind of crap. And I train in methods that are designed to allow me to maintain my training for a lifetime, so compromise some "right now" readiness.

Method of training matters, IMO, more than style. It's arguable whether method of training is part of a style, but I don't think it is. It's possible to train most arts with quite different methods, without losing the principles of the style. If the techniques are generally effective, then changing training methods (even adding or removing forms work) and testing outcomes more shouldn't change the art.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 27, 2018)

drop bear said:


> There is a reason you can't box without being conditioned.
> 
> It makes you a better fighter.
> 
> It amazes me that this is still discussed in abstract. It should be a factor in any sort of martial arts where results matter.


It should be. Time becomes an issue, as does commitment. If students won't train hard during regular drills, then it's hard to get enough fitness built into training time for those attending 2-3 hours a week (2 classes). I can deliver the same class to two pairs of students. If one student in one pair is slow and lethargic, that pair will probably never even get out of breath (the same would be true if that pair gets really intellectual and technical that day). If the other pair go at it with intensity, they'll get to sweat and get some real fitness benefit out of just training. Two different results from the same training session, same drills, etc. I've never found a reliable way to change that outcome.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 27, 2018)

Martial D said:


> But we don't see that, at all. Karatekas that fight successfully in competition against non karatekas are a unicorn.
> 
> Sure, you could argue that most of them don't train right to prepare for actual fighting, but I don't think that's the case. I find it more likely that there is a higher skill bar to reach a level of practical functionality . .much higher...in things like Karate, Wing Chun, TKD, aikido etc etc than things like boxing or Mui Thai, that is, you will need much much more training, and of a wholly different sort than the typical fare.


Oh there is a higher skill bar - you're back to the specialization point. I don't think any of us would argue it's easier to learn an effective punch than an effective kick, and (to over-simplify it) the Karateka is learning both. Balance, alone, makes the kick more complex and difficult - and exposed. If I wasn't building a foundation for longer learning, I'd probably teach something for the first few months that would look a little like boxing. Footwork, punching, and related defense makes a reasonable start at self-defense, and can be achieved faster than adding in takedowns, ground defense, throws, kicks, etc.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 27, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> I guess that makes, Choki Mutobu, Raymond "real deal" Daniels, Wonderboy Thompson, Machida and Andy Hug unicorns.
> 
> K1, and Shootfighting saw a number karateka thriving against other styles and arts.
> 
> ...


I don't think the issue is that Karate was designed for SD. I suspect the larger issue is that Karate's curriculum and approach was largely developed for long-term study. If you started someone in their youth (when they don't really need the skills yet), you have years to get them to some useful level. And if you're not training for elite competition, there's really no need to focus down to just a small number of most-effective (or most-efficient) techniques - you have time to develop a larger range of techniques, which is more flexible perhaps, and definitely more interesting to some people.


----------



## now disabled (Jul 27, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Two different results from the same training session, same drills, etc. I've never found a reliable way to change that outcome.



I don't think you can, You as the teacher can set things up but it is up to the individuals to put into it what they want, You cannot force them to go harder or longer or faster etc you can advise cajole and nudge but in the end it their choice and their path, you only provide the route map


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 27, 2018)

now disabled said:


> I don't think you can, You as the teacher can set things up but it is up to the individuals to put into it what they want, You cannot force them to go harder or longer or faster etc you can advise cajole and nudge but in the end it their choice and their path, you only provide the route map



I have found that a Good martial arts curriculum and pedagogy is a sorting table for minds. This is a byproduct. But it can be a useful one.

The mind that is hopeful it can do it

The mind that says I can do this

The mind that doesn't care how much it hurts, its going to get done.

The mind that gives up under adversity

The mind that is here to be entertained

There are some mindsets that hinder their growth.
While it is certainly true that we cannot make anyone do anything. 

That doesn't mean we cannot act in an effective manner to address this.

A student can be admonished: The intensity is going to go up!  When it does they have 2 choices. They will grow and push through or they will become upset and drop out.

This can be especially challenging if you run a martial arts afterschool daycare to pay the school bills. Fun was never a necessity in training for self defense.

But it is helpful, almost absolutely necessary for the engagement of the child or adolescent mind, that classes are fun, and lightly challenging.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 27, 2018)

*Warning wall of text follows, but this is pointed back at the OP on page 1:*

One thing about Karate tma.
and it can apply to many other martial arts.

There is the acquisition of general knowledge and there is knowledge mastery.

In the system that I currently crosstrain (I am only half way through the kyu belts) that general knowledge is huge. Count yourself blessed if your tradition is not over 12 to 18 forms.

It takes on average three years to be read to test for Nikyu (1st brown.) Then at least a year to test for Ichikyu (2nd brown) Then another year to be ready to test for Shodan. Most don't get promoted.

One of the Yudansha in the dojo took 10 years to get his 1st BB.

We have about 110 Kata that are "active" but the Big Cheese has more, that are not currently being taught, and haven't been taught in a long time.

Twice a year, once in the Spring and once in the Fall, He flies to the US and teaches a special training.

That let's us know the current curriculum and any revisions. It's a 4 day training. We will do everything, all active Kata.

By the time you are 4th dan you may have all the Kata sequences down.... but you still have a ton of Bunkai to still memorize for that kata. A shorter kata may only have 5 to 15 bunkai. Some kata are 108 movements long. You dont want to know how many bunkai exist for that.

Thankfully, there exist a bit of redundancy between a fair number of NahaTe, ShuriTe, and TomariTe kata, so that reduces the bunkai count.

But we just to get a solid handle on the curriculum we are looking at minimum 30 years worth of training.

This is what I call general knowledge.

Then there is what I call Knowledge Mastery.
It is when you have done a technique 10,000 times.
It is so drilled it, it requires no conscious thought.

You strike as a flinch, or you flinch into a specific posture or stance and react without even "meaning to".

You have done it so much, it is forgotten. In a sense. You sometimes forget exactly how it was taught to you So you teach it slowly movements broken down
and you under and perceive the principles that are at work. To beginners you may even exaggerate certain movements to get the point across.

You can tell at a glance, when someone is doing it biomechanically incorrect, even if it superficially looks right. It is an extension of yourself.
It becomes how you walk, breath and stand.

It affects your anatomy.

But it is a DIY process to convert something from general knowledge to personal mastery. In fact, the methods of converting kumite into street fighting were sometimes withheld and it was left to the student to weaponize the information himself.

This was the case of Choki Motobu... His teacher did not give him the Honto Kumite or Jissen Kumite because the teacher was concerned that Choki was going to go out an start hurting or mauling people with it. Even as a youth he had a propensity for getting into violent altercations.

His teacher Itosu left him up to "Develop your own jissen methods" which lead him to Kakedameshi or streetfighting in the red light district of Naha.

If he lost it would have brought severe shame as he was from a noble family. He didn't lose in the streets. He found how to apply his training.

By the time he had fought the western boxer he was 52. Given that he started with his brother when he was age 12, that left a span of 40 years of training.

And he trained very hard. As a youth he set his goal of becoming the strongest man in Okinawa. He was reportedly striking the makiwara 1000 times a day, and doing Nifanchin as many times as 500 a day.

The point being that out of all the kata that he knew, he chose one and developed personal mastery of it.

Developing his own real world fighting bunkai, and turning that into two man drills.

A point that Patrick McCarthy has made repeatedly was that Kata was never meant to be just a solo form, but was the summation of all the two man drills that you already were supposed to have learned.

*TL,DR version*
General Knowledge acquisition from the TMA is only the beginning.

From it, it is up to each practitioner to determine what to master and weaponize for real life fighting. It is up to you or I to make it ours.

That is the difference between hobbyist and a lifestyle practitioner. And this distinction is a point that traditional martial arts critics don't under.


----------



## geezer (Jul 27, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> There is the acquisition of general knowledge and there is knowledge mastery.We have about 110 Kata that are "active"...By the time you are 4th dan you may have all the Kata sequences down.... but you still have a ton of Bunkai to still memorize for that kata. A shorter kata may only have 5 to 15 bunkai. Some kata are 108 movements long. You dont want to know how many bunkai exist for that.



Well, even accounting for those "redundancies" you mentioned, if you have an average of 15 bunkai per kata between the shorter and longer forms, and you have110 active kata you have well over 1650 bunkai. Now let's say you practice each one 10,000 times to gain mastery, that's 16,500,000 reps. But I suspect that's really not nearly enough reps to be a true master.

For example, about ten years back when I was in my early 50's, I would do sessions of between 1,000 and 5,000 Ving Tsun chain punches in a single session, about 3 or 4 days a week, for over a year. So I wore out a couple of wall-bags doing some 300,000 total punching reps during that time, ...also doing no favor to my hands, and after all that, still I am by no means a _master._

So the OP has a valid point. If You are looking for something to keep you busy for your whole life, this TMA approach is great. On the other hand, if you are looking for _an efficient path to functional fighting skills,_ it leaves much to be desired.



TSDTexan said:


> Then there is what I call Knowledge Mastery.
> It is when you have done a technique 10,000 times.
> It is so drilled it, it requires no conscious thought.
> You strike as a flinch, or you flinch into a specific posture or stance and react without even "meaning to".



Like many of us, I've actually experienced what you describe above, although not with the consistency and frequency of a "master". So, I do know what you are getting at. As I noted above however, in a system with fewer techniques, a capable person will reach that level sooner. In a system with a huge number of kata, techniques and bunkai, few will ever attain that level of spontaneity except with the more common techniques. That's reality.

Interestingly, it is widely believed Wing Chun evolved from earlier arts that were much _more complicated_ and, at least from a WC point of view, _less practical._ One of WC's strengths was it's relative simplicity compared to these ancestral forms, probably including southern shaolin and fujian white crane (also the ancestor of Okinawan Te). Our origin myths tell us of our supposed founder, the elderly nun Ng Mui who developed a simpler, more practical kung-fu system. Her first student, from whom the system takes it's name, was a slight young woman who learned enough in a short time to best a local bully in combat.

However improbable the tale, the meaning is clear. Unlike your stories of Okinawan Te, the best Wing Chun _should_ be simple enough to be learned in less than an entire lifetime, and efficient enough that even an old woman or slightly built young girl could make it work. At least that was supposed to be the idea!


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 27, 2018)

geezer said:


> Well, even accounting for those "redundancies" you mentioned, if you have an average of 15 bunkai per kata between the shorter and longer forms, and you have110 active kata you have well over 1650 bunkai. Now let's say you practice each one 10,000 times to gain mastery, that's 16,500,000 reps. But I suspect that's really not nearly enough reps to be a true master.
> 
> For example, about ten years back when I was in my early 50's, I would do sessions of between 1,000 and 5,000 Ving Tsun chain punches in a single session, about 3 or 4 days a week, for over a year. So I wore out a couple of wall-bags doing some 300,000 total punching reps during that time, ...also doing no favor to my hands, and after all that, still I am by no means a _master._
> 
> ...



The goal wasn't to have mastery of all of your general knowledge. That's simply for transmission of the art to the next generation.

Let's say Joe enrolls, spends 15 years and is exceptionally motivated. He hits 4th or 5th dan.
He learns about 80% of all the Kata.
But what bunkai will he learn and transmit first?
The Kata groups that he learned first.

So He may fall deeply in love with the Pinans. He drills all five so good, that other instructors will comment... "If you want to see Pinan done right go talk with Joe. He knows the Pinans".

That doesn't mean that they dont know the kata, or its bunkai. It means that his depth of knowledge is a lot deeper.


The problem (as such) is my style contains multiple styles or traditions of Te.

We have the majority of each of the following systems kata.
NahaTe.

TomariTe.

ShuriTe.
And each could be viewed as a separate system.

Then we have 25 Kobudo forms. a separate art.

We have the 7 kata of Kyoku series which my teacher says that Kanken Toyama said could alone be taught as a style of karate by itself.

[What just blew my mind as I was looking over the 2016 Honbu Curriculum kata list.... is we have dropped Bassai/Patsai.  Both Dai and Sho are missing.]

Well the short of it is...
There is a university with many colleges of Te in the brand of Karate.

No one is expected to PhD in every college/discipline. having 6 different associates degrees, and 3 bachelors, and two masters degrees should be enough.

I envy the guys who do Uechi Ryu.... they only have to do Eight different Kata EVER. I wont lie.

There are 14 Kata just for our 1st Brown belt (NiKyu) curriculum. And we are expected to learn it in about 12 months.

Sometimes I wonder what I got myself into and feel like second guessing myself. But I knew full well that it would be a lot, so I am committed. I guess that I am an idiot.

So it's not really just one art. Like Wing Chun.
It's like 10 different lineages of wing chun, with other stuff thrown in.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 28, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> I envy the guys who do Uechi Ryu.... they only have to do Eight different Kata EVER. I wont lie.


This is true. The modern curriculum has 8 but traditionally there are only three.  Many seniors and myself only do the three.  I dropped the others because it was too much to remember.  Lol lol lol


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> This is true. The modern curriculum has 8 but traditionally there are only three.  Many seniors and myself only do the three.  I dropped the others because it was too much to remember.  Lol lol lol



I knew that. Well... Pangainoon had three. Word is Kanei Uechi and some of Kanbun's senior students created the rest.

Also.... I hate your guts .

Not really. But damnit.... this is so unfair.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 28, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> The goal wasn't to have mastery of all of your general knowledge. That's simply for transmission of the art to the next generation.
> 
> Let's say Joe enrolls, spends 15 years and is exceptionally motivated. He hits 4th or 5th dan.
> He learns about 80% of all the Kata.
> ...


I’ll be honest, I don’t see the value in that many kata. At all.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> I’ll be honest, I don’t see the value in that many kata. At all.


You move ALOT. Good Cardio.
You dont get burned out.
There are lots of treasures to mine, and polish.

Well... blame Kanken Toyama. He started it!
(Points at a non living historical figure.)


But if I could... I would go to a Mutobu Ryu dojo and learn Channan... and drop the five Pinans that Itosu created out of it.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 28, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> You move ALOT. Good Cardio.
> 
> Well... blame Kanken Toyama. He started it!
> (Points at a non living historical figure.)


Stop throwing dead masters under the bus!

Seriously, I consider that a value of kata, in general. But after maybe the second dozen, I don’t see the value in more of them. It starts taking time from learning to actually use the techniques and movements. It limits the time you get to spend on one kata to improve it. 

But that’s me. And I think that was the point of your earlier post.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Stop throwing dead masters under the bus!
> 
> Seriously, I consider that a value of kata, in general. But after maybe the second dozen, I don’t see the value in more of them. It starts taking time from learning to actually use the techniques and movements. It limits the time you get to spend on one kata to improve it.
> 
> But that’s me. And I think that was the point of your earlier post.



Yeah which means you get double work.
general knowledge preservation duty, and then specialization duty.

The stuff that you need to do to make it work.

Thankfully I am many years deep into nihanchi kata.
But I have about 16 or so Korean Hyungs stuck in my brain. I have been working with em so long, that I can't shake em.

My Shihan says the Doshinkan method forces you to develop the ability to learn fast. Eventually you can pick up and catch a new kata by observing and doing them three times.

if I ever create my own art... I think it will only have 2 short forms. Sanchin, and Nifanchin/Nihanchi and 3 long forms, to be determined. and that's it. No more forms and bunkai beyond that..
5 is enough.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 28, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> Yeah which means you get double work.
> general knowledge preservation duty, and then specialization duty.
> 
> The stuff that you need to do to make it work.
> ...


Interestingly, that’s exactly the number I decided on. I’d created others - some of which I really like (and might go back to practicing for my own pleasure), but more than 5 seemed too much time and focus away from more flexible work, and too little in common among students of different levels.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Interestingly, that’s exactly the number I decided on. I’d created others - some of which I really like (and might go back to practicing for my own pleasure), but more than 5 seemed too much time and focus away from more flexible work, and too little in common among students of different levels.



I would ditch the jumping and leaping stuff, & Kicks to the head etc. No flashy dashy.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 28, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> I would ditch the jumping and leaping stuff, & Kicks to the head etc. No flashy dashy.


If we had that, I’d keep it as optional study. Some folks really enjoy it, and it’s good for developing the body.


----------



## pdg (Jul 28, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> I would ditch the jumping and leaping stuff, & Kicks to the head etc. No flashy dashy.



That's fine for you 

One person's flash is another's ideal range.

On the whole, I can kick with more power and accuracy in mid/high (stomach to head) than low (waist down to floor), and do so faster. I guess I'm just built and wired that way.

Jumping and leaping? I can work with those too. Get both my feet off the floor for a turning kick or side kick and power wise it's on par (or even slightly higher). Plus, my standing leg can't be swept because it's not there.

That could be self confirming because I rarely try to train lower, or it could be playing to my personal strengths - without cloning me a few years ago and running opposite parallel training ideas I'll never know...


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 28, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> Word is Kanei Uechi and some of Kanbun's senior students created the rest.


true.

the entire original Uechi curriculum is very short.

7 strikes,  2 kicks and knees , 1 circle block
3 kata
kotekitai  (arm pounding exercise)

is it any wonder they added a bunch of stuff.  the extra forms are good but they dont actually express any new principals or concepts.  its just the same re hashed stuff from the original three. this is why i decided to drop them, at least for my own practice.
for myself i found not having a lot of material led me to go down a historical archaeological rabbit hole of discovery.  how did the seniors do this kata in the past?  how did the founder do it?  how did his Chinese teacher do it?  were these the only kata?  what original Chinese style was this?  what other styles are related and how do they do similar moves?  what other forms do they do that might have other principals?

at the end of that rabbit hole i end up with..how do i want to do the kata?  then i spent  20 years pulling apart and dissecting every aspect of the kata and the meanings that lie underneath.  and Dog gamit i ended up right at the beginning.  lol


----------



## KPM (Jul 28, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> *Warning wall of text follows, but this is pointed back at the OP on page 1:*
> 
> One thing about Karate tma.
> and it can apply to many other martial arts.
> ...



Yes, back to the OP.....we need to add a #6, and it does easily apply to TCMA as well as other "traditional" arts.

6.  "Traditional" arts sometimes have very long curricula containing many forms that take multiple years to learn. These forms are often redundant and unnecessary, given that there are only so many ways a human body can move, and such extensive material is not really required for fighting.  This is not an efficient way to learn to fight.  Modern successful sports competitors will invariably tell you that they have less than 10 "go to" moves that they have mastered and used regularly to win fights.

I think these very long curricula may be a way to keep people interested and coming back for more and more instruction.  Or it may be that over generations subsequent masters have felt the need to put there own "stamp" on the system and so added more and more forms.  Or sometimes several "traditional" systems have been  combined into one and each of the system's forms have been retained.  Bruce Lee saw this and commented on it as well.  It was part of what he referred to as the "classical mess."   That is why one of his key approaches to martial arts was to try and simplify things as much as possible by using guiding principles and concepts that could be applied in a rather open-ended fashion rather than accumulating more and more techniques and applications.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jul 28, 2018)

There is something to be said for getting more mileage from less material.

My experience with a system with a very large curriculum tells me that you reach a point of diminishing returns.  Eventually, all the good ideas have been done and much of the new material is just plain bad ideas, or else it is simply redundant and repackaged.

When a system becomes so large that it requires training for 12 hours a day, seven days a week, that is unsustainable.  It is physically and mentally exhausting as well as isolating and is a recipe for burnout.  There is too much material to train any of it with sufficient intensity to actually benefit and develop any level of mastery.  It becomes a race to do it all just enough to not actually forget it.

There should be more to life than simply training.

A very large system seems to me to try to teach every possible scenario, and in my opinion that is a poor design.  Instead it should teach you principles and strategies and a reasonable body of techniques that you then learn to use spontaneously and creatively to answer what problems may come at you.  If you haven’t learned how to do that with some reasonable amount of material, then piling on exponentially more material is unlikely to help you.

That is my opinion.  Ones mileage may vary.


----------



## pdg (Jul 28, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> I’ll be honest, I don’t see the value in that many kata. At all.



As someone who enjoys doing patterns (kata/forms/whatever), I agree...

But as always I have to introduce a complication 

We have 24 patterns, sort of increasing in difficulty as you go through them.

If it were up to me, I'd add more.

But, at the same time I'd only keep the lowest/easiest for as long as they're useful to the individual.

I mean, there's only so many ways to interpret repetitions of punch/block/kick, and those are incorporated in higher patterns anyway, so use them to begin with but I can't see the harm in stopping their practice later as they're 'outgrown'.

And there's the possibility of either rescripting other arts' forms, or creating your own if you want to try other transitions and combinations, but that would be for their own sake in a way.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2018)

pdg said:


> That's fine for you
> 
> One person's flash is another's ideal range.
> 
> ...



Well, Not everyone is Andy Hug... and Yes its good to be limber enough to Ax Kick.... but that doesn't mean that every high kick has to be in the forms.

Ideally the forms should be achievable from age 14 to 94. Any "high kicks" would be at sternum height in the kata.

Here are 200 kicks. Not a lot of them are what I want to be doing at 94.

I don't want doing a kata that has kicks that wear out hip or knee joints.






We are just talking about kata. There is a lot of kihon basics that is outside of kata.


----------



## pdg (Jul 28, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> Well, Not everyone is Andy Hug... and Yes its good to be limber enough to Ax Kick.... but that doesn't mean that every high kick has to be in the forms.
> 
> Ideally the forms should be achievable from age 14 to 94. Any "high kicks" would be at sternum height in the kata.
> 
> ...



So instead of specifying a measured height (for higher kicks, like "your head") have a little flexibility to be able to say "high for you".

If the sternum is high for you, do it there.

If you've already got hip or knee issues, then waist might be "high for you", so do it there.

If I'm still (a) alive and (b) capable at 94, I'll still be going high for me 

Don't oppress my range, man


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> true.
> 
> the entire original Uechi curriculum is very short.
> 
> ...



And in all three original kata everything is done from Sanchin Dachi? 

Both Hands open and forward and parallel? Body is forward Square to the Target, and no side stances that create a big change of lead hand rear hand.

It makes me wonder why Kanbum trained for 13 years in China to bring back the most paired down art, that I have ever seen.

Is there really 13 years worth of material in those three forms. . . or is there a lot of body conditioning iron shirt stuff that is being passed off as Hojo Undo?


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2018)

pdg said:


> So instead of specifying a measured height (for higher kicks, like "your head") have a little flexibility to be able to say "high for you".
> 
> If the sternum is high for you, do it there.
> 
> ...



No... 6'4" I can stretch my leg and touch the top of any doorjamb I find. 
I don't have any knee or hip issues, but I alnost always have been careful with kicking. When your weight ranges from 238 to 250... a little dab will do ya.

(my secret, I do a bit of yoga streatches on the side, so I can play rubberguard.)

I just want the future practitioners to have a bar that is readily achievable all the days of their life in my hypothetical kata.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 28, 2018)

pdg said:


> So instead of specifying a measured height (for higher kicks, like "your head") have a little flexibility to be able to say "high for you".
> 
> If the sternum is high for you, do it there.
> 
> ...


I teach high kicks (above own sternum), but don't require them...unless the person is physically capable of them. Then, they are entirely mandatory.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 28, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> And in all three original kata everything is done from Sanchin Dachi?
> 
> Both Hands open and forward and parallel? Body is forward Square to the Target, and no side stances that create a big change of lead hand rear hand.
> 
> ...


Perhaps he was just trying to get really good at it.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 28, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> No... 6'4" I can stretch my leg and touch the top of any doorjamb I find.
> I don't have any knee or hip issues, but I alnost always have been careful with kicking. When your weight ranges from 238 to 250... a little dab will do ya.
> 
> (my secret, I do a bit of yoga streatches on the side, so I can play rubberguard.)
> ...


Another option is to not be too picky with the kata. Where I indicate a front kick, I'm likely to deliver it at (my) face height. If someone delivers it at (their) crotch height, that's fine, too. I'd probably accept a knee-height kick there, so long as it's a good kick.


----------



## pdg (Jul 28, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> When your weight ranges from 238 to 250... a little dab will do ya.



And when you've been around the 150 mark for the last 15+ years, nothing succeeds like excess 



TSDTexan said:


> I just want the future practitioners to have a bar that is readily achievable all the days of their life in my hypothetical kata



How is "for you" not readily achievable?

And anyway, a badly executed low kick will do far more damage to the practitioner than a high kick done with proper form.

It's silly stances that get me, turning your knees in and ankles out for instance...


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 28, 2018)

pdg said:


> It's silly stances that get me, turning your knees in and ankles out for instance...


Hey, don't make fun of my dancing!


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Another option is to not be too picky with the kata. Where I indicate a front kick, I'm likely to deliver it at (my) face height. If someone delivers it at (their) crotch height, that's fine, too. I'd probably accept a knee-height kick there, so long as it's a good kick.


 
Good clean technique directed at a specific target.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2018)

pdg said:


> And when you've been around the 150 mark for the last 15+ years, nothing succeeds like excess
> 
> 
> 
> ...



How much in, how much out?

How far apart are the knees?

How far apart are the ankles?

Are you Squatting deep? Or the Legs Straight instead?

To what degree are the knees bent?

We gotta know.... Right Meow!

Some are insanely silly, others not so much.
But details mean everything.


----------



## pdg (Jul 28, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> How much in, how much out?
> 
> How far apart are the knees?
> 
> ...



Anything that puts you pigeon toed is somewhere your legs aren't built to be, the more bend in your knees (closer knees, further ankles) then the worse it is.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2018)

pdg said:


> Anything that puts you pigeon toed is somewhere your legs aren't built to be, the more bend in your knees (closer knees, further ankles) then the worse it is.



This is a big deal... but I am willing to bet a Slight big toe in outside ankle out Is as safe for nihanchi dachi, as perfectly parallel.

But I am not advocating a pigeon toe.

There is some contraversy about Kiba Dachi/Naifanchin/Tekki and the correct ankle/foot alignment.


----------



## pdg (Jul 28, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> This is a big deal... but I am willing to bet a Slight big toe in outside ankle out Is as safe for nihanchi dachi, as perfectly parallel.
> 
> But I am not advocating a pigeon toe.



Outside of your feet parallel is alright (with bent knees too, as long as they're not caving inward), and slightly in. But only slightly.

Get more toward (or past) a 'goat clamping stance' and trying to apply any force is just asking for trouble.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 28, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> And in all three original kata everything is done from Sanchin Dachi?


no not at all.  while sanchin stance is our fighting posture there is a difference between the first form and the second and third.
sanchin in the first form that carries its name is a foundational kata and the form has a fluid dynamic tension within the body that is a constant though out the performance. 
below is Kanei Uechi.  you will notice his performance is more relaxed and fluid then how Gushi Sensei does it and it looks very relaxed but there is a tension there, this is the goal. to be solid but fluid.





seisan the next form does use sanchin dachi but  there are other stances in there.





Sanseiru is more complex and uses many deep stances







TSDTexan said:


> Both Hands open and forward and parallel? Body is forward Square to the Target, and no side stances that create a big change of lead hand rear hand.


correct.  this is a philosophical rule for fighting, always face square to the opponent ,, so no side stances. 



TSDTexan said:


> It makes me wonder why Kanbum trained for 13 years in China to bring back the most paired down art, that I have ever seen.


there is complex answer for this.  

during kanbuns time in China he was granted teaching rank and taught for many years so it wasnt like it took him 13 years to just learn it.  he was teaching as well.
this was during the time frame of the boxer rebellion and martial arts were more geared toward actual fighting. the later wushu was not invented yet and older more time consuming curriculums were not in fashion due to the focus on actual fighting.
Kanbun also learned weapons and chinese medicine but these were not passed down.  
there was a great deal of focus on the iron shirt/ iron palm stuff.
there is a lot of stand up grappling / chin na  in the system and in the forms that have been watered down and not apparent in the performance of the kata.  when the style came to Okinawa in 1948  sport karate was all the rage so the stand up boxing/ shotokan karate stuff has been emphasised.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 28, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> How much in, how much out?
> 
> How far apart are the knees?
> 
> ...


See, I'm not even that picky about exact stances, except when I am. If I have a student who is not aware of their feet, I'll give them exact stances (and be picky about them). Absent such an issue, I don't actually care which stance they use, so long as it makes sense in that transition.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> no not at all.  while sanchin stance is our fighting posture there is a difference between the first form and the second and third.
> sanchin in the first form that carries its name is a foundational kata and the form has a fluid dynamic tension within the body that is a constant though out the performance.
> below is Kanei Uechi.  you will notice his performance is more relaxed and fluid then how Gushi Sensei does it and it looks very relaxed but there is a tension there, this is the goal. to be solid but fluid.
> 
> ...



I have seen these videos many many times, they are master craftsmanship stained glass in motion. although this is the first time I have heard French in the third one.

Question. I  the third video.
what's the bunkai or reason for the in place jump stomp into zenkutsu dachi?


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 28, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> I have seen these videos many many times, they are master craftsmanship stained glass in motion.


yeah i figured you had but i wanted to post them for others to see what the heck we were gabbering on about.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 28, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> See, I'm not even that picky about exact stances, except when I am. If I have a student who is not aware of their feet, I'll give them exact stances (and be picky about them). Absent such an issue, I don't actually care which stance they use, so long as it makes sense in that transition.


Aikido is like that.  its a philosophical problem for me because Aiki and Uechi are at opposite sides of the spectrum. i cant rectify the differences into one symbiotic unit.  in creating my own system i have to keep them separate tactically while joining them under one umbrella of philosophical paradigm.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> yeah i figured you had but i wanted to post them for others to see what the heck we were gabbering on about.


I think my new favorite for Seisen is this one. found this about a week ago.





They do bunkai drills, while another does the kata sequence.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 28, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Another option is to not be too picky with the kata. Where I indicate a front kick, I'm likely to deliver it at (my) face height. If someone delivers it at (their) crotch height, that's fine, too. I'd probably accept a knee-height kick there, so long as it's a good kick.



Would you change the kata? An oblique kick to the knee isn't a teep to the face.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 28, 2018)

pdg said:


> And when you've been around the 150 mark for the last 15+ years, nothing succeeds like excess
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It depends. I look at kata as the fighting version of animal walks.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 28, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Would you change the kata? An oblique kick to the knee isn't a teep to the face.


Actually, once they are past a certain point, I'm okay with the students changing the kata. So, yeah, I'd adjust the kata for someone who can't physically do what I put in there. I allow stuff like a rear hammerfist instead of a rear elbow, too. I'm pretty lax about that. If the thing they do makes sense (and I often make them explain a different choice, as well as the pros and cons of it), then I don't much care.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 28, 2018)

drop bear said:


> It depends. I look at kata as the fighting version of animal walks.


What are animal walks? (And if you say "the non-fighting version of forms" I'm sending ninjas to your house.)


----------



## Poppity (Aug 7, 2018)

I know this thread looks dead but as a quick post... I accept that in traditional CMA you have a level of reverie to those who came before you and this ancestor worship is a bit of a usp for CMA. I think the issue in CMA in particular is that some teachers and branches want the reverie without the gong Fu or hard work, without the skill and ability, they just want their ego massaged and to be the big I am. 

I think it is this ancestor reverie that makes CMA particularly attractive to certain people making it more prone to mcdojos and is why CMA is often so poorly represented in competition.  I am not saying all CMA is like this only that CMA is more susceptible because of the importance it places on lineage.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Aug 7, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> What are animal walks? (And if you say "the non-fighting version of forms" I'm sending ninjas to your house.)


Bear walks, gator crawls, duck walks, monkey walks, froggers, etc. Great exercises that also build specific movement skills.

That reminds me - I never did send you that video on shrimping. I’ll try to do that when I get back from D&D tonight. Remind me if I don’t.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 7, 2018)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Bear walks, gator crawls, duck walks, monkey walks, froggers, etc. Great exercises that also build specific movement skills.
> 
> That reminds me - I never did send you that video on shrimping. I’ll try to do that when I get back from D&D tonight. Remind me if I don’t.


Dungeons and Dragons?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 7, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> What are animal walks?


Tiger:






Dragon:






Horse:






Bear:






Chicken:






...


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Aug 7, 2018)

Flying Crane said:


> Dungeons and Dragons?


Yep. On Tuesdays I DM. On Thursday we’ll be starting a new campaign where I get to be one of the players.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 7, 2018)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Yep. On Tuesdays I DM. On Thursday we’ll be starting a new campaign where I get to be one of the players.


Nice.  It’s been decades.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Aug 7, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Bear:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think drop bear and I had some different animal walks in mind. The ones I was thinking of look more like this:


----------



## drop bear (Aug 7, 2018)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I think drop bear and I had some different animal walks in mind. The ones I was thinking of look more like this:



I was thinking chicken attack.





But our version and wangs version is pretty much the same thing.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 7, 2018)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Bear walks, gator crawls, duck walks, monkey walks, froggers, etc. Great exercises that also build specific movement skills.
> 
> That reminds me - I never did send you that video on shrimping. I’ll try to do that when I get back from D&D tonight. Remind me if I don’t.


You keep telling me to remind you. Haven't you figured out yet that *I* need somebody to remind *me*?

Thanks for that. And I'll go looking for those walks. I probably know some of them, but not by those names.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 7, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Tiger:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for that. I couldn't watch them all. My knees hurt from just watching that dragon form. Those look like they'd be fun to train (wow, there's something wrong with saying that!).


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 7, 2018)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I think drop bear and I had some different animal walks in mind. The ones I was thinking of look more like this:


Okay, I used to do a simpler version of that kind of thing to work on ground movement. As he says in the video, a good workout, too.


----------

