# San Soo article in Inside Kung-Fu Magazine



## Tames D (Jun 14, 2007)

The August 2007 issue of Inside Kung-Fu magazine has an article on Taylor Presley, an Army Captain currently serving his 2nd tour of duty in Iraq. Taylor talks about how his San Soo training has helped him. Check it out.


----------



## Yeti (Jun 14, 2007)

I love how it's only June, but they've already got the August issues of magazines out. 

Thanks for the heads-up. I'll be sure to grab a copy.


----------



## kidswarrior (Jun 15, 2007)

I saw it too, *Q-G*. Short but excellent piece. Talk about kung fu being combat worthy! Course, it's our beloved _*Ugly fu*_, but still, comes from the same source. :ultracool Puts the kabosh on the argument, kung fu doesn't work on the street.


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jun 15, 2007)

I'm sorry but Sanda and Gongfu are two completely different things. Sanda is a Chinese copy of kickboxing with some grappling thrown in. It has no relation to Gongfu whatsoever except that Gongfu is a generic term used for all martial arts. Learning Wushu forms or a copy of kickboxing are hardly the same.


----------



## Tames D (Jun 15, 2007)

Can you expand on this please? I don't follow how your post relates to San Soo in Iraq?


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jun 16, 2007)

My meaning is:

Sanda working in actual combat not= Gongfu working in actual combat because Sanda is a copy of foreign MA.

It's been proven that kickboxing/grappling can be applied to real combat. The same cannot be said of TCMA. For this I wait.


----------



## bakxierboxer (Jun 16, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> My meaning is:
> 
> Sanda working in actual combat not= Gongfu working in actual combat because Sanda is a copy of foreign MA.



Personally, I've always been struck by the apparent similarity between the Chinese "san" = "free" and the Latin "sans" = "without"...
Both might be taken in the same sense as the Madison Avenue "free" as in "salt free" or "fat free".
This might lead us to the "interesting" possibility that "san shu" or "san soo" means "without 'hands'" and "san da" means "without (meaningful) hitting".



> It's been proven that kickboxing/grappling can be applied to real combat. The same cannot be said of TCMA. For this I wait.


Perhaps you're in the wrong country to find that.


----------



## TaiChiTJ (Jun 16, 2007)

yeah but I thought what xue sheng was kindly teaching us in this post was that there are different types of Sanda: 

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=38089&highlight=xue+sheng

Which was news to me at the time. So a person could always seek out what for them would be the more "real" sanda, no? Of course finding such a teacher would not be easy...


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jun 16, 2007)

bakxierboxer said:


> Personally, I've always been struck by the apparent similarity between the Chinese "san" = "free" and the Latin "sans" = "without"...
> Both might be taken in the same sense as the Madison Avenue "free" as in "salt free" or "fat free".
> This might lead us to the "interesting" possibility that "san shu" or "san soo" means "without 'hands'" and "san da" means "without (meaningful) hitting".
> 
> Perhaps you're in the wrong country to find that.


 
Definitely. I do believe that there is some useful Gongfu out there, but the percentage of good teachers is so low that there is little hope left. Personally, I don't like Sanda. To me it just conforms to the kickboxing mold. It is nothing special.

Chinese teachers will tell you that all the techniques are from TCMA, but that is complete ********. Whatever happened to the great age/s when people were actually creative. MMA makes it look like there is only one effectice way to fight. No matter what style the fighters trained in, the techniques all look almost identical. This is just boring. Sanda is just China's way of keeping up with the Jones' and hardly has anything to do with applying TCMA to real life combat.


----------



## bakxierboxer (Jun 17, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> Definitely. I do believe that there is some useful Gongfu out there, but the percentage of good teachers is so low that there is little hope left.



I'm fairly sure that there is useful TCMA "out there", but modern day "situations" are "conspiring" to keep most of the knowledgeable SiFus "out of the public eye".
In PRC, they tend to have "long memories" and it wasn't all that long ago that TCMA were outlawed.  There were instances in the past when TCMA masters "standing up for their rights" and those of their neighbors were summarily executed.  It isn't healthy to simply forget about those things.



> Personally, I don't like Sanda. To me it just conforms to the kickboxing mold. It is nothing special.


Makes two of us....
"Mold".... heh!
Mold is one of the lowest life-forms on the planet.



> Chinese teachers will tell you that all the techniques are from TCMA, but that is complete ********.


That's called "reaching".
Trying to get whatever modicum of "respect" (and income) they can.



> Whatever happened to the great age/s when people were actually creative.


Most of the modern "creativity" has done nothing more than debase the existing arts.... there IS no "easy way" to "mastery" of any kind.



> MMA makes it look like there is only one effectice way to fight. No matter what style the fighters trained in, the techniques all look almost identical. This is just boring.


Judging from what the MMA crowd do, it is anything BUT "effective".
The rules seem to prevent the use of simple basic techniques and natural reactions to some really STUPID "attacks" that are only made in the least bit "useful" by the UNrealistic "rules".



> Sanda is just China's way of keeping up with the Jones' and hardly has anything to do with applying TCMA to real life combat.


Market-wise.
Agreed.


----------



## kidswarrior (Jun 17, 2007)

Not sure how we got here from the OP. Can anyone tie it together for me?


----------



## Tames D (Jun 17, 2007)

kidswarrior said:


> Not sure how we got here from the OP. Can anyone tie it together for me?


Good question KW. I think they are confusing Kung Fu San Soo with Sanda/San Shou. Oh well... 
As you know KW, SAN SOO is an extremely effective fighting art.


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jun 17, 2007)

bakxierboxer said:


> I'm fairly sure that there is useful TCMA "out there", but modern day "situations" are "conspiring" to keep most of the knowledgeable SiFus "out of the public eye".
> In PRC, they tend to have "long memories" and it wasn't all that long ago that TCMA were outlawed. There were instances in the past when TCMA masters "standing up for their rights" and those of their neighbors were summarily executed. It isn't healthy to simply forget about those things.


 
True, but most teachers are not like that. They are young Wushu coaches that want to be rich and famous or aging men that want to be richer and get face. And the police and military teachers, although they have some ability, are arseholes.

And then there are the ones that "teach" only foreigners for ten times the price. Many foreigners are satisfied with what they "teach". I have come to understand how Chinese people think and so I distrust 99% of them, especially doctors. If given a good opportunity, I strongly believe that at least 75% of Chinese would resort to thievery. And of all of MA teachers that I have met here only one of them is a good man.

TCMA, like all MAs, are fading away because combat is no longer a part of our everyday lives (And the ****ing government). This is a world of sports. Most people are satisfied with that. I am not. Hell, there is more TKD in China than TCMA. What does that tell you?



bakxierboxer said:


> Makes two of us....
> "Mold".... heh!
> Mold is one of the lowest life-forms on the planet.


 
That could be said of a lot of Chinese, especially MA teachers.



bakxierboxer said:


> That's called "reaching".
> Trying to get whatever modicum of "respect" (and income) they can.


 
And here I am just trying to find something worth studying... =S



bakxierboxer said:


> Most of the modern "creativity" has done nothing more than debase the existing arts.... there IS no "easy way" to "mastery" of any kind.


 
True, I've more or less decided that I don't need to study from anyone to train myself for combat. I have my own ways and theories. I just need practise and practise partners. But Chinese are too boring to be interested in practising real MA.



bakxierboxer said:


> Judging from what the MMA crowd do, it is anything BUT "effective".
> The rules seem to prevent the use of simple basic techniques and natural reactions to some really STUPID "attacks" that are only made in the least bit "useful" by the UNrealistic "rules".


 
I don't think that it is completely useless because at least the training is alive, but everyone is taught the same thing and to me that is just boring. There are many ways to effectively fight if one trains well.


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jun 17, 2007)

QUI-GON said:


> Good question KW. I think they are confusing Kung Fu San Soo with Sanda/San Shou. Oh well...
> As you know KW, SAN SOO is an extremely effective fighting art.


 
Kung Fu San Soo is not a mis-spelling of Gongfu Sanda/Sanshou?


----------



## Tames D (Jun 17, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> Kung Fu San Soo is not a mis-spelling of Gongfu Sanda/Sanshou?


No. KFSS is a Chinese fighting system in it's own right. As far from sport fighting as you can get, in my 30+ years of experience in the art.


----------



## kidswarrior (Jun 17, 2007)

Ditto.


----------



## Yeti (Jun 18, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> Hell, there is more TKD in China than TCMA. What does that tell you?


 
LOL!
There are more TKD schools in my town then there are lawyers! What does THAT tell you!?!?


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jun 18, 2007)

QUI-GON said:


> No. KFSS is a Chinese fighting system in it's own right. As far from sport fighting as you can get, in my 30+ years of experience in the art.


 
There are several versions of Sanda... Are you sure that it isn't one of them? It only means unarmed combat in Chinese. That's rather broad, nee?


----------



## kidswarrior (Jun 18, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> There are several versions of Sanda... Are you sure that it isn't one of them? It only means unarmed combat in Chinese. That's rather broad, nee?



No, Kung Fu San Soo in America is more than the sum of its etymological parts. It's a complete system brought here and taught by Jimmy H Woo (Chin Siu Dek). There are many clips and threads in the CMA section, if you wanted to get a visual representation of Jimmy or the Art (or, could just use Search function).


----------



## bakxierboxer (Jun 18, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> I have come to understand how Chinese people think and so I distrust 99% of them, especially doctors. If given a good opportunity, I strongly believe that at least 75% of Chinese would resort to thievery. And of all of MA teachers that I have met here only one of them is a good man.



Don't confuse the "ways" of people who have been forced to live under Communism with the natural proclivities of a "free" people.
Chinese in America are often "sharp" business-men/dealers, but I would not call them thieves. There are other nationalities that are far worse.



> TCMA, like all MAs, are fading away because combat is no longer a part of our everyday lives (And the ****ing government). This is a world of sports. Most people are satisfied with that. I am not. Hell, there is more TKD in China than TCMA. What does that tell you?


It tells me that is what the government THOUGHT they wanted.
Now, perhaps it is too late to "change back".



> And here I am just trying to find something worth studying... =S


If you look long enough, you may find it yet.
The "wrong attitude" will pretty much guarantee not finding it.
You DO need to be cautious....



> True, I've more or less decided that I don't need to study from anyone to train myself for combat. I have my own ways and theories. I just need practise and practise partners. But Chinese are too boring to be interested in practising real MA.


How old are you and how long have you trained?
In what?


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jun 20, 2007)

bakxierboxer said:


> Don't confuse the "ways" of people who have been forced to live under Communism with the natural proclivities of a "free" people.
> Chinese in America are often "sharp" business-men/dealers, but I would not call them thieves. There are other nationalities that are far worse.
> 
> It tells me that is what the government THOUGHT they wanted.
> ...


 
First of all I should say that I was refering to Mainland Chinese. I've been living here for three years now and not in the tourist places or big cities (Though I have been there as well), and in both the North and South.

Chinese people have a lot of freedom because of a lack of enforcement of laws and too many people everywhere to notice things.

I agree with you that it is too late. It's quite sad really. A lot has been destroyed since I've been here. But not everything in China is a brainchild of the government. Chinese people are brainwashed into having none of their own opinions about anything by society, the media, their family, et cetera. And they are being influenced by Japanese fashion, through Korea, and by foreign corporations. And they are brainwashed yet again by their addiction to computer games. I could go on, but it would be pointless. I know it sounds bad, but what I have said is the truth and I stand by it. That said, not 100% are like this, but the vast majority are.

When I first came here I was anything but negative. Harsh experience has done that. I'm still looking, but becoming ever more doubtful...


----------



## bakxierboxer (Jun 20, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> First of all I should say that I was refering to Mainland Chinese. I've been living here for three years now and not in the tourist places or big cities (Though I have been there as well), and in both the North and South.



Mostly around what areas and/or cities?



> Chinese people have a lot of freedom because of a lack of enforcement of laws and too many people everywhere to notice things.


That sounds "better than it might have been".



> I agree with you that it is too late. It's quite sad really. A lot has been destroyed since I've been here. But not everything in China is a brainchild of the government. Chinese people are brainwashed into having none of their own opinions about anything by society, the media, their family, et cetera. And they are being influenced by Japanese fashion, through Korea, and by foreign corporations. And they are brainwashed yet again by their addiction to computer games. I could go on, but it would be pointless. I know it sounds bad, but what I have said is the truth and I stand by it. That said, not 100% are like this, but the vast majority are.


It often sounds like that in many areas of the world.... fortunately, it does't always "take".



> When I first came here I was anything but negative. Harsh experience has done that. I'm still looking, but becoming ever more doubtful...


??? I hope you're wrong.... because I've given some thought to possibly moving there....


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jun 20, 2007)

I can't even begin to tell you how disappointed I am about China. I came with high expectations. I can tell you from first hand experience that what was once grand is now gone. Whenever I go to a new city the first thing I do is look all over for the Gongfu. I've studied from many different schools since I've been here and quickly realised that they are all out for one (or two) of two things here: Money or face.

I officially studied, Taijiquan, Qinna (From three teachers), and Sanda, but tried much more. I even did Taekwondo and Kendo when there was nothing else and those sucked too! Of the three Qinna teachers one was the only good teacher in China. But he told me himself that his knowledge was very limited. There rest were all liars. Every single one of them. I especially hate the Sanda teacher who led me on for months.

Next week I'm almost certainly moving to Hainan, "The Hawaii of the Orient". I'm crossing my fingers. I've been to Guangzhou, Guilin, Shenzhen, Hongkong, Yangshuo, Liuzhou, Chongqing, Guiyang, Lanzhou, Sichuan, and Shanghai, along with some very remote places. I have scoured the mountain-top temples, isolated villages, urban metropolises, AND CHINESE search engines for anything resembling real TCMA with no luck. By real I mean those that are combat effective. I can only be comforted by the fact that I know more about CMA than 99% of Chinese themselves.

That said, there are good places in China if you can manage to keep yourself from becoming like them and you can get out of the normal expat rut and it may still be possible to re-construct some MA, like WMA was, for example. But until Chinese people try to develop their minds and stop concentrating on the bloody economy, it won't happen.


----------



## Nebuchadnezzar (Jun 20, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> ...It's been proven that kickboxing/grappling can be applied to real combat. The same cannot be said of TCMA. For this I wait.


 
I'm not going to say it.


----------



## kidswarrior (Jun 20, 2007)

Nebuchadnezzar said:


> I'm not going to say it.


 Me neither. :ultracool But I will say that *this thread began because of an article about a soldier in Iraq effectively using and teaching Kung Fu San Soo*, which has to be considered TCMA (Jimmy didn't just make it up when he got to the U.S.), and which I believe is traceable six generations back from Jimmy. Other San Soo guys would be much better with the history than I am (*QUI-GON*, *Sifu John*, *Lauren, *and I know I'm forgetting many more).


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jun 20, 2007)

As a general rule... Any MA that was created in America is hardly a TCMA. Especially one with such an ambiguous name and a founder called Jimmy. I suppose JKD is also a TCMA, then?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 20, 2007)

Sansoo is not sanda/sanshou.

San Soo
http://www.answers.com/topic/san-soo-1

Sanda/Sanshou
http://www.answers.com/topic/sanshou



MaartenSFS said:


> It's been proven that kickboxing/grappling can be applied to real combat. The same cannot be said of TCMA. For this I wait.



I don't know, I used Taiji pretty effectively (and way to much) in my security days and a hospital with a Mental health and detox unit


----------



## Tames D (Jun 20, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> As a general rule... Any MA that was created in America is hardly a TCMA. Especially one with such an ambiguous name and a founder called Jimmy. I suppose JKD is also a TCMA, then?


Maarten, There is no way I can express to you how wrong you are, and how out of line you are. If you want to continue with the negative comments, don't do it here.


----------



## Grenadier (Jun 20, 2007)

_ATTENTION ALL USERS:

_Please, return to the original topic.

-Ronald Shin
-MT Senior Moderator-


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jun 21, 2007)

Xue Sheng said:


> Sansoo is not sanda/sanshou.
> 
> San Soo
> http://www.answers.com/topic/san-soo-1
> ...


 
My meaning by not proven to being effective comes from the fact that most TCMA practitioners do not compete in any fights (Not only MMA fights). And that many practitioners aren't even in good enough physical condition to walk quickly without having to catch their breath because their technique and/or Qi Cultivation Skillz are vastly superior. And I don't like MMA at all. It just looks the same after a while, so I'm not one of "those types".

You know, the best martial artists don't win fights because their technique is better, but because they are in great health. A healthy non-MAist could be better off than an unhealthy MAist.


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jun 21, 2007)

QUI-GON said:


> Maarten, There is no way I can express to you how wrong you are, and how out of line you are. If you want to continue with the negative comments, don't do it here.


 
I think it's fine to disagree. Now I know what San Soo is, or isn't. But I expect you to be able to handle a little criticism. If you can't handle it, perhaps you are the one who is out of line. I have taken some tough criticism in my day for my unconventional thoughts and words. I took it like a man and, despite what others said or thought, continued on my own path in my own way. Anyways, I'll leave it at that. To each his own.


----------



## Tames D (Jun 21, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> I think it's fine to disagree. Now I know what San Soo is, or isn't. But I expect you to be able to handle a little criticism. If you can't handle it, perhaps you are the one who is out of line. I have taken some tough criticism in my day for my unconventional thoughts and words. I took it like a man and, despite what others said or thought, continued on my own path in my own way. Anyways, I'll leave it at that. To each his own.


I don't have a problem with criticism, but in this case you are criticising something that you know nothing about. I call that ignorance. You thought San Soo was a mis-spelling of Sanshou, showing me that you are not knowedgable about the subject. And your remarks about Jimmy Woo were out of line in my opinion, especially since you don't know anything about him or who he is.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jun 21, 2007)

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful.

-Brian R. VanCise
-MartialTalk Super Moderator-
*


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 21, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> My meaning by not proven to being effective comes from the fact that most TCMA practitioners do not compete in any fights (Not only MMA fights). And that many practitioners aren't even in good enough physical condition to walk quickly without having to catch their breath because their technique and/or Qi Cultivation Skillz are vastly superior. And I don't like MMA at all. It just looks the same after a while, so I'm not one of "those types".
> 
> You know, the best martial artists don't win fights because their technique is better, but because they are in great health. A healthy non-MAist could be better off than an unhealthy MAist.


 
Agreed many MMA\Sanda people train harder but you also have a big philosophical difference between TMA training and MMA/Sanda training today. TMA trains not to fight and MMA/Sanda trains to fight. Meaning the goal of most sports based or police military based training systems is to climb into a ring and fight or they full expect to be in a fight either in the street of a combat zone. 

TMA, if trained like it should be or use to be is very effective. But in general, or at least my experience, is you are trained to only use it when absolutely necessary and if at all possible run away. A fight in the street is very serious and not to be taken lightly. Not that the other training takes it lightly, they take it incredibly seriously but they train to fight and defeat the other guy. And there is nothing wrong with that it is just different.  

I guess bottom-line the views of fighting are different between MMA/Sanda and TMA.


----------



## pete (Jun 21, 2007)

i cant place the origin of this, but once heard 'one does not rise to the occasion, but sinks to the level of his training'  

if you don't train endurance, you'll tire. if you don't train your body, it will atrophy. if you don't train your mind, you'll grow complacent.

if you train to always fight, you'll be fighting everything. if you train to always run, you'll be forever running away from something.

its less a matter of what you train, but HOW you train...

pete


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jun 21, 2007)

Xue Sheng said:


> Agreed many MMA\Sanda people train harder but you also have a big philosophical difference between TMA training and MMA/Sanda training today. TMA trains not to fight and MMA/Sanda trains to fight. Meaning the goal of most sports based or police military based training systems is to climb into a ring and fight or they full expect to be in a fight either in the street of a combat zone.
> 
> *TMA, if trained like it should be or used to be is very effective.* But in general, or at least my experience, is you are trained to only use it when absolutely necessary and if at all possible run away. A fight in the street is very serious and not to be taken lightly. Not that the other training takes it lightly, they take it incredibly seriously but they train to fight and defeat the other guy. And there is nothing wrong with that it is just different.
> 
> I guess bottom-line the views of fighting are different between MMA/Sanda and TMA.


 
I completely agree. But, in my opinion, the MMA training method is more effective for learning how to fight (Nowadays), whilst the TCMA approach is more geared towards art. Again, in my opinion, the definition of art, in a martial context, is training a technique until it is the most efficient that it can be. My problem with MMA is that it lacks the imagination and creativity the Ancients had when they thought up all of the techniques that MMA practitioners deem useless. If it was all useless then the techniques would have been discarded long before now. The difference is that they knew what they were used for, whilst we can only guess. Just by playing around we can find many ways to lock someone or find sensitive areas. These are almost completely overlooked in MMA. And I hate boxing shorts. But incompetant TCMA practitioners continue to promote their arts as a martial dance...



pete said:


> i cant place the origin of this, but once heard 'one does not rise to the occasion, but sinks to the level of his training'
> 
> if you don't train endurance, you'll tire. if you don't train your body, it will atrophy. if you don't train your mind, you'll grow complacent.
> 
> ...


 
Absolutely.


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jun 21, 2007)

QUI-GON said:


> I don't have a problem with criticism, but in this case you are criticising something that you know nothing about. I call that ignorance. You thought San Soo was a mis-spelling of Sanshou, showing me that you are not knowedgable about the subject. And your remarks about Jimmy Woo were out of line in my opinion, especially since you don't know anything about him or who he is.


 
Now I know and you'll have to excuse me for not being able to associate a name like Jimmy Woo with an authentic TCMA style. That said it's still good that a soldier was able to use what he learned when it really counted. I wish I could say the same about the time I wasted studying Taekwondo all those years ago. =P


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 22, 2007)

Is there anywhere online we can read the artlicle at all? I've never seen the magazine in question and would love to read it. I'm very interested in learning more about the soldier's experience as would many in my club being soldiers themselves just back from Iraq. 

I've never done any Chinese styles but am fascinated by all styles and arts. I have a friend who fights MMA and comes from a Chinese style background. You can Google him or look on Sherdog - Sami Berik.he's confident but a humble man. A very good advertisement for martial arts I think. 

I've never considered learning anything let alone a martial art pointless, I think that would be very arrogant of me. In my life I've tried all sorts of things and learned a lot. Maybe a certain style or art isn't for you but it's hardly a waste of time learning it. At the very least you've learned it's not for you, it doesn't however make it a 'bad' art. 

There is a trap for unwary martial artists, it's called pride. It's so tempting to think that the art we do is the best, the only one, the original. However there's nothing new under the sun and there's so much to learn from everyone else it is such a waste to argue over who's style is the best or most original. it's why I am posting on here, a Chinese site when my main styles are MMA and TSD. I want to learn more! 

Qui -Gon I'm looking to you to help me here !:asian:


----------



## Tames D (Jun 22, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> Is there anywhere online we can read the artlicle at all? I've never seen the magazine in question and would love to read it. I'm very interested in learning more about the soldier's experience as would many in my club being soldiers themselves just back from Iraq.
> 
> I've never done any Chinese styles but am fascinated by all styles and arts. I have a friend who fights MMA and comes from a Chinese style background. You can Google him or look on Sherdog - Sami Berik.he's confident but a humble man. A very good advertisement for martial arts I think.
> 
> ...


Tez3 - 

I checked their website and couldn't find the article online. You may have better luck if you try. You may be able to contact the magazine for assistance.


----------



## The Master (Jun 22, 2007)

A most interesting thread. It has raised some questions I think I'll ask in a new thread.

For this topic, it is good to know that one's training was effective in the real world. May he not have to ever test it again. :asian:


----------



## eyebeams (Jun 23, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> My meaning is:
> 
> Sanda working in actual combat not= Gongfu working in actual combat because Sanda is a copy of foreign MA.



This is factually incorrect. 

Sanda is a rules set (actually, a group of rules sets) not a martial art. Sport sanda is trained as an independent rules set, but it's not much like kickboxing for a number of reasons:

1) You can't stall in sanda, so people don't pace themselves with jabs and probing shots. The strategy using in boxing and kickboxing, to enter, score and leave is useless in Sanda.

2) Clinchfighting doesn't resemble boxing, kickboxing or Muay Thai, because throws are common scoring techniques.

Sanda's core techniques come from a synthesis of kung fu (including mongolian wrestling and shuai chiao) and *maybe* sambo, because we know sanda was partly based on the standardization that created sambo and there was some cross-country exchange of instructors. It hasn't taken much from Muay Thai because Muay Thai strategies don't work well in sanda matches and vice versa. But kung fu schools compete using the rules set pretty often using whatever mix of techniques they prefer. Tai Chi sanda players usually go for standing sweeps and throws from the clinch.

Sanda is actually related to old style leitai fighting, which has also been standardized in Taiwan.

Sanda does reflect what CMA is about in that there's no ground game. It's CMA's big weakness, but CMA's general strategy is to knock a person down without accompanying them to the ground. This is a terrible idea in an MMA rules set, but it works fine as self-defense -- and better than pulling guard against a stable, standing opponent.

The observation that competitive fighters will do better is inane. This is true in any field. Most kung fu/CMA practice is designed to support a civil, casual practice, and in that sense it works quite well, as long as there's a good amount of progressive sparring.


----------

