# Are 99% of CMA's crap?



## AceHBK (May 15, 2006)

THIS IS NOT A FLAME!!!

LOL..now, 7* made the comment that most CMA is crap.  Do you agree or disagree.  I am not jumping on 7* b/c I thnk after reading some of his posts that he does have a valid point.  Most people stand behind their art 100% but without even considering the bad things about their art.  They defend it blindly without realizing what it lacks.

What do you feel about CMA's and what is it lacking?  Do you feel that instructors, students, etc has turned it into more of a show than a useful fighting art?  Maybe the westernization of it had detoriated much of it?
 What do you think the CMA community needs to work on?

Thanks to 7* for making that comment which in turn made me think alot and stop following so blindly as I use too.


----------



## Flying Crane (May 15, 2006)

Like all arts, many people do it poorly and it is crap. 

Like all arts, those who do it well are fierce and not to be trifled with.

Like all arts, probably there are more who do it poorly, and fewer who do it well.


----------



## Andrew Green (May 15, 2006)

I think that there are more practitioners believing they can become invincible warriors without hard sparring or anything, becasue that's what the kung fu movie told them they could then anything else.

I think that there are a good number of instructors that realise the best way to keep the doors open is to feed that wish.

99% might be a bit of a overstatement though, but a lot of the martial arts being practiced in general make some really nutty claims about what they do.

I think that after a generation or two that's what you get...


----------



## yipman_sifu (May 15, 2006)

AceHBK said:
			
		

> THIS IS NOT A FLAME!!!
> 
> LOL..now, 7* made the comment that most CMA is crap. Do you agree or disagree. I am not jumping on 7* b/c I thnk after reading some of his posts that he does have a valid point. Most people stand behind their art 100% but without even considering the bad things about their art. They defend it blindly without realizing what it lacks.
> 
> ...


 
The Chinese government prohibited all the culture stuff including Martial arts during the Mao era. After culture was brought back, Wushu was back as a show stuff. The effectivness went away for the sake of the beauty. 7* made this comment because he saw how other arts defeated CMA. Come on now friends. We only see silly examples performing CMA against other arts sponsoring the video we are watching. Do you expect that those other Martial arts schools will show how they lose. No way. CMA never lacked techniques, it is the deepest and the richest in concepts and application. The problem is in the Chinese community, let me tell you this.

Last year I was in HK. I wanted to visit any shop selling martial arts stuff. It appeared to me that no one knows where shops selling these stuff are located. I was stunned and realized that people cares only cares about their living and not caring about this heritage. After asking many people and searching. I found a shop located inside an old building with dirty steps and an old elevator. When I reached the floor I was amazed again. There was a small room condensed with stuffs and catalogs. All the showed stuff are cheap and of bad quality, above that they were proud of sponsoring tickets for attending K1 matches!!!!.What the hell is this?. Do you beleive that CMA will be excellent if it's people the Chinese are not taking the minimum care of it, above that they sponsor tickets for MMA competitons which contradicts with the CMA values that states "fight only if neccessary".
If you go to Japan. You will realize how Karate and Judo schools are well organized and how they are selling expensive Katanas with quality.

In Beijing. I asked the hotel lady about a martial arts shop. Upon searching she could find a single shop located in a shopping mall, can you beleive this!, in Beijing one shop .
I beleive that Chinese are more concerned about business and economy, martial arts became a source of entertainment for tourists who claps for flips and showy demonstrations. In the Three Kingdoms era. 90% of the commom folk were excellent fighters, not good, excellent. The prove comes as general Zhang Fei was a butcher who owned a farm, and Sun Jian was a merchant's son. Those were excellent fighters although they hadn't that much training, so what about real fighters at that time like Zhao Yun, Guan Yu, and of course Lu Bu:supcool:, just imagine who legendary they were .


----------



## The MMA kid! (May 15, 2006)

yipman_sifu said:
			
		

> In the Three Kingdoms era. 90% of the commom folk were excellent fighters, not good, excellent.


 
I have had my fill of ridiculous statistics for one day...

As I said before, many will argue to death that in style vs. style,  "it is the fighter that makes the win in the fight, not the art"

but try this on for size, *why is it that the same Martial arts consistently dominate others throughout time?* surely something more than "the fighter" is making a difference here.

*why haven't we seen many CMAist in the UFC/Pride/K1 arenas?*

you may answer, "it was not meant for prize fighting, it was only meant for self defense"

does this mean that CMA was created only to subdue unskilled/untrained attackers??


----------



## AceHBK (May 15, 2006)

The MMA kid! said:
			
		

> *why haven't we seen many CMAist in the UFC/Pride/K1 arenas?*


 
I will say as many others, rules of course.  Those events are geared more towards the grappler/wrestler.

I see the point you are trying to make but you have to admit with rules things change.  

If you try to use this argument then I shoulda be able to say that if u put a MMA in a boxing ring with a boxer then they should be able to hold their own and win.  Obviously you would disagree with that statement b/c of....rules.


----------



## 7starmantis (May 15, 2006)

AceHBK said:
			
		

> THIS IS NOT A FLAME!!!
> 
> LOL..now, 7* made the comment that most CMA is crap.  Do you agree or disagree.  I am not jumping on 7* b/c I thnk after reading some of his posts that he does have a valid point.  Most people stand behind their art 100% but without even considering the bad things about their art.  They defend it blindly without realizing what it lacks.
> 
> ...


 lol I understand this is not a flame, no problem. Let me clarify my position here. I dont neccessarily think most CMA systems are crap, but that those teaching them and many who study them are just either crazy, or miserably mislead. 

Now, as to your questions, I'll offer my own personal opinions.

1.) I think what is lacking is serious skilled teachers. Next to that is people willing to do what it takes to become truly skilled in CMA, which I think leads to unskilled, mislead teachers. Next is serious motives for studying CMA. Too many people watch jackie and want to learn to move like him. Too many people watch old kung fu movies and are unable to distinguish between truth and make believe. These people then come into the kung fu school and want to learn the "secrets" to flying around shooting lighting balls and dont want to train. Next you have those who train hard, practice on their own, who are sriously seeking to be skilled practitioners but are just mislead by either the same type of people teaching them or by simply not knowing what is worth training and what is not. Finding seriusly skilled CMA teachers who understand more than surface movements and have the skill to apply these principles to fighting and can and will actually teach that is a rare thing. 

2.) I think the "westernization" of it actually did help to spread this issue, but we can't blame that and expect a change. I think the "westernized" students are the major contributors. Then these "students" become "teachers"...yikes.

3.) I think the CMA community needs to put aside their massive egos, swallow their obese pride complexes and start training. I have no problem with people learning CMA forms and such but they shouldn't pass themselves off as fighters. I think years back these false fighters would have been exposed but in today's society its easy for someone to claim skill and never prove it. Thats ok though, it makes my training that much more effective and real. Its just sad that so many people are mislead by these teachers and schools. Too many people are overconcerned with lineage and the transcription of ancient transcripts to get out and train hard. Too many people are unwilling to go through the pain, sweat, tears, and blood it takes.....way too few. And on that note, way too few are patient enough to spend the time it takes to really understand nad learn things. It takes years to be a competent fighter, you can't shorten it to months and expect to have the same grasp of the concepts and principles.

Ok, off my soapbox now....

7sm


----------



## Flying Crane (May 15, 2006)

The MMA kid! said:
			
		

> *why haven't we seen many CMAist in the UFC/Pride/K1 arenas?*


 
Probably for many reasons.  We can only speculate.  But if someone doesnt show up for a fight/competition of some type, they cannot be judged in either a positive or negative way, with regard to that tournament.  They didn't show up, and didn't show their stuff, that is ALL we know.

Maybe they were scared, maybe they can't fight, or maybe they just aren't interested in the competition and don't see the point.  Maybe they feel the best way to win a fight is to not be there when the fight happens.  But we cannot judge that based only on the fact that they didn't show up for a tournament.

The winner of a tournament is only the best out of those who bothered to show up that day.  Agaist those who did not show up, he cannot be judged as better or worse.  It is pure speculation.  Outside the doors of the competition, it means nothing.

World Championship titles are nonsense, because the winner didn't compete against the world.  He only competed against, and bested, those who showed up that day.  Let's keep it in perspective, and abandon the rediculous fantasy that the UFC/Pride/K1 stuff is the _only_ measure of a competent fighter.


----------



## AceHBK (May 15, 2006)

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> Probably for many reasons. We can only speculate. But if someone doesnt show up for a fight/competition of some type, they cannot be judged in either a positive or negative way, with regard to that tournament. They didn't show up, and didn't show their stuff, that is ALL we know.
> 
> Maybe they were scared, maybe they can't fight, or maybe they just aren't interested in the competition and don't see the point. Maybe they feel the best way to win a fight is to not be there when the fight happens. But we cannot judge that based only on the fact that they didn't show up for a tournament.
> 
> ...


 
Couldnt have said it any better.


----------



## Andrew Green (May 15, 2006)

yipman_sifu said:
			
		

> In the Three Kingdoms era. 90% of the commom folk were excellent fighters, not good, excellent. The prove comes as general Zhang Fei was a butcher who owned a farm, and Sun Jian was a merchant's son. Those were excellent fighters although they hadn't that much training, so what about real fighters at that time like Zhao Yun, Guan Yu, and of course Lu Bu:supcool:, just imagine who legendary they were .



Legends and oral history are not reliable sources of information.  Nor are two examples representative of the entire population at that time...


----------



## The MMA kid! (May 15, 2006)

my point exactly...


----------



## mantis (May 15, 2006)

to the original question...
it's not lacking anything!
it is just lacking someone with a western mindset to go challenge bullies with it so it becomes popular in the west.

we're talking about a martial art that was born more than a thousand years ago.  it's been through wars, and it's been through demonstrations.
in fact, CMA's are taught to special forces in more than one country including germany's anti-terrorism police (specifically wing chun)
i dont think it's smart to argue that it's 99% worthless. that just doesnt make sense about any system, not only CMA's.  

why dont we see it in UFC? that's a funny question.  why would you want to see a traditional self defense or a fighting art in there?! that's like against everything asian cultures stand for, where CMA comes from. 

Besides, do not judge ANYTHING in this world just because you see it, or not see it on TV.  There's a whole load of things  you guys have no idea about outside this country!


----------



## dmax999 (May 15, 2006)

mantis said:
			
		

> why dont we see it in UFC? that's a funny question. why would you want to see a traditional self defense or a fighting art in there?! that's like against everything asian cultures stand for, where CMA comes from.


I'll have to disagree with this point. All the really good CMA teachers always went around fighting anyone they could. Countless stories of them starting fight after fight in their youth for no reason other then to fight.

As for one MA always dominating, which one was being refered to? Not a single MA dominates MMA contests today (Hence the [Mixed]MA). Go back twenty years and not a single grappling art dominated MA contests in the US.


----------



## 7starmantis (May 15, 2006)

dmax999 said:
			
		

> I'll have to disagree with this point. All the really good CMA teachers always went around fighting anyone they could. Countless stories of them starting fight after fight in their youth for no reason other then to fight.


Thats misinformation really. "really good CMA teachers" is a very subjective term.



			
				dmax999 said:
			
		

> As for one MA always dominating, which one was being refered to? Not a single MA dominates MMA contests today (Hence the [Mixed]MA). Go back twenty years and not a single grappling art dominated MA contests in the US.


Your still talking contests not pure self defense which is what "most" CMAs are about.

7sm


----------



## The MMA kid! (May 15, 2006)

dmax999 said:
			
		

> I'll have to disagree with this point. All the really good CMA teachers always went around fighting anyone they could. Countless stories of them starting fight after fight in their youth for no reason other then to fight.
> 
> As for one MA always dominating, which one was being refered to? Not a single MA dominates MMA contests today (Hence the [Mixed]MA). Go back twenty years and not a single grappling art dominated MA contests in the US.


 
what main arts are usually mixed?

western boxing
Thai boxing
Brazilian Jiu Jitsu.

*no Wushu,*
* no Wing Chun,*
*  no Mantis kung fu.*

why? why not mix Wing chun with grappling and go into the MMA ring?

please don't go into the "rules" debate on how things that a Wing chun master would do to a grappler. elbows to the spine? I don't think so.

*and how does UFC/Pride favor grapplers?* becuase it allows grappling maybe???:idunno: 

*okay, let's say it does favor the grappler, then why don't we see CMA in K1 events?*
IMHO, *San Shou* is the most fight applicable CMA there is.


----------



## The MMA kid! (May 15, 2006)

adressing the "mostly for _self defense_" argument, does this mean that CMA is only for defending yourself against an untrained/unskilled attacker??

usually, if someone is a bully, they are going to be pretty confident in their fighting skill, not everyone throws a sloppy haymaker...


----------



## Tony (May 16, 2006)

Its not the Art, but how skilled the individual is! I think there are useful techniques in every art, no matter where it comes from! Some things may not work but because of our syllabuses we have to learn them and get an all rounded knowledge of concepts.

I guess it depends how you apply what you have learnt and know what will and won't work.


----------



## 7starmantis (May 16, 2006)

The MMA kid! said:
			
		

> what main arts are usually mixed?
> 
> western boxing
> Thai boxing
> ...


Who knows, but if "the ring" is your ultimate test of an effective self defense system I think you are missing a big piece of the puzzle. 



			
				The MMA kid! said:
			
		

> please don't go into the "rules" debate on how things that a Wing chun master would do to a grappler. elbows to the spine? I don't think so.


Well, I agree with you for the most part, but if elbows to the spine were so nonimportant why does the UFC forbid them?


			
				UFC Rules said:
			
		

> *Fouls:*http://www.ufc.tv/index.cfm?fa=LearnUFC.Rules#top
> 1.   Butting with the head.
> 2.   Eye gouging of any kind.
> 3.   Biting.
> ...


Those rules certainly desribe a sport and not a true self defense fighting situation. I think its a big problem that people see UFC type MMA events and can't distinguish between sport and real life....kind of like the people who watch kung fu movies and can't distinguish truth from make believe.



			
				The MMA kid! said:
			
		

> *and how does UFC/Pride favor grapplers?* becuase it allows grappling maybe???:idunno:


See rules listed above. 



			
				The MMA kid! said:
			
		

> *okay, let's say it does favor the grappler, then why don't we see CMA in K1 events?*
> IMHO, *San Shou* is the most fight applicable CMA there is.


The fact that we dont see CMA fighters in K1 proves to you CMA's are not effective? Thats a huge assumption to make, but your welcome to it.

7sm


----------



## 7starmantis (May 16, 2006)

The MMA kid! said:
			
		

> adressing the "mostly for _self defense_" argument, does this mean that CMA is only for defending yourself against an untrained/unskilled attacker??
> 
> usually, if someone is a bully, they are going to be pretty confident in their fighting skill, not everyone throws a sloppy haymaker...


Not at all. It simply means the fighting isn't geared towards good sportsmanship and allowing figihters to have long illustrius careers. Its a fight for your life if you must fight, those types of situations are not condusive to continued career fighting. Also, your assuming that all self defense situations are against untrained/unskilled attackers. This was certainly not the case when many of these CMA systems were created and developed. Mantis for one was designed specifically to comabt those who are skilled fighters. Its basically a difference in intent. My intent if I have to fight is to make my attacker unable to continue threatening me as quickly as possible by whatever means needed. Thats not sport, thats fighting for your life and training for that is different than training for sport fighting. I actually compete in MMA events from time to time, not many lately and probably not many more at all, but its hard to train to "flip the switch" of trying to kill someone for attacking you and trying to win a victory over someone that might even go to the judges for a decision. Small joint manipulation and groin attacks are a huge part of my fighting, how good will I be if I avoid those and try to fight someone who trains specifically for that rule set?

In our training a "sloppy haymaker" is almost harder to defend against sometimes than a precise jab or cross. 

7sm


----------



## Henderson (May 16, 2006)

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> Let's keep it in perspective, and *abandon the rediculous fantasy that the UFC/Pride/K1 stuff is the only measure of a competent fighter.*


 
Thanks, Crane!  Couldn't have said it better myself.


----------



## mantis (May 16, 2006)

okay
let's assume that the utlimate goal of all martial arts in the world since 4000 years ago was to get to the UFC and K1 rings in the year 2006.  

7starmantis i want to ask you a question what do you think the reaction of your sifu and sigung to you participating in these tournaments?

I am just using you as an example of a person learned under an 'authentic' family.


----------



## mantis (May 16, 2006)

Henderson said:
			
		

> Thanks, Crane!  Couldn't have said it better myself.


it's like saying if you do not know how to play games on PC then you cannot be a good computer scientist!


----------



## AceHBK (May 16, 2006)

The problem is that some MMA practictioners feel that MMA is the end all to be all in terms of fighting.  They are not interested in learning art, they are interested in learning how to fight.  There is a difference.

Traditional CMA's take time to learn and you need a good instructor.  Too many today want to learn how to fight (rather than defend themselves) and be a good fighter in the shortest amount of time.  Is there anything wrong with that?  No, but dont bash CMA's b/c of your choice.

When it comes to CMA's, it was about internal and extermal.  You had to learn how to first heal before you could learn how to injure.  It is something that is lifelong and not just a sport for a few years.

It can easily be said that MMA is good for one on one fighting but when it comes to multiple attackers then you are outta luck.  Does that mean since you can win one on one but cant win in a attack on the street against 2 or 3 attacker you suck? Of course not.

Just b/c someone doesnt get into a ring doesnt mean they are not good.  How you act in a life or death situation and how you act in a sport are totally different.  Now for myself I get nothing from tournaments and what not b/c I feel no need to prove things to someone else to show how vaid I and my technique are.  I rather spend my life learning and art and never once needing to use it than doing it for sports sake.  Now everyone doesnt think like that and I understand.  I love watching MMA anytime I get the chance and I dont trash it just b/c it doesnt have the same beliefs that I have when it comes to my art.


----------



## AceHBK (May 16, 2006)

Flying Crane and 7* have made some great points.


----------



## Flying Crane (May 16, 2006)

AceHBK said:
			
		

> The problem is that some MMA practictioners feel that MMA is the end all to be all in terms of fighting.


 
I'd like to add to this that it gets to be a bit tiresome when every thread gets hijacked and turned into the same old debate over which is better, MMA/UFC style competitions, vs. Traditional Martial Arts.  I understood the intention of this thread to be a discussion of quality in Chinese martial arts, what is good, what is poor, what might be done better, etc.  But here we are, taking another detour down the same old highway of UFC debate.  I wish some people could just control their apparently compulsive urge to always have to start this kind of argument.  It just detracts from the original intention of the thread and it gets to be a drag.

OK, i'm off my soapbox now.  thanks for putting up.


----------



## mantis (May 16, 2006)

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> I'd like to add to this that it gets to be a bit tiresome when every thread gets hijacked and turned into the same old debate over which is better, MMA/UFC style competitions, vs. Traditional Martial Arts. I understood the intention of this thread to be a discussion of quality in Chinese martial arts, what is good, what is poor, what might be done better, etc. But here we are, taking another detour down the same old highway of UFC debate. I wish some people could just control their apparently compulsive urge to always have to start this kind of argument. It just detracts from the original intention of the thread and it gets to be a drag.
> 
> OK, i'm off my soapbox now.  thanks for putting up.


you are correct.  someone  has to steer this some other direction.  

btw, i am tired of people calling computers a "soapbox".  you guys are hurting my feelings. i work with soapboxes, i mean computers!!


----------



## AceHBK (May 16, 2006)

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> I'd like to add to this that it gets to be a bit tiresome when every thread gets hijacked and turned into the same old debate over which is better, MMA/UFC style competitions, vs. Traditional Martial Arts. I understood the intention of this thread to be a discussion of quality in Chinese martial arts, what is good, what is poor, what might be done better, etc. But here we are, taking another detour down the same old highway of UFC debate. I wish some people could just control their apparently compulsive urge to always have to start this kind of argument. It just detracts from the original intention of the thread and it gets to be a drag.
> 
> OK, i'm off my soapbox now. thanks for putting up.


 
You are correct it did steer off the intended path.

It seems that CMA's have been around the longest (please correct me if I am wrong) but don't get the same amount of respect anymore like they use too.

I know many people say that you have to "find a good school" but for many newbie's how are they to know a good school/teacher from a bad one?  I know if i went out right now to find a good school/teacher I would have no idea to tell.  If you are not familiar with techniques how can someone know the difference between good and bad?

But to a certain extent it is b/c of UFC's and such that many TMA's are referred to as being not good b/c many never really see it in action.  I know i have to go to google video to search and search to find some worthy clips.


----------



## Flying Crane (May 16, 2006)

AceHBK said:
			
		

> I know many people say that you have to "find a good school" but for many newbie's how are they to know a good school/teacher from a bad one? I know if i went out right now to find a good school/teacher I would have no idea to tell. If you are not familiar with techniques how can someone know the difference between good and bad?


 
Good point, it can be hard to know, and often a good school is the exact opposite of what we in the Western culture tend to think a good school should be.  A while back I posted some thoughts and a description of this, maybe I can find that thread again, it might be relevant here...


----------



## Andrew Green (May 16, 2006)

A "good school" is one that looks very much like my own, or at least how I percieve my own.  The more it differs from the perception of my own, the worse it is.

...  I think that's about what people usually mean by "Good school"


----------



## Flying Crane (May 16, 2006)

OK, here is the link to the discussion about, coincidentally enough, what makes a good kung fu school.  I posted thoughts and descriptions of what a _Traditional_ kung fu school might be like, but I will be the first to admit, especially for Westerners, that this can be a frustrating experience.  I think not everyone can be successful in a Traditional type kung fu school.  It assumes that the student has a tremendous amount of drive to pursue training, especially with regards to figuring out how to really use the material, with minimal guidance from the instructor.  For beginners, this can be disasterous.

http://martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=30621


----------



## AceHBK (May 16, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> 1.) I think what is lacking is serious skilled teachers. Next to that is people willing to do what it takes to become truly skilled in CMA, which I think leads to unskilled, mislead teachers. Next is serious motives for studying CMA. Too many people watch jackie and want to learn to move like him. Too many people watch old kung fu movies and are unable to distinguish between truth and make believe. These people then come into the kung fu school and want to learn the "secrets" to flying around shooting lighting balls and dont want to train. Next you have those who train hard, practice on their own, who are sriously seeking to be skilled practitioners but are just mislead by either the same type of people teaching them or by simply not knowing what is worth training and what is not. Finding seriusly skilled CMA teachers who understand more than surface movements and have the skill to apply these principles to fighting and can and will actually teach that is a rare thing.


 
*holds head in shame*  I am one of the victims of kung fu theatre.  But I will say I realized the difference between fantasy and reality and realized the art and movements and wanted to learn and knew that it does take a looooong time to become good.  There needs to be some standard in making sure there are quality instructors teaching people.



> 2.) I think the "westernization" of it actually did help to spread this issue, but we can't blame that and expect a change. I think the "westernized" students are the major contributors. Then these "students" become "teachers"...yikes.


 
I think this is a big problem as well.  But then to those westerners who are good teachers they get hurt by this b/c then people say, "hey your not Chinese so how can you be good at CMA's?"  It becomes then a double edged sword.



> 3.) I think the CMA community needs to put aside their massive egos, swallow their obese pride complexes and start training. I have no problem with people learning CMA forms and such but they shouldn't pass themselves off as fighters. I think years back these false fighters would have been exposed but in today's society its easy for someone to claim skill and never prove it. Thats ok though, it makes my training that much more effective and real. Its just sad that so many people are mislead by these teachers and schools. Too many people are overconcerned with lineage and the transcription of ancient transcripts to get out and train hard. Too many people are unwilling to go through the pain, sweat, tears, and blood it takes.....way too few. And on that note, way too few are patient enough to spend the time it takes to really understand nad learn things. It takes years to be a competent fighter, you can't shorten it to months and expect to have the same grasp of the concepts and principles.
> 
> 7sm


 
I agree with this whole heartedly/  Politics plays WAY too much of a role in CMA's today.  It is less about the art and strengthing it and is more about who lays claims to what.


----------



## Flying Crane (May 16, 2006)

OK, I've got some thoughts on how people in Traditional Chinese arts ought to train.

First, basics are important.  Stance work, foot work, how to punch, kick, and do other strikes properly, blocking, evading, etc.  This is the stuff that everything else is built upon.  This is the foundation.  If this stuff is weak, all the rest will be weak.  Don't build a house on a foundation made of sand.

Second, forms are important.  Forms teach how to link basics into useful combinations on a theoretical level.  This is where the bulk of the material is taught, that makes up the system.  This is where the nuances and flavor of the system is most apparent.  This is where Mantis looks like Mantis, Monkey looks like Monkey, Tiger looks like Tiger, Crane looks like Crane, etc.

Third, power and conditioning should be developed thru striking.  This can include arm-against-arm, heavy bags, makiwara, sand bags, wooden dummy, etc.  These exercises harden and condition the striking and blocking surfaces of the body, and develop the ability to strike with decisive power.  Tools like the Wood Dummy also develop movement, positioning, angles, and to some degree, useage of techniques.

Fourth, useage of the material needs to be developed.  This can be done in many ways.  People need to have training partners to work with, where they take the material from the basics and forms, and apply it against realistic attacks.  Partnering should run the full range of cooperative (when first learning how to use the technique) to completely uncooperative (to develope the ability to use the technique realistically, in an unpredictable situation).  There are many ways to develope this kind of training drill, limited only by the imagination.  Most systems also have traditional drills that are designed to develop this skill, such as Chi Sau in Wing Chun.

Some type of free sparring should also be used to remove any cooperation, and develop skills that can be used creatively, and in an uncooperative situation.  The problem is that people can get too used to sparring and training with people from their own school, and within their own style.  It is good to get experience training with, and sparring against those from other styles.  I don't think this needs to be in the form of a tournment.  What would be best, in my opinion, is to develop friendships with other schools, or individual who train different arts, and spend time working techniques, and sparring, with these people.  It shouldn't be competitive, but rather in the spirit of everyone learning and growing.

I believe that the problem most people encounter is with focusing too heavily or exclusively on one or two aspects of training, and not enough on the others.  To be a well trained CMA person, one needs to train all aspects, so they understand their art on a technical and theoretical level, and can also realistically utilize the material that their art holds.

Any thoughts are welcome.


----------



## 7starmantis (May 16, 2006)

mantis said:
			
		

> 7starmantis i want to ask you a question what do you think the reaction of your sifu and sigung to you participating in these tournaments?


 I know, they helped me train for them. In fact, Sigung took one of our students in and helped train him (he wanted to go professional) and even set up fights for him and took him to events. He invited other schools in the area to come fight and such. Sigung was the east coast full contact champion in the 60's before even starting Kung Fu. I think its a misconception that "traditional" or "authentic" kung fu must avoid fighting at all costs, I mean thats what we train to do, fight. When we begin speaking about what CMA communities need to do more of, I think one of those things is fight. I understand there are those who learn it for the forms, health, art of it; but they can't (or shouldn't) pass themselves off as skilled fighters, they simply are not. There is a huge difference in those two training methods and intents. Thats one of the reasons we started a testing schedeul for students who have passed black level who are interested in becoming "disciples" of the style and want to pursue all aspects of it, heavly the fighting. There is a lack of truly skilled mantis fighters and we want to perserve that skill and further it through the years.

I think most CMAs would be wise to do something similar, just far to few people are willing to go through what it takes....its hard and most people dont get through it.

7sm


----------



## mantis (May 16, 2006)

i think these are really great recommendations but how much time is that?
how many years, and how many hours a day/week to accomplish all this? (on average)


----------



## Flying Crane (May 16, 2006)

mantis said:
			
		

> i think these are really great recommendations but how much time is that?
> how many years, and how many hours a day/week to accomplish all this? (on average)


\

You cannot put a number on it.  It is constant, and forever.  As much time as you have, and that you are willing and eager to dedicate to it is enough, but never enough.  There is always room for more, but reality often gets in the way.  There is no end-goal, only a road.  Enjoy the journey.


----------



## mantis (May 16, 2006)

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> \
> 
> You cannot put a number on it. It is constant, and forever. As much time as you have, and that you are willing and eager to dedicate to it is enough, but never enough. There is always room for more, but reality often gets in the way. There is no end-goal, only a road. Enjoy the journey.


absolutely
which leads us to the next point about students. students do not spend much time practicing outside of the school or class time

it's like going to college, if you only attend lectures you will not do good. you have to go to the library, to the lab, and you have to spend some time studying on your own.

this is necessary whether you want to spend 1 year, or 25 years practicing KF. i think!


----------



## Flying Crane (May 16, 2006)

mantis said:
			
		

> absolutely
> which leads us to the next point about students. students do not spend much time practicing outside of the school or class time
> 
> it's like going to college, if you only attend lectures you will not do good. you have to go to the library, to the lab, and you have to spend some time studying on your own.
> ...


 
In my opinion, you are 100% correct.


----------



## 7starmantis (May 18, 2006)

Yes and thats one of the main problems in the CMA community. Too many people are unwilling to go to the lab, library, etc and do the hard work it takes to really gain the skill. The "fast food" mentality has taken over and now many of these people who were unwilling to do the work are now teaching. That makes for a bad situation all around.

7sm


----------



## mantis (May 18, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> Yes and thats one of the main problems in the CMA community. Too many people are unwilling to go to the lab, library, etc and do the hard work it takes to really gain the skill. The "fast food" mentality has taken over and now many of these people who were unwilling to do the work are now teaching. That makes for a bad situation all around.
> 
> 7sm


that's why i was asking the stupid question of "how long would that take".  i wish i could practice outside of school, but i just do not have time at all.  I watch KF movies though, so that counts towards my lab hours 

I personally tend to think if i cannot have time now to practice then  i'll practice when i get to the next belt and so on.  This is a terribly bad habit.  I always end up piling things up and never get the chance to work on them.


----------



## AceHBK (May 18, 2006)

mantis said:
			
		

> that's why i was asking the stupid question of "how long would that take". i wish i could practice outside of school, but i just do not have time at all. *I watch KF movies though, so that counts towards my lab hours *


 
Same here!!  I know it has to count for something.  
I just saw the Jet Li movie _Fearless_.  I can't stop watching it!!!!

I also spend a lot of time reading on the net and going to google video to see different clips.
To me it is a lifetime commitment and free time is spent studying.  Now if I could find a way to train with someone as serious as I am or find a school that is really serious.



> I personally tend to think if i cannot have time now to practice then i'll practice when i get to the next belt and so on. This is a terribly bad habit. I always end up piling things up and never get the chance to work on them.


 
I think this happens to many of us, your not alone.

Reading this thread I wish I was close to some of you guys b/c it is really a pleasure to see others have the same amount of passion about the art and want to do more with it and are serious with it.


----------



## AceHBK (May 18, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> Yes and thats one of the main problems in the CMA community. Too many people are unwilling to go to the lab, library, etc and do the hard work it takes to really gain the skill. The "fast food" mentality has taken over and now many of these people who were unwilling to do the work are now teaching. That makes for a bad situation all around.
> 
> 7sm


 
You are correct along with Flying crane and mantis.

I think at some point the CMA community must take responsibility to get CMA's back to what they use to be.  The almighty dollar and students with just the "how long will it take for me to beat up a group of men" mentality has ruined MA in general.


----------



## mantis (May 18, 2006)

AceHBK said:
			
		

> I also spend a lot of time reading on the net and going to google video to see different clips.


that's actually time well-spent.  
it's very important to read up on your art and the lineage and who did what and who added what value to your family's art.  We had the second annual CMA tournament this year and students from my school earned a bunch of medals, but unfortunately NONE of them knew what is our lineage, and most of them did not even know who our master is.  That's why my school goes over the lineage like every week! ... sad dude!


----------



## Rook (May 18, 2006)

I think the main problem CMAs seem to have today is the training.  

Traditional Chinese masters were known for great physical strength and tremendous endurance.  Some of this may well be exaduration, but the CMA community seems to have the greatest shortage of people in good physical condition of any of the martial arts communities.  

"Back in the day" CMA masters fought early and often - today's CMA people often don't spar very much or very hard and rarely against competent non-CMA stylists.  BJJ and Kyokushin karate frequently challenge and recieve challenges from other martial arts and constantly train in being able to beat their representatives.  Today's CMAists rarely do.


----------



## Hand Sword (May 19, 2006)

It's not the styles or systems, it's the practitioner. If one puts in the work, effort, time, and proper focus, effectiveness won't be a problem. I seem to find, judging from pop culture, that the arts have become equivalent to the 80's soccer mom. We now have the culture of "Karate" mom's. Meaning the arts are focussed for kids and families, meaning fun, not real self defense. Just look at the advertisements for movies, commercials etc..


----------

