# Is High Level Skill Still Possible



## Xue Sheng (Oct 10, 2008)

I hope so but I am not sure and this applies to any MA I just put it in CMA because I am a CMA guy and the basis of this is Chen Fa Ke who is most certainly CMA.

I was recently reading and old article in Tai Chi Magazine by Peter Wu Shizeng about Chen Fa Ke  (1887-1957) and his level of skill. Chan Fa Ke  was the Chen Family member that designed Chen Xinjia Yilu and Erlu. The article was also discussing if it was possible for anyone today to reach that same level of skill in Chinese Martial Arts. And the article pretty much left me with the thought that the author does not think so.

He based this on 
1. Inheriting the Real Martial Art
2. Hard Training
3. Life-Long Pursuit
4. Extraordinary Strength
5. Noble Character

And it seems to me that based on number 1 and 2 it may not be possible in many CMA styles today if you are comparing it to Chen Fa Ke. 

As far as &#8220;Inheriting the Real Martial Art&#8221; goes Chen Fa Ke was a member of the Chen family therefore taught by the Chen family in Chen Village. One of his Teachers was his father Chen Yanxi who was allegedly a highly skilled martial artist in Chen style Taijiquan.

As for &#8220;Hard Training&#8221; I am not sure anyone today has this kind of time but apparently doing the form 100 times a day was not out of the question at the time Chen Fa Ke was learning Chen style but apparently the normal amount was 60 times a day. And later when he was teaching he wanted his students to do the form at least 20 times a day. (One of his last living students is Feng Zhi Qiang)

&#8220;Life-Long Pursuit&#8221; It appears that Chen Fa Ke never stopped training and was never satisfied with his level of skill and even in old age was quite capable of doing all the forms that he learned and designed. But I do honestly believe there are people in the world trained CMA and MA that are much the same in this aspect

&#8220;Extraordinary Strength&#8221; Chen Fa Ke was very good at fajing and was quite capable of using it against larger opponents and sending them flying back rather far. He is also on record as having lifted a 220 lbs man vertically off the ground demonstrating Tuishou. Also Chen Yao (1841-1926) had a pair of Jain which weighted about 18 pounds that no one else at Chen Village trained with since they were too heavy, however it was Chen Fa Ke seemed to like training with them. 
This to I believe is possible to achieve today, possibly not Chen Fa Ke&#8217;s skill at Fajing but there are certainly people alive that are equally as strong or stronger.

&#8220;Noble Character&#8221; Also Chen Fa Ke was apparently rather humble and not given to putting others down. This to is also still around today.

It is the first 2 that have me wondering &#8220;Inheriting the Real Martial Art&#8221; and &#8220;Hard Training&#8221;
Certainly in order to inherit the real martial art you have to have a teacher that has inherited it as well. I do think this too is possible today. Maybe not so much in some styles but I do believe there are other styles that have highly skilled and knowledgeable teachers. 

Then it is the second one &#8220;Hard Training&#8221; that is the issue and again if you are using people like Chen Fa Ke as your baseline it is likely you will never have anyone of his level since very few people today have the time to train 8 to 15 hours a day and I am guessing based on doing forms 60 to 100 times a day. But can we train hard enough today to reach high level skill as compared to those of the not to distant past.

Tung Ying Chieh (Yang style) did say that it was possible to reach high level skill if you train less per day or see your sifu less as long as you were serious, it will just take longer. If this is the case then again using Chen Fa Ke as a baseline I am not sure someone doing a form 3 or 10 times a day is going to get them to his level in my lifetime but I still do  not think we should not try.

What does everyone else think about this?


----------



## JadecloudAlchemist (Oct 10, 2008)

Looking at life some time ago and now a days it is obvious that the 5 would be hard to follow. I think it is possible and only possible by the individual will to make it possible.

We are not all lucky enough to grow up in Chen village or may not have the brillant mind to create a new form but we may be able to be the best we can be.


----------



## ggg214 (Oct 11, 2008)

i think there is another factor which is most important: talent!
many teachers i have met have the same understanding: CMA practitioners, if they want to reach some level, need talent. 
it's easy to find one or two characters mentioned in Xue Sheng's post in a person. but it's hard to find one person have the whole characters plus talent. really hard.


----------



## clfsean (Oct 11, 2008)

I think it's possible to encompass a couple or multiple of those ideas, but I don't believe it's possible to do all of them. The world & environment doesn't allow for it. It's even impossible to withdraw from the world completely enough to focus on it. The world is way to small and connected now to do it.

Pieces... yep. Alll of it... don't believe so.


----------



## grydth (Oct 11, 2008)

It is unlikely that our society will produce such high levels of proficiency. One factor is necessity - a modern American lacks a key motivator that every samurai had: our lives do not depend on our sword. 

Another is loss of knowledge - when the samurai class was eliminated, doubtless much of the apparently useless knowledge likely went with them. Likely also, we now receive much diluted forms in many arts. 

Legend has it that fakes would be terminated when a true master appeared at their door. Now, we are overrun by fakes and frauds in many arts, and they often prosper much more than the true masters.

We have serious distractions the olde masters and students did not - imagine the consequences on his proficency had Yang Cheng Fu  become hooked on video games or TV 'reality' shows.

The above are only partially offset by the availability of better nutrition, better training facilities and scientific cures for disease and injury. This newfangled Internet is terrific for research and information transfer - but if the essence of an art has already been lost, there is nothing left to find.


----------



## mograph (Oct 12, 2008)

1. Inheriting the art: tough. Given the shift from fighting to health, the fighting component is being lost. But that's not news to anyone.

2. Training intensity, we have that nowadays, but only in professional or olympic-level sports.

3. Life-long pursuit: the student has to start early and end late. Wushu kids have potential, but it's not institutionalized in the West, so it's not as popular as say, American football. As for starting late, just as young musicians give up playing because life intrudes, so the same goes for the Wushu kids, I suppose. 

4. Extraordinary strength: I see this as the result of the other factors in this list, since some formerly sickly practitioners have shown great strength through Nei Gong practice, no?

5. Noble character: there's a lot of that out there, but the students may lack patience, faith and an open mind to turn a noble character into a great martial artist. And nowadays, people find it hard to combine the idea of a noble character with fighting arts. A lot of the Tai Chi people I know are scared to death (!) of being involved in anything that has martial intent, even for nei gong purposes.

Like the others who have written, I also believe that all these components exist today, but finding someone who possesses all five would be very difficult.

My 2 cents ...


----------



## ngokfei (Nov 3, 2008)

while the 5 listed components are goals we strive to achieve, that is all that they are.

Only after our deaths will we be judged on whether we were able to accomplish any of them.

For me Highly Skilled involves mainly the Fighting and Health Skills acquired.  The rest are only there for blending the Fighter into "respectable Society".

Throughout China's history a Carpenter/ARtisan was considered a higher social level then the fighter/soldier.

On with the additions of confucian ideas did we come up with the ideas of "Martial Artist".  One obvious example was the inclusion of Ancstor Worship/lineage.  Since most fghters built there knowledge on experience alot of the Older Lineages are more folk lore tale heros then real citizines/exponenets.


----------



## oxy (Nov 3, 2008)

ngokfei said:


> For me Highly Skilled involves mainly the Fighting and Health Skills acquired.  The rest are only there for blending the Fighter into "respectable Society".
> 
> Throughout China's history a Carpenter/ARtisan was considered a higher social level then the fighter/soldier.



If I remember correctly, a Confucian education back then required tutelage in the martial arts as well.

Of course, back then, "martial arts" meant horse riding, archery and sword.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 4, 2008)

ngokfei said:


> while the 5 listed components are goals we strive to achieve, that is all that they are.
> 
> *Only after our deaths will we be judged on whether we were able to accomplish any of them*.
> 
> For me Highly Skilled involves mainly the Fighting and Health Skills acquired. The rest are only there for blending the Fighter into "respectable Society".



Agreed, except I feel that #5 is the only one that could be thought of as bringing a fighter into "respectable society" but we are talking about this based on Chen Fa Ke (1887-1957) which is long after Confucius and Lao Tzu and in an era when fighters, particularly good ones, form a good lineage were pretty well respected in society



ngokfei said:


> Throughout China's history a Carpenter/ARtisan was considered a higher social level then the fighter/soldier.
> 
> On with the additions of confucian ideas did we come up with the ideas of "Martial Artist". One obvious example was the inclusion of Ancstor Worship/lineage. Since most fghters built there knowledge on experience alot of the Older Lineages are more folk lore tale heros then real citizines/exponenets.


 
Actually you will find ancestor worship in China before Confucianism and in both Confucianism and Taoism.

And lineage has played a part in CMA for a very long time but then we are back to filial piety which is not specifically Confucian. And in China if you were a family member of a given family style you were more likely to make more money from it than if you were a student of said family. This is also one of the resaons you end up with variations on a style such as Taiji, Bagua, Xingyiquan, Tong Bei, etc. 

As to martial artists being at a lower level in society than Carpenter and other Artisan I am not sure about that either. There is no doubt the average Martial artists buy today&#8217;s standards were not high on the social ladder but neither were what you are referring to as Artisans they were all just laborers in Chinese society. And today they still are not all that high on the social register in China. Artists however be they painters, carvers, musicians and calligraphers have always been (and still are) pretty high on the social list. 

But as oxy pointed out way back when a martial artist was more as well as different from what we call a martial artist today.


But the question is can anyone achive high level today based on those 5?


----------



## ngokfei (Nov 4, 2008)

Yes Ancestor worship has existed along time but my statement was its inclusion as part of legitimizing a fighters position in the social structure.

I'll have to find the one article I had read I believe from the Wulin Magazine of China some 3 years back.

Artisan is not the same a laborer.  Laborers are unskilled workers like ditch diggers, porters, etc.  Artisans relates to skilled individuals (ones who had undergone an apprentiship) like a Painter, sculpter, carpenter/cabinet or furniture maker etc.  It is also where the term Sifu/shrfu originated for usage in martial Arts schools today.

Again I'd have to locate the article the specifically researched the evolution of the combat arts/soldiers or bodyguards into Martial Artists.  They listed the evolution of the terms/names given to these individuals and I believe also their place in the class structure.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 4, 2008)

ngokfei said:


> Artisans relates to skilled individuals (ones who had undergone an apprentiship) like a Painter, sculpter, carpenter/cabinet or furniture maker etc. It is also where the term Sifu/shrfu originated for usage in martial Arts schools today.


 
You are correct, I was looking at it form the wrong perspective (modern China). People like sword makers and Bow maker were fairly respected just be careful during dynastic change. So based on that I do not doubt that a person that went through an apprenticeship was respected more than a ditch digger or for that matter your average solider or martial artist (Generals not included )

But this was not the China of 1887 to 1957 as compared to a martial artist of Chan Fa Ke's level... and certainly not the China of later or today but that is another post.

I look forward to reading the article 

Thanks


----------



## zeeberex (Nov 4, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> I hope so but I am not sure and this applies to any MA I just put it in CMA because I am a CMA guy and the basis of this is Chen Fa Ke who is most certainly CMA.
> 
> I was recently reading and old article in Tai Chi Magazine by Peter Wu Shizeng about Chen Fa Ke  (1887-1957) and his level of skill. Chan Fa Ke  was the Chen Family member that designed Chen Xinjia Yilu and Erlu. The article was also discussing if it was possible for anyone today to reach that same level of skill in Chinese Martial Arts. And the article pretty much left me with the thought that the author does not think so.
> 
> ...



Methinks your answer lies in the apparent conflict between discipline to carry out the training verses the short attention span of the typical twenty first century human being. Good luck with that.


----------



## zeeberex (Nov 4, 2008)

grydth said:


> It is unlikely that our society will produce such high levels of proficiency. One factor is necessity - a modern American lacks a key motivator that every samurai had: our lives do not depend on our sword.
> 
> Another is loss of knowledge - when the samurai class was eliminated, doubtless much of the apparently useless knowledge likely went with them. Likely also, we now receive much diluted forms in many arts.
> 
> ...



I agree in particular with the remark regarding Japanese martial arts. Unfortunately as the Fuedal period ended so did the "edge" the arts had. Jujitsu and Aikijutsu became Judo and Aikido for example and as they evolved into a more acceptable sport like form one has to wonder how much "other" method/knowledge was potentially lost.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 4, 2008)

zeeberex said:


> Methinks your answer lies in the apparent conflict between discipline to carry out the training verses the short attention span of the typical twenty first century human being. Good luck with that.


 
Good luck with what?

I am not saying I am doing this, I am just wondering if it is still possible based on the 5 listed

EDIT

I should add that bassed on the 5 

1. Inheriting the Real Martial Art
2. Hard Training
3. Life-Long Pursuit
4. Extraordinary Strength
5. Noble Character

I feel, based on Chen Fa Ke, that 1 makes it nigh impossible 2 makes it really hard and as far as 3 goes highly unlikely.

So if Chen Fa Ke is the baseline of mastery it is not happening in the 21st century


----------



## geezer (Nov 6, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> I hope so but I am not sure and this applies to any MA I just put it in CMA because I am a CMA guy and the basis of this is Chen Fa Ke who is most certainly CMA.
> 
> I was recently reading and old article in Tai Chi Magazine by Peter Wu Shizeng about Chen Fa Ke (1887-1957) and his level of skill. Chan Fa Ke was the Chen Family member that designed Chen Xinjia Yilu and Erlu. The article was also discussing if it was possible for anyone today to reach that same level of skill in Chinese Martial Arts. And the article pretty much left me with the thought that the author does not think so.
> 
> ...


 
I have a couple of problems with the whole premise here. It is a fact that the more hectic pace of modern life makes it difficult to train "the old way". Very few would have the time and focus to train that way, even if they had the means...including the ability and access to a master instructor. But on the other hand, contrary to tradition, there is a limit to the value of endless repetition. Doing a form 100 or even  a mere 50 times a day seems excessive.  And even if this has some merit, since no one has that much time anymore, it's a moot point. If the time is not available to invest 10 hours a day, then perhaps the answer lies in the old saying, "Train smarter, not harder". I would suggest that the key ingredients necessary for attaining superior skill would be:

1. The right teacher
2. Exceptional ability
3. Intelligence
4. Unusual drive and determination 

I base this on a couple of individuals I know who have achieved a high level of skill. One is a martial artist, the other excells in another field. Interestingly, "noble character" in the sense of being a morally upstanding and socially responsible individual doesn't necessarily apply here at all.


----------



## JadeDragon3 (Nov 6, 2008)

No it is not possible.


----------



## mograph (Nov 7, 2008)

Regarding the importance of "noble character", I'd say that a calm mind is necessary for high-level skill. In other words, a calm psychopath might achieve a higher level of skill than a nervous Samaritan, all other things being equal.

But ... if psychopaths are all narcissistic, then the calm psychopath should fail when facing the calm Buddhist who has truly relinquished or transcended "Self" ...? 

Hmm.

(Personally, attempting to relinquish "self" helps my squash game, anyway.)


----------



## jks9199 (Nov 7, 2008)

JadeDragon3 said:


> No it is not possible.


Why not?

Y'know, MT is a discussion board; the idea is to share opinions and talk about them.  A series of "NO", "YES", and "I DUNNOs" with no more to it just gets dull and boring...

I've noticed a few opinions by various posters in this thread and elsewhere, and I'd really be interested in hearing WHY folks feel the way they do...


----------



## Formosa Neijia (Nov 8, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> As for &#8220;Hard Training&#8221; I am not sure anyone today has this kind of time but apparently doing the form 100 times a day was not out of the question at the time Chen Fa Ke was learning Chen style but apparently the normal amount was 60 times a day. And later when he was teaching he wanted his students to do the form at least 20 times a day. (One of his last living students is Feng Zhi Qiang)
> 
> Then it is the second one &#8220;Hard Training&#8221; that is the issue and again if you are using people like Chen Fa Ke as your baseline it is likely you will never have anyone of his level since very few people today have the time to train 8 to 15 hours a day and I am guessing based on doing forms 60 to 100 times a day. But can we train hard enough today to reach high level skill as compared to those of the not to distant past.
> 
> ...



This is nonsense. No one was doing the Chen forms 100 times a day. Nor was anyone training 15 hours a day.

Having great abilities is just as possible now as in any time in the past. But people MUST stop believing these fairy tales about the past.

Forms training doesn't make you deadly -- not five minutes of it or 15 hours a day for a million years.

If people want to be good, they have to start by thinking for themselves. Then do training that we know works -- working against resistance.

BTW, this post is aimed at the idea, not the person presenting them.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 8, 2008)

Formosa Neijia said:


> This is nonsense. No one was doing the Chen forms 100 times a day. Nor was anyone training 15 hours a day.
> 
> Having great abilities is just as possible now as in any time in the past. But people MUST stop believing these fairy tales about the past.
> 
> ...


 
Good point and no problem 

I too have had my doubts Chen Fa Ke did the form 100 times a day, I did the math based on a form taking 20 minutes. That comes out to just over 33 hours , and forms work will not make you a martial artist that is for sure and I am pretty sure Chen Fa Ke did his fair share of applications training, push hands and sparing so we are no up to a day that is about 2 days long. Of course there is always the possibility he trained on Venus or Mercury, the days are longer there 

But I also have no doubt Chen Fa Ke trained a lot and for his whole life and likely never was entirely happy with his form his entire life so he continually worked on it.

But I am thinking that very few, if any, have the time or desire to dedicate to CMA like Chen Fa Ke did and very few, if any, have access to the level of learning that Chen Fa Ke had. So is it possible to get to the same level as Chen Fa Ke did?


----------



## Nebuchadnezzar (Nov 8, 2008)

JadeDragon3 said:


> No it is not possible.


 
This opinion is based on what experience?


----------



## Formosa Neijia (Nov 8, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> But I am thinking that very few, if any, have the time or desire to dedicate to CMA like Chen Fa Ke did and very few, if any, have access to the level of learning that Chen Fa Ke had. So is it possible to get to the same level as Chen Fa Ke did?



Just my POV, but two things:
1. We have no idea how good Chen really was. Outside of his students and the Chen family, we don't hear much of anything about how great he supposedly was. He didn't compete in the 1928 national leitai tournament nor the one in 1933. 

2. I'm personally not interested in being as good as someone else, especially a dead person who's skills are being greatly exaggerated. My goal is to be as good as _I_ can be.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 8, 2008)

Good points, and I agree with both. But I do know that my Taiji sifu would not compete in anything either and he is very good as compared to anyone else I have ever trained with or done push hands with. My Sanda sifu has absolutely no interest what-so-ever in competition. But then again this is from one of their students much like what we get about Chen Fa Ke. I am not a believer that just because someone did not fight in a competition that it should be used to judge their skill or lack there of. And I do not think that is what you are saying either, It is just that Chen Fa Ke did not fight in 1928 or 1933 so we cannot use it as a way of judging the truth of the stories about his skill. As far as I know Tung Hu Ling did not fight in competitions either but he did open a taiji school in Thailand at a time it meant that he would be challenged if he did. And he was challenged and he won and had to in order to have the school there. 

And to be entirely honest my stand on this is "if" we use these

1. Inheriting the Real Martial Art
2. Hard Training
3. Life-Long Pursuit
4. Extraordinary Strength
5. Noble Character

As standards it is highly unlikely that anyone can reach high level skill based on what we have been told about Chen Fa Ke. Also I am just using Chen Fa Ke as an example really since that is who the article I originally read was about. However you could use anyone from old China as an example, but would a student of an accepted Shu&#257;iji&#257;o master or Changquan master or Xingyiquan master or Wing Chun master be using all the same criteria for mastery? Could be I don't know. 

My suspicion is that there are a lot of people in old china that were damn good fighters that we never heard of and that may not have been referred to as having noble character or did not train from a young age like Chen Fa Ke. Much of the stories of Chinese masters from the old days have propaganda in them, especially when they start talking about them never being defeated. If all of these guys were undefeated who were they fighting? Certainly not each other. One of my favorite stories is of Wang Xiang Zhai because he was defeated. But that was before he came up with dachengquan and of course after that he was never defeated.

My sifu could claim undefeated as well if he wanted to but I do not think he has had a fight since he got to the US in the very early 60s. However he has told me that he was defeated by Tung Hu Ling prior to that. However he tends to tell me that by taking me out in some way and as I am laying on the ground looking up saying "Tung Hu Ling did that to me once". 

I am going to try my best to be the best I can be at the arts I train as do many today. However I do not believe that many today train as much as they did years ago, if for no other reason lack of time. Also most today do not have the same access to their teacher that they use to, at least not in the US. And there are a whole lot out there trying real hard to shortcut their way to being a master and what are really the consequences today if they do? 

I know for a fact my first sifu has been told by the Chen family to stop teaching Chen and stop claiming Chen lineage. But as the Chen family person said "What can I really do to him, this is America". I got the impression that China would have been much more costly to my first sifu either in pain or money. And what would it have been like in Chen Fa Ke's day? But I am going off my own post.

Can people become masters today? Yes I think so
Should I look to Chen Fa Ke and try and be just like him? Nope, if I do I will most certainly not get where I want. 

But I still have a real problem believing in the 21st century at the speed we all tend to live and with the amount of distractions we have everyday that is real hard possibly impossible to get the same skill level of people like Chen Fa Ke or Fu Zhongwen or Tung Ying Chieh or Yin Fu or Sun Lutang. But I am also talking in their style. Could my Sanda (non-sport) sifu defeat any of them, possibly, but then he too trained from a very young age, in China, with a sifu that was very well trained in Sanda. But he also teaches Taiji at the YMCA and it is 24 form that he picked up somewhere in China. Could he defeat any of them with Taiji? Doubtful. 

I too am striving to be the best I can be but I doubt I will ever reach the skill level of my Taiji sifu. I simply do not have the time he had when he was learning. I do not have the same access to him that he had to his sifu and there are very few people that want to learn the martial arts of it and not too many more that even want to train push hands.


----------



## oxy (Nov 9, 2008)

I think the "mastery" problem is the same as when one is learning a musical instrument like the violin.

You can still get pretty good even if you start out older and perhaps if you practice 30 mins a day, but to get close to mastery level, you have to start out at 4 years old and practice 3 or 4 hours a day.

Personally, I think a big problem with "mastery" these days is that teaching techniques are holding people back as well.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 9, 2008)

oxy said:


> I think the "mastery" problem is the same as when one is learning a musical instrument like the violin.
> 
> You can still get pretty good even if you start out older and perhaps if you practice 30 mins a day, but to get close to mastery level, you have to start out at 4 years old and practice 3 or 4 hours a day.
> 
> *Personally, I think a big problem with "mastery" these days is that teaching techniques are holding people back as well*.


 
Agreed and I do honestly beleive that a lot of the problem today which goes right to "Inheriting the Real Martial Art"


----------



## Formosa Neijia (Nov 9, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> Much of the stories of Chinese masters from the old days have propaganda in them, especially when they start talking about them never being defeated. If all of these guys were undefeated who were they fighting? Certainly not each other.



The reason I brought up the 1928 and 1933 leitai tourneys was because it was one of the few time that different styles openly fought each other. But many teachers were ....(ahem)....unwilling to try it out themselves so they let their students participate. Interestingly enough, NO taiji people period participated. That drew some criticism about just how good the Chen's, etc. really were. 

Despite all the rhetoric you hear about these tourneys, three more things need to be mentioned:
1. external styles like Northern shaolin did VERY well. Gu Ru-zhang, the shaolin guy, won his division.
2. to my knowledge, no IMA guys placed. 
3. A long-time BGZ guy that was there said that he never saw a clean technique used in the tourney. in other words, the fighting was not as clean as a lot of people like to imagine.

I say all this because we hear lots of stories about IMA guys back then, but much of it is myth, like that surrounding Chen Fa-ke. If I had a dime for every "undeafeated" IMA guy at that time... You get the picture.

Perfecting the art side of the styles is an open question. I can't answer it but then no one really knows how good Chen Fa-ke was. no mater how good you are, you will never measure up in the eyes of Confucian-obsessed, past-worshipping Chinese culture.

As far as fighting goes, you have a much better chance of perfecting that aspect than at any time over the ast 100 years IMO. There are so many chances for people to test their material these days. But people don't take advantage of it. Much like they didn't enter the 1928 and '33 tourneys.

The more thngs change....


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 9, 2008)

Formosa Neijia said:


> you will never measure up in the eyes of Confucian-obsessed, past-worshipping Chinese culture.


 
All I can say is my Sanda sifu does not seem all that Confucian-obsessed or past-worshipping nor does my Taiji sifu and my first sifu most certainly is not and you have a range of ages there from 70s to late 40s. But I do understand what you are saying and get the point. It does have a Confucian/ancestor worship base but then you have that in just about every Chinese society on the planet. 

And thank you I did not know much about the 1928 and 1933 leitai tournaments other than they happened. I now will have to look more into those. 

I am not surprised that there were no Taiji people there. They can be an arrogant lot and could think it beneath them they also could be afraid of loosing. (You can look to the Wu Gongyi vs. Chen Kefu match and see a great example of why many Taiji should not hop in a ring, but my sifu and his sifu were both there and they too thought it was a pathetic show of martial arts.) And of course Taiji tends to me more defensive than aggressive. 

I am however surprised that there were no Xingyiquan people there.


----------



## oxy (Nov 9, 2008)

Formosa Neijia said:


> No mater how good you are, you will never measure up in the eyes of Confucian-obsessed, past-worshipping Chinese culture.



Past-worshipping is not exactly a Chinese-only thing. Actually, a lot of Western religions cannot stand on their own without making a myth of how much things were better than the past and things now are decadent.



> As far as fighting goes, you have a much better chance of perfecting that aspect than at any time over the ast 100 years IMO. There are so many chances for people to test their material these days. But people don't take advantage of it. Much like they didn't enter the 1928 and '33 tourneys.



I think with a modern understanding of body structure and not relying on vague and unhelpful catchphrases like qi and root people do have a better chance of perfecting.


----------



## JadeDragon3 (Nov 10, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> Why not?
> 
> Y'know, MT is a discussion board; the idea is to share opinions and talk about them. A series of "NO", "YES", and "I DUNNOs" with no more to it just gets dull and boring...
> 
> I've noticed a few opinions by various posters in this thread and elsewhere, and I'd really be interested in hearing WHY folks feel the way they do...


 
High level of skill is not possible today because people want to learn MMA fighting and not stick to one specific art.  The days of the Bill Wallace's, Chuck Norris's, Jeff Smith's, Benny "the jet" Urquidez, etc.... are gone.  Those are the ones that were dedicated to their art.  Now days you got people jumping from one style to another learning a little bit here and a little bit there.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 10, 2008)

JadeDragon3 said:


> High level of skill is not possible today because people want to learn MMA fighting and not stick to one specific art. The days of the Bill Wallace's, Chuck Norris's, Jeff Smith's, Benny "the jet" Urquidez, etc.... are gone. Those are the ones that were dedicated to their art. Now days you got people jumping from one style to another learning a little bit here and a little bit there.


 
Globally or regionally?

And I do tend to agree that many do not take the time to learn a style before jumping ship for another style these days. I know this is an issue in the US but is it the same in Europe, Russia, China, Africa, Middle East, Australia, Japan, etc?


----------



## JadeDragon3 (Nov 10, 2008)

I think globally.


----------



## jks9199 (Nov 10, 2008)

JadeDragon3 said:


> High level of skill is not possible today because people want to learn MMA fighting and not stick to one specific art.  The days of the Bill Wallace's, Chuck Norris's, Jeff Smith's, Benny "the jet" Urquidez, etc.... are gone.  Those are the ones that were dedicated to their art.  Now days you got people jumping from one style to another learning a little bit here and a little bit there.


So, an MMA fighter or someone who's trained in several arts can't have a high level of skill?

I disagree.  In fact, I think some of the examples you've given weren't any more highly skilled than many of the MMA fighters today.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 10, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> So, an MMA fighter or someone who's trained in several arts can't have a high level of skill?
> 
> I disagree. In fact, I think some of the examples you've given weren't any more highly skilled than many of the MMA fighters today.


 
Where I do believe you can have a highly skilled MMA fighter my take on this, based on the example of Chen Fa Ke (although I am beginning to regret using his name for this example), is that due to the number of people cross training and training in things like MMA of for MMA the high level of skill in a single traditional MA is getting harder to find because so few take the time anymore to learn any of them completely. 

Taiji for example some say it takes 6 years of training just to start understanding how to use it and Bagua is said to be 4 years and Xingyi 2 years and many today simply do not want to put in the time. 

And then later if someone wants to teach or train a TMA they bring all the prior training with them and likely will, out of habit, use what they learned previously instead of taking the time to figure out how a given application is suppose to work in that specific style. 

And PLEASE I beg you NOT to turn this into a MMA vs TMA argument post :asian:


----------



## JadeDragon3 (Nov 10, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> So, an MMA fighter or someone who's trained in several arts can't have a high level of skill?
> 
> I disagree. In fact, I think some of the examples you've given weren't any more highly skilled than many of the MMA fighters today.


 
I think that there are some really talented and skilled MMA fighters but very few.  A lot of them rely on the ground and pound method.  What skill is there in that?  Plus how many of these MMA fighters have any real kicking skill other than kicking to the thigh?  I bet most of them couldn't get their leg higher than their waist (hense the reason for so many leg kicks).  There are so many other facets of martial arts besides fighting.  I'm taking into account the whole package that martial arts offers, not just the fighting aspect of martial arts.  How many of these MMA fighters do you HONESTLY think could kick higher than their stomach?  I'd venture to say not many.  What does this say about thier flexability?  To me it says they don't have any at all.  How many MMA fighters would you say have actually attained a black belt in any one style?  for that matter attained anything higher than a 1st degree bb?  I would say the percentage is low. Very few MMA fighters come to mind when you ask is there any high skilled martial artists in MMA.  The ones that do come to mind are Royce Gracie (or any Gracie for that matter), Oleg Taktarov, Ken Shamrock, Mark Vale, Dan Severn, Matt Hughes, Broc Lesner (only because he was an NCAA wrestling champion in college), Mark Coleman, and Randy Couture.  Those are about it.  The others don't impress me as far as being skilled in martial arts.  Let me ask you this.....Is Tank Abbot a skilled martial artist?  He's got a pretty good win loss record.  I'd say he's a skilled brawler not martial artist.


----------



## JadeDragon3 (Nov 10, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> So, an MMA fighter or someone who's trained in several arts can't have a high level of skill?
> 
> I disagree. In fact, I think some of the examples you've given weren't any more highly skilled than many of the MMA fighters today.


 
You and I are talking about 2 different things here.  I don't think an MMA fighter can have a high level of skill as a martial artist, as a fighter maybe but not as a martial artist (a true martial artist).  Remember, MMA is not a style of martial art.  It's more of a concept like JKD was or is.  MMA takes the best techniques from the most effective styles such as Muey Thai Kickboxing, Western Boxing, BJJ, and Wrestling and training in these areas. There are no forms to learn in MMA like there are with specific systems such as kung fu, shotokan karate, or ishin ryu karate, etc....  There is also no weapons training in MMA.  In my opinion MMA fighters can not obtain a high level of skill in MARTIAL ARTS because they don't study a martial art, they study or train in fighting.  As stated before there are so many different facets of Martial Arts besides fighting hand to hand combat.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 10, 2008)

Not that this is not an interesting discussion but now that you are into MMA and comparing it to true MA you are off topic and I would really appreciate this not degrading into MMA vs. TMA. If that is what you wish to discuss start a topic on it since the topic ofthis post is; 

Is High Level Skill Still Possible

Thank You :asian:
XS


----------



## JadeDragon3 (Nov 10, 2008)

Well then Xue Sheng, yes a high level of skill can be obtained in MARTIAL ARTS because I have attained it myself (not to be bragging).  After all I am the reflection of perfection and the number one selection.


----------



## Formosa Neijia (Nov 11, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> And thank you I did not know much about the 1928 and 1933 leitai tournaments other than they happened. I now will have to look more into those.
> 
> I am however surprised that there were no Xingyiquan people there.



There were. But I don't think they placed.


----------



## profesormental (Nov 12, 2008)

Greetings.

"High level skill" is something that I equate with optimal performance of martial movements.

MMA or sport fighting does require skill, yet it relies more on athleticism.

High level skill improves with age, as the finer motor skills are cemented and can be used under adrenal stress syndrome.

Also, high level skill has to do with sophistication of basics. This means that every movement is simple, yet so much details and subtleties are executed each time that it becomes "sophisticated".

That is why someone with this high level skill seems to hit so hard or bend someone like a pretzel without apparent effort.

Hope this helps. There is a lot more on this.

Juan M. Mercado


----------



## Formosa Neijia (Nov 12, 2008)

BTW, I'm not sure if I mentioned it or not but Kang Ge-wu's book Spring and Autumn of Chinese Martial Arts covers the 1928 and '33 tourneys. That's where I got the lst of winners. You can get the book at Plum Pubs and I highly recommend it. 

There was also a link on my old forum about it:
http://groups.google.com/group/form...63039af8bc23b?lnk=gst&q=1928#f1763039af8bc23b

Some useful stuff there.


----------

