Hybrid Arts
- Thread starter KPM
- Start date
And why is that? I never understood why so many Silat people have it out for Simonet. I find his explanation of the Jurus to be rather straight-forward and common sense.
If you put together your own system, you ought to be able to explain every move!
---Very true! And unfortunately the people that put together the Wing Chun dummy forms are long gone and a lot has either been forgotten, or lost in "translation." And some of modern understanding of the traditional forms is just flat wrong.
--- I also think it is just flat wrong to denigrate someone's dummy form simply because it isn't the same as the "traditional" forms. I'm pretty sure Simonet could beat the crap out of a whole lot of "traditional" guys out there using his stuff. Wing Chun guys in particular.
On the other hand, if you are a student of a traditional martial art handed down through an old lineage, it only stands to reason that there would be things that you don't fully understand yet.
---Well, I have also come to the conclusion that there is a lot in "traditional" martial arts that we will likely never understand simply because people just don't fight that way any more.
BTW Keith, I posted something on short-staff down in the General FMA section with a reference to Paulus Hector Mair. I believe you translated that short-staff section into English? Awesome.
---Yep. I translated a lot of Paulus Hector Mair's fighting manual. Quite a bit of it is floating about on the internet now.
---Very true! And unfortunately the people that put together the Wing Chun dummy forms are long gone and a lot has either been forgotten, or lost in "translation." And some of modern understanding of the traditional forms is just flat wrong.
--- I also think it is just flat wrong to denigrate someone's dummy form simply because it isn't the same as the "traditional" forms. I'm pretty sure Simonet could beat the crap out of a whole lot of "traditional" guys out there using his stuff. Wing Chun guys in particular.
On the other hand, if you are a student of a traditional martial art handed down through an old lineage, it only stands to reason that there would be things that you don't fully understand yet.
---Well, I have also come to the conclusion that there is a lot in "traditional" martial arts that we will likely never understand simply because people just don't fight that way any more.
BTW Keith, I posted something on short-staff down in the General FMA section with a reference to Paulus Hector Mair. I believe you translated that short-staff section into English? Awesome.
---Yep. I translated a lot of Paulus Hector Mair's fighting manual. Quite a bit of it is floating about on the internet now.
I, too, agree that nearly every system now in play is, or at least was once considered to be, a hybridization of 2 or more other then-thought to be original systems.
Personally, in my journey, I've moved through aikido, to straight-line karate, into taekwondo, then hapkido, turned into muay thai, got into judo and ended up back in aikido, which I sort of express with a bit of meanness so mine is probably more like aikijutsu.
When I find myself in an open fun contest with another experienced person, and we'r eplaying around with an anything goes philosophy (but not trying to hurt one another, just exploring) it's interesting. I end up with this we're blend of the thai-boxing stance working into aikido/hapkido hand traps and then end up in judo for throwing techniques, depending on if I can close or the other guy is able to maintain distance or also wishes to close. Definitely a blended type of thing.
Personally, in my journey, I've moved through aikido, to straight-line karate, into taekwondo, then hapkido, turned into muay thai, got into judo and ended up back in aikido, which I sort of express with a bit of meanness so mine is probably more like aikijutsu.
When I find myself in an open fun contest with another experienced person, and we'r eplaying around with an anything goes philosophy (but not trying to hurt one another, just exploring) it's interesting. I end up with this we're blend of the thai-boxing stance working into aikido/hapkido hand traps and then end up in judo for throwing techniques, depending on if I can close or the other guy is able to maintain distance or also wishes to close. Definitely a blended type of thing.
Could it be a bit of resentment since he has chosen to go his own way and do his own thing? You know....left the family so he is "persona non grata"?
Who knows KPM. I have just hung out with enough people that this is what I have heard over and over again. Personally, it doesn't affect me so I do not worry about it.
I think that's a useful distinction. NGA is a hybrid - apparently based in movements and principles from Daito-ryu, plus Shotokan(?) Karate, Judo, and perhaps even some of Ueshiba's Aikido (via Shioda, most likely). Shojin-ryu is an evolutionary step away. While I've borrowed movements (yes, movements, moreso than principles - keeping the principles from NGA) from other arts and styles (some few directly from Daito-ryu and Ueshiba's Aikido, some from bits of FMA, some from bits of CMA), the primary base is still NGA with some adaptations from my own refinement. I couldn't rightly call it a hybrid, as it is clearly based mostly in mainline NGA.
Vajramusti
Master Black Belt
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hybrid wing chun? Its one own concoction. Caveat emptor. Lots of cherry picking under a word- label.
Training well in different arts is different from a so called hybrid. Jordan and Barkley played basketball well.
They also played golf- but they did not misuse the names basketball or golf-though they had their own different
approaches to basket ball.
That's a pretty dumb analogy. As I said....Wing Chun likely started out as a hybrid art....if you put any stock in its own legends at all.
Vajramusti
Master Black Belt
Juany118
Senior Master
If you believe one particular legend. There is another legend where the nun was simply the last survivor of 5 masters who were trying to create a new martial art that would train a competent Kung Fu practitioner in a shorter period of time.
There are also people who see similarities between Wing Chun and Hung Ga and thus may see WC as an evolution of Hung Ga.
Back to the analogy you ad hominem attacked. Let's explain what they were trying to say a bit more specifically. My school teaches WC and Lacoste-Inosanto Kali in tandem. So, until you have advanced far enough in WC to learn the Butterfly knives and Long Pole, the mind set is that you transition between arts.
-If I have a knife, stick or sword I use Kali.
-If unarmed I use WC until I can get one.
-If I am using WC in a "stand up fight" and find myself suddenly in a ground fight, again to Kali.
(@geezer can correct me if his ideas are different since he teaches rather than simply studies the same concepts I am learning)
The reason for this is that while Kali does have unarmed techniques for the most part these techniques have a philosophy of "use them brutally until you can get to a weapon." They are good, damn effective BUT limited and if you are facing another well trained unarmed fighter you can find yourself with fewer options in a "stand up" fight than the dedicated unarmed practitioner.
It is not a hybrid art I learn, I am studying both in a complete form and then learning how and when to transition, or as I like to say dance, between the two as the situation dictates.
In order to create a true hybrid art you need to have a deep understanding of all of the arts involved in order to create a proper system. The people with that kind of understanding, even in the days long past were few and far between. Why else would what history (not legends) speak of say Shaolin Temple having different Monks being the Master of form "X" in the singular.
I think part of the problem may be we forget that in the East that Martial Arts were seen in a way similar to any other Art. We look at them as a Science. Science is a logical progression and at times a combination of different sciences to achieve a goal. Art however does not need to follow such a logical progression. Martial Arts can be equal part science and self-expression and so a "new" art can simply be inspired by previous arts al la Raphael being inspired by Da Vinci Leonardo da Vinci's influence on Raphael - The Mona Lisa Foundation
The lines are a lot more blurred so unless explicitly called a hybrid, I would hesitate to apply the label.
Juany118
Senior Master
I definitely agree with this and, correct me if wrong, I think it similar to my Sifu. Now while we learn both WC and Kali in tandem (maybe a bit more than you do in that regard), but it's the mindset and method that I think are shared.
When we fight/spar, we do so with a Kali method/mindset. Both arts, while using different terms, share the idea of the centerline theory but also see it in a different light. So we may use some WC techniques but the centerline as an example, is a means to an end. We attack the center to unbalance and stun our opponents so we can, if unarmed, then move to joint destruction, where as, in my experience, a person with the WC mindset will be seeing the opponent's center as both the means and the end.
So while we learn and can test in both arts separately, the way we learn to fight is Kali in it's heart and soul, even if there is some bleed over in terms of WC techniques. So he isn't making it even more of a hybrid than L-I Kali already is, it maintains the essence.
Most hybrid martial arts (as opposed to fighting systems) that I have seen do not only bring in different techniques, they also tend to blur/blend the philosophy or essence of the arts involved so that the new hybrid art has a new heart or "core" at the center of it.
Last edited:
It was no less disrepectful than what you wrote. I didn't call anyone a name. I simply said that your analogy was dumb. You said essentially the same thing about the idea of a "hybrid Wing Chun." So what's the difference? You made no point either, other than stating that you didn't think any "hybrid" art was a good idea. You didn't say why you thought that or what the problem would be. Your post added nothing to this discussion.
If you believe one particular legend. There is another legend where the nun was simply the last survivor of 5 masters who were trying to create a new martial art that would train a competent Kung Fu practitioner in a shorter period of time.
----And that particular legend states that Wing Chun was a culmination of the 5 animal systems taught at Shaolin. So, once again, a hybrid martial art!
Back to the analogy you ad hominem attacked.
---Basketball and Golf are nothing alike. Why would either man do a Golf move on the basketball court? So yeah, a dumb analogy.
Let's explain what they were trying to say a bit more specifically. My school teaches WC and Lacoste-Inosanto Kali in tandem. So, until you have advanced far enough in WC to learn the Butterfly knives and Long Pole, the mind set is that you transition between arts.
-If I have a knife, stick or sword I use Kali.
-If unarmed I use WC until I can get one.
-If I am using WC in a "stand up fight" and find myself suddenly in a ground fight, again to Kali.
---Nothing wrong with this. But the two have a different biomechanic. Shifting back and forth between 2 different biomechanics can be confusing. It may not be instinctive enough when the pressure is own and you really need to use it. Go from a standing art to a ground-fighting/grappling art is an easy transition because they don't mix biomechanical methods....as would two different standing/striking arts.
In order to create a true hybrid art you need to have a deep understanding of all of the arts involved in order to create a proper system.
---Not necessarily. Bruce Lee's JKD started out as a hybrid art. He only knew Wing Chun up to the dummy form and never completed the entire system. He did some western boxing, but nothing beyond an amatuer level. He used nothern CMA style kicking, but he never mastered any northern style. I don't think he learned western fencing "hands on" at all, but incorporated a lot of the theory. What is really required is to have a systematic approach in mind and to recognize where aspects of another art either fit, or overlap. Knowing the base art with a deep understanding will allow you to recognize how you can vary it and change it by the addition of aspects of another art.
The people with that kind of understanding, even in the days long past were few and far between.
---I disagree. You give far to much credit to past masters and not enough to modern people. Modern people are just as smart as past masters. Modern people likely have a wider exposure to different systems, and a more systematic approach to analysis and training.
----And that particular legend states that Wing Chun was a culmination of the 5 animal systems taught at Shaolin. So, once again, a hybrid martial art!
Back to the analogy you ad hominem attacked.
---Basketball and Golf are nothing alike. Why would either man do a Golf move on the basketball court? So yeah, a dumb analogy.
Let's explain what they were trying to say a bit more specifically. My school teaches WC and Lacoste-Inosanto Kali in tandem. So, until you have advanced far enough in WC to learn the Butterfly knives and Long Pole, the mind set is that you transition between arts.
-If I have a knife, stick or sword I use Kali.
-If unarmed I use WC until I can get one.
-If I am using WC in a "stand up fight" and find myself suddenly in a ground fight, again to Kali.
---Nothing wrong with this. But the two have a different biomechanic. Shifting back and forth between 2 different biomechanics can be confusing. It may not be instinctive enough when the pressure is own and you really need to use it. Go from a standing art to a ground-fighting/grappling art is an easy transition because they don't mix biomechanical methods....as would two different standing/striking arts.
In order to create a true hybrid art you need to have a deep understanding of all of the arts involved in order to create a proper system.
---Not necessarily. Bruce Lee's JKD started out as a hybrid art. He only knew Wing Chun up to the dummy form and never completed the entire system. He did some western boxing, but nothing beyond an amatuer level. He used nothern CMA style kicking, but he never mastered any northern style. I don't think he learned western fencing "hands on" at all, but incorporated a lot of the theory. What is really required is to have a systematic approach in mind and to recognize where aspects of another art either fit, or overlap. Knowing the base art with a deep understanding will allow you to recognize how you can vary it and change it by the addition of aspects of another art.
The people with that kind of understanding, even in the days long past were few and far between.
---I disagree. You give far to much credit to past masters and not enough to modern people. Modern people are just as smart as past masters. Modern people likely have a wider exposure to different systems, and a more systematic approach to analysis and training.
The comment about past masters bears emphasis. It was not uncommon for someone to start a new style in their 20's. Granted, they would have had much more training than most of us had by our 20's (different lifestyle), but their brains were no more developed. Someone in their mid-20's creating a new art/style likely has no more understanding of it (barring a few exceptional people) than another equally experienced martial artist today.If you believe one particular legend. There is another legend where the nun was simply the last survivor of 5 masters who were trying to create a new martial art that would train a competent Kung Fu practitioner in a shorter period of time.
----And that particular legend states that Wing Chun was a culmination of the 5 animal systems taught at Shaolin. So, once again, a hybrid martial art!
Back to the analogy you ad hominem attacked.
---Basketball and Golf are nothing alike. Why would either man do a Golf move on the basketball court? So yeah, a dumb analogy.
Let's explain what they were trying to say a bit more specifically. My school teaches WC and Lacoste-Inosanto Kali in tandem. So, until you have advanced far enough in WC to learn the Butterfly knives and Long Pole, the mind set is that you transition between arts.
-If I have a knife, stick or sword I use Kali.
-If unarmed I use WC until I can get one.
-If I am using WC in a "stand up fight" and find myself suddenly in a ground fight, again to Kali.
---Nothing wrong with this. But the two have a different biomechanic. Shifting back and forth between 2 different biomechanics can be confusing. It may not be instinctive enough when the pressure is own and you really need to use it. Go from a standing art to a ground-fighting/grappling art is an easy transition because they don't mix biomechanical methods....as would two different standing/striking arts.
In order to create a true hybrid art you need to have a deep understanding of all of the arts involved in order to create a proper system.
---Not necessarily. Bruce Lee's JKD started out as a hybrid art. He only knew Wing Chun up to the dummy form and never completed the entire system. He did some western boxing, but nothing beyond an amatuer level. He used nothern CMA style kicking, but he never mastered any northern style. I don't think he learned western fencing "hands on" at all, but incorporated a lot of the theory. What is really required is to have a systematic approach in mind and to recognize where aspects of another art either fit, or overlap. Knowing the base art with a deep understanding will allow you to recognize how you can vary it and change it by the addition of aspects of another art.
The people with that kind of understanding, even in the days long past were few and far between.
---I disagree. You give far to much credit to past masters and not enough to modern people. Modern people are just as smart as past masters. Modern people likely have a wider exposure to different systems, and a more systematic approach to analysis and training.
We have a tendency (it's a psychological thing) to give much weight to the ability and wisdom of those who founded things in times long past. Likely they were no different than those starting things today.
Hybrid arts can be good or bad, I am certain.
Problem is that the question itself is on an individual level. You can not say all hybrids are either good or bad. Each hybrid art is what it is, and good or bad can either be the hybrid art or the one teaching it not really understanding what he himself has created.
Question is, would it be a good investment of my time to learn such a hybrid art in hopes that it will make me a better fighter? Well the answer to such a question often comes from watching the teacher and in this case I would say a resounding No. Whatever is taught here would not serve me well. Does this mean it is a bad art? Not necessarily, since I do not study it I can never answer that question. Instead I can just know I will never need to ask myself that question because it serves no interest to me.
We put too much effort into labelling stuff good or bad, the answer to that question is most often an individual one and can only be answered once you have tried it. Even the most shitty art could perhaps be the best art for you because it makes you understand something you otherwise would not. What do I know?
Now is a hybrid art any or both of the arts that it consist of?
Is Wing Chun and Kali mix actually Wing Chun? No it is not, otherwise it would not be called a mix or a hybrid. Studying both at same time does not mean it is a hybrid, mixing the arts into one would mean replacing some parts with something from a different art. This would mean it is a new art. Still does not believe it changes anything of value as I said above.
Problem is that the question itself is on an individual level. You can not say all hybrids are either good or bad. Each hybrid art is what it is, and good or bad can either be the hybrid art or the one teaching it not really understanding what he himself has created.
Question is, would it be a good investment of my time to learn such a hybrid art in hopes that it will make me a better fighter? Well the answer to such a question often comes from watching the teacher and in this case I would say a resounding No. Whatever is taught here would not serve me well. Does this mean it is a bad art? Not necessarily, since I do not study it I can never answer that question. Instead I can just know I will never need to ask myself that question because it serves no interest to me.
We put too much effort into labelling stuff good or bad, the answer to that question is most often an individual one and can only be answered once you have tried it. Even the most shitty art could perhaps be the best art for you because it makes you understand something you otherwise would not. What do I know?
Now is a hybrid art any or both of the arts that it consist of?
Is Wing Chun and Kali mix actually Wing Chun? No it is not, otherwise it would not be called a mix or a hybrid. Studying both at same time does not mean it is a hybrid, mixing the arts into one would mean replacing some parts with something from a different art. This would mean it is a new art. Still does not believe it changes anything of value as I said above.
In your MA toolbox, what MA tools do you need? You will need:
1. Entering strategies (how to move in without being punched and kicked):
- rhino strategy
- octopus strategy,
- double spears strategy,
- zombie arms strategy,
- leading arm jams back arm strategy,
- circle dragging strategy,
- ...
2. Finishing strategies (how to disable your opponent ASAP):
- jab, cross, uppercut, hook, ...
- front kick, side kick, roundhouse kick, back kick, ...
- finger lock, wrist lock, elbow lock, shoulder lock, ...
- hip throw, leg block, single leg, double legs, ...
- full mount, side mount, arm bar, choke, ...
Is there a single MA system on earth that can offer you all these tools? The answer is no. So where will you obtain all those information beside "cross training" and create your own hybrid art?
May be you don't need all those tools but just a small subset instead. But in order to be able to know how to defense and counter those tools, you will have no choice but to master all those tools so you will know how to counter it. A simple example, you can't learn how to counter a "side mount" if you don't even know how to apply a "side mount" yourself.
If your MA goal is "how to enter" and "how to finish". The word "style" will have very little meaning to you.
1. Entering strategies (how to move in without being punched and kicked):
- rhino strategy
- octopus strategy,
- double spears strategy,
- zombie arms strategy,
- leading arm jams back arm strategy,
- circle dragging strategy,
- ...
2. Finishing strategies (how to disable your opponent ASAP):
- jab, cross, uppercut, hook, ...
- front kick, side kick, roundhouse kick, back kick, ...
- finger lock, wrist lock, elbow lock, shoulder lock, ...
- hip throw, leg block, single leg, double legs, ...
- full mount, side mount, arm bar, choke, ...
Is there a single MA system on earth that can offer you all these tools? The answer is no. So where will you obtain all those information beside "cross training" and create your own hybrid art?
May be you don't need all those tools but just a small subset instead. But in order to be able to know how to defense and counter those tools, you will have no choice but to master all those tools so you will know how to counter it. A simple example, you can't learn how to counter a "side mount" if you don't even know how to apply a "side mount" yourself.
If your MA goal is "how to enter" and "how to finish". The word "style" will have very little meaning to you.
Last edited:
Juany118
Senior Master
If you believe one particular legend. There is another legend where the nun was simply the last survivor of 5 masters who were trying to create a new martial art that would train a competent Kung Fu practitioner in a shorter period of time.
----And that particular legend states that Wing Chun was a culmination of the 5 animal systems taught at Shaolin. So, once again, a hybrid martial art!
In some of he legends yes, in others no. That is the problem with using such legends, depending on your school of thought the legend changes.
My point was to say there are ways to argue against a poor argument without ad hominem, no more, no less.
Actually the biomechanics of the two arts aren't that different. There are differences of course but not enough to really lend to confusion if taught properly. You have to remember that FMA, especially in the south, have major bleed over, the same as the rest of South Asia, from southern Chinese arts that brought about Kuntao. Are their unique cultural things yes? But @geezer actually teaches seminars on how one can seemlessly transition from one to the other as well, his FMA base is a different style than the one I study if I remember rightly but it's still FMA.
Well there I tend to be in the camp that JKD is a system today for mostly marketing reasons. If you read the Tao of Jeet Kun Do you see that what we call JKD is actually anathema to Lee's philosophy. When I think of hybrid arts in modern times I am thinking of L-I Kali, Hapkido, etc. These are arts that were created by, for lack of a better term, mature practitioners. The point being, they do exist today it's just those who successfully create a truly holistic hybrid are few and far between.
Last edited:
I see you left room for more, so let me add the following and leave room for more:
- sloth strategy
- possum strategy
- kangaroo strategy
- skunk strategy
- turtle strategy
- ....
Similar threads
Latest Discussions
-
éåæ ZhĆ²ngxÄ«n center of gravity
- Latest: Wing Woo Gar
-
-
-
