Learning Another Art

[MJS]

Sometimes (well, a lot of times) people will post threads here on MT where they say they are studying one art that covers a certain range of combat (let's say kicking), and they want to know what style they could learn to handle other ranges (punching/trapping/grappling). More often than not, these people are poo pooed on here and told that it takes a long time to "master" the one they are already studying. (Some people go on to say you can never even master the first one...all you can do is keep refining it...but that's a whole other thread.)

However, a thought struck me the other day: as long as the style they picked for the other range complimented what they are currently studying, what would be the harm in that? For example, from what little knowledge I have, I can see how judo would be a better compliment to my wing chun training than aikido if I wanted to add a grappling range art to my curriculum. (However, I don't know what style that covers kicking range would fit well with it.)

At any rate, your thoughts?

I agree. A stand up art would most likely compliment a grappling are and vice versa. I've got no issues with cross training, however, I do feel that the person should have a solid base in 1 art first, before taking on something else. ie: at least a green or brown belt. As far as the mastering comments go...well, yes, that's probably suited for another thread, but I'll toss in my thoughts on that. While that may be the case, that doesn't mean that we can't learn something else. Sure, the journey is never ending, but isn't that all just part of training? However long it takes, it takes.

 

[MJS]

One headache for mixing styles or cross training is whether or not the principles that underlie them are in sync. To make a really extreme example -- if you're trying to meld a style that relies on relaxation and circular movements and one that's all about tension and straight lines -- you'll be fighting yourself under pressure. It can be done -- but you really do need a solid grounding in one set of principles before you try to jumble other stuff in. That doesn't mean mastery -- or even the equivalent of first dan. But you have to have the primary art's principles pretty well understood before you mix 'em up. Unless they're already in good alignment to begin with...

And then there's the simple issue of time and effort. My teacher tells how he was once invited to a black belt only class, taught by a senior master in the area -- but of a different art. After going, and doing drills, and being corrected for making a fist improperly, it dawned on him that, unless he'd already mastered everything HIS teacher had to teach him... He was wasting his time working on stuff from someone else.

Agreed! That's one and still is, one of the biggest obstacles that I've had to deal with, when I went from Kenpo to Kyokushin. Granted, I no longer do Kenpo, but when you've done something for a long period of time, that way gets burned into your head, and it's hard to change. Now, this isn't to say that the way I executed things in Kenpo was wrong, but having to force myself to do it the way my current teacher wants me to do things, is the challenge.

 

[MJS]

One of the negative things about learning a bunch of systems at the same time is that there is no underlying structure that keeps things fundamentally cohesive for the practitioner. It can end up like a Frankenstein monster where the practitioner can put on a silat hat, muay thai hat, submission grappling hat, etc. but under stress they cannot make anything work well. (I have run into a few of these guys) If there is a structure and cohesiveness to it then there is no problem learning multiple methods but few broad systems have this. (though some do) Quite often good advice is to pick and art and master the fundamentals in it then go out and learn more. That way you have structure and can add to it!

Great point Brian! You can have the jack of all trades, master of none, who trains a little here, a little there, and never really picks up much measurable skill, and you can also have someone who doesn't care how long it takes. That person is more interested in learning rather than getting the quick fix, so to speak. As you said, the structure is key.

 

[drop bear]

When you start adding things on to chi sau , it then becomes JKD.
It is no longer chi sau as it was designed to be practiced , it is a hybrid version.
Chi sau is already theoretically perfect it doesn't need things added to it.

Now I get that people think that the various grappling systems use leverage and not brute strength to execute their movements , but from a Wing Chun perspective they do.
Wing Chun , my lineage in particular is extremely obsessive about minimum use of brute strength , any technique should take the same amount of effort whether executed in thin air or on the opponent.

This is only possible by maintaining a straight posture and maintaining the correct angles of the arms at all times and using the actions of the joints rather than muscular force.
Once these rules are broken then by default you will be using strength to try and execute techniques.
Ultimately it boils down to how high a level of skill you want to obtain in chi sau , if you want to achieve a high level then you should not be using any strength at all.

Interesting.

What is the purpose behind the no strength thing?

Why is chi sao theoretically perfect?

I was having a look at a chi sau comp and they were of course using strength. But I would have assumed that is a given when that sort of thing becomes competitive.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jwUgiAHP2BQ

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

What is the purpose behind the no strength thing?

Why is chi sao theoretically perfect?

One has to go through the "strength" training before going to the "no strength" training.

The "WC sticky hand" training and the "Taiji push hand" training are already 1/2 way there to train the "clinching" skill. It doesn't take much to train the entire "clinching" skill package (such as arm wrap, under hook, over hook, head lock, ...).

How hard can it be to add "arm wrap" into your "sticky hand" training?

 

[drop bear]

One has to go through the "strength" training before going to the "no strength" training.

The "WC sticky hand" training and the "Taiji push hand" training are already 1/2 way there to train the "clinching" skill. It doesn't take much to train the entire "clinching" skill package (such as arm wrap, under hook, over hook, head lock, ...).

See I would have gone the other way and said no strength or focus on good technique to get the best result when you use strength.

That was what I am trying to say is that a lot of the wrestling methodology is the same as chi sau.

 

[wingchun100]

I agree. A stand up art would most likely compliment a grappling are and vice versa. I've got no issues with cross training, however, I do feel that the person should have a solid base in 1 art first, before taking on something else. ie: at least a green or brown belt. As far as the mastering comments go...well, yes, that's probably suited for another thread, but I'll toss in my thoughts on that. While that may be the case, that doesn't mean that we can't learn something else. Sure, the journey is never ending, but isn't that all just part of training? However long it takes, it takes.

Well yes, you need a good foundation in one before moving one. I just meant that I don't think it should be automatic criticism for even thinking about it. LOL

 

[mook jong man]

Interesting.

What is the purpose behind the no strength thing?

Why is chi sao theoretically perfect?

I was having a look at a chi sau comp and they were of course using strength. But I would have assumed that is a given when that sort of thing becomes competitive.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jwUgiAHP2BQ

Lot of what you see on video is not good Wing Chun , simple as that.

I will get back to you later on your other questions .
Now it starts to get a bit heavy mate , for me to explain exactly how power is generated in Wing Chun at least in my lineage will take quite a bit of text as it is quite technical.

But I will endeavour to get back to you later with an explanation and maybe some videos, bit busy at the moment.

 

[mook jong man]

Interesting.

What is the purpose behind the no strength thing?

Why is chi sao theoretically perfect?

I was having a look at a chi sau comp and they were of course using strength. But I would have assumed that is a given when that sort of thing becomes competitive.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jwUgiAHP2BQ

Ok back now.
Basically , in my lineage we consider Wing Chun to be an internal Kung Fu , we believe that is the way it was originally meant to be taught and practiced.
We believe in a concept called 'nim lik' which roughly tranlates as "sense from the brain" this force enables the joints to rotate and generate a huge amount of force without a whole lot of muscular effort.
But only if the muscles and joints can remain relaxed , tension and muscular effort is not conducive to generating this type of effortless power.

In regards to chi sau being theoretically perfect.
Forget about the fighting aspect for just a moment , in essence what we are training our bodies to do in chi sau is to deal with different types of incoming force.
To be able to efficiently redirect and even accelerate those forces without them having an effect on our bodily structure.

To understand the theory behind chi sau it is helpful to think of a rotating sphere , something like a large leather ball that is not fully inflated.
Our hypothetical ball can spin in any direction at high speed , you try to strike the ball or touch it but your force is spun away by the rotation of the ball.
Because our hypothetical ball is not fully inflated it can also absorb a certain degree of force as well , this is like having relaxed arms instead of a tense rigid structure.

I say the theory is perfect , because the tools of Tan sau , Fook sau and Bong sau when extended form the structure of the rotating sphere , these tools are designed to be able to withstand heavy outside force.
With these three structures , the sphere is already perfect , anything else added would only weaken the structure of the sphere.

One of the seniors in my lineage explains better than I can , in this series of videos why strength should not be used in Wing Chun.
Even non Wing Chun people should be able to take something away from this info.

[video=youtube_share;KePHdXgpAdk]http://youtu.be/KePHdXgpAdk[/video]

[video=youtube_share;7j_lsIPgMcE]http://youtu.be/7j_lsIPgMcE[/video]

[video=youtube_share;0POu0pxzO28]http://youtu.be/0POu0pxzO28[/video]

 

[K-man]

I only have a vague idea about chi sau and am looking at it on YouTube at the moment.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kolgxMBdsbU

Now one thing I noticed is that they were doing arm drags and basic hand trapping concepts.

I really can't see why clinching could not be bolted on.

Pummeling looks similar to chi sau.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aaYCWyiyko4

A better example of contested pummeling.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VrfDW3HA0ZA

I must confess 'pummelling' meant something different to me but I'm not too old to learn. The biggest difference is that pummelling is basically clashing physically. The second clip is more relaxed but really quite different to my understanding of chi sau which is practised without tension.

When you start adding things on to chi sau , it then becomes JKD.
It is no longer chi sau as it was designed to be practiced , it is a hybrid version.
Chi sau is already theoretically perfect it doesn't need things added to it.

Now I get that people think that the various grappling systems use leverage and not brute strength to execute their movements , but from a Wing Chun perspective they do.
Wing Chun , my lineage in particular is extremely obsessive about minimum use of brute strength , any technique should take the same amount of effort whether executed in thin air or on the opponent.

This is only possible by maintaining a straight posture and maintaining the correct angles of the arms at all times and using the actions of the joints rather than muscular force.
Once these rules are broken then by default you will be using strength to try and execute techniques.
Ultimately it boils down to how high a level of skill you want to obtain in chi sau , if you want to achieve a high level then you should not be using any strength at all.

Obviously karate doesn't have chi sau but we do have Kakie which is based on chi sau and Tegumi which was the form of Okinawan wrestling that was basically mixed with Kung fu to form karate. Kakie can be practised as a conditioning exercise using strength but I prefer to practise it with softness. But I do practise a paired exercise based on chi sau that develops sensitivity and relies on softness rather that strength.

Interesting.

What is the purpose behind the no strength thing?

Why is chi sao theoretically perfect?

I was having a look at a chi sau comp and they were of course using strength. But I would have assumed that is a given when that sort of thing becomes competitive.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jwUgiAHP2BQ

That is so close to what we train it could be any one of my guys in the clip. I found it really interesting as I had never seen others training it like that.

One has to go through the "strength" training before going to the "no strength" training.

The "WC sticky hand" training and the "Taiji push hand" training are already 1/2 way there to train the "clinching" skill. It doesn't take much to train the entire "clinching" skill package (such as arm wrap, under hook, over hook, head lock, ...).

How hard can it be to add "arm wrap" into your "sticky hand" training?

But why would you? The whole purpose behind certain styles is you don't need to add the force. I love, Bas Rutten. I have been to one of his seminars, I have heaps of his material and I teach many of his techniques. But he is as far from Taiji or WC as you could get. Normally you don't mix oil and water. You can use both in an engine but if you get water in the oil the engine isn't going to function properly. You can use hard and soft in a martial art but if you mix it up it doesn't work properly either.

Ok back now.
Basically , in my lineage we consider Wing Chun to be an internal Kung Fu , we believe that is the way it was originally meant to be taught and practiced.
We believe in a concept called 'nim lik' which roughly tranlates as "sense from the brain" this force enables the joints to rotate and generate a huge amount of force without a whole lot of muscular effort.
But only if the muscles and joints can remain relaxed , tension and muscular effort is not conducive to generating this type of effortless power.

In regards to chi sau being theoretically perfect.
Forget about the fighting aspect for just a moment , in essence what we are training our bodies to do in chi sau is to deal with different types of incoming force.
To be able to efficiently redirect and even accelerate those forces without them having an effect on our bodily structure.

To understand the theory behind chi sau it is helpful to think of a rotating sphere , something like a large leather ball that is not fully inflated.
Our hypothetical ball can spin in any direction at high speed , you try to strike the ball or touch it but your force is spun away by the rotation of the ball.
Because our hypothetical ball is not fully inflated it can also absorb a certain degree of force as well , this is like having relaxed arms instead of a tense rigid structure.

I say the theory is perfect , because the tools of Tan sau , Fook sau and Bong sau when extended form the structure of the rotating sphere , these tools are designed to be able to withstand heavy outside force.
With these three structures , the sphere is already perfect , anything else added would only weaken the structure of the sphere.

One of the seniors in my lineage explains better than I can , in this series of videos why strength should not be used in Wing Chun.
Even non Wing Chun people should be able to take something away from this info.

[video=youtube_share;KePHdXgpAdk]http://youtu.be/KePHdXgpAdk[/video]

[video=youtube_share;7j_lsIPgMcE]http://youtu.be/7j_lsIPgMcE[/video]

[video=youtube_share;0POu0pxzO28]http://youtu.be/0POu0pxzO28[/video]

Really interesting videos, thank you. The principles he is teaching are the same ones I learn in Aikido and teach in my karate.
:asian:

 

[drop bear]

But why would you? The whole purpose behind certain styles is you don't need to add the force. I love, Bas Rutten. I have been to one of his seminars, I have heaps of his material and I teach many of his techniques. But he is as far from Taiji or WC as you could get. Normally you don't mix oil and water. You can use both in an engine but if you get water in the oil the engine isn't going to function properly. You can use hard and soft in a martial art but if you mix it up it doesn't work properly either.



I just wanted to look at this because I think hard and soft techniques together have merit.

Conceptually it is nice to have different methods in which to think it is just empowering to be comfortable in the moment and whether that is a hard or soft moment shouldn't make a difference. I have found people with a great deal of control are able to dial up and down very easily. And it makes them mentality very versatile.

Tactically I would suggest that the oil and water engine breaking mix is applied to the other guy. Not knowing what is going to be resisted what is going to be passed and what is going to be absorbed breaks your own rhythm. And sets up its own openings.

And then mention something about ying yang.

 

[drop bear]

Ok back now.
Basically , in my lineage we consider Wing Chun to be an internal Kung Fu , we believe that is the way it was originally meant to be taught and practiced.
We believe in a concept called 'nim lik' which roughly tranlates as "sense from the brain" this force enables the joints to rotate and generate a huge amount of force without a whole lot of muscular effort.
But only if the muscles and joints can remain relaxed , tension and muscular effort is not conducive to generating this type of effortless power.

In regards to chi sau being theoretically perfect.
Forget about the fighting aspect for just a moment , in essence what we are training our bodies to do in chi sau is to deal with different types of incoming force.
To be able to efficiently redirect and even accelerate those forces without them having an effect on our bodily structure.

To understand the theory behind chi sau it is helpful to think of a rotating sphere , something like a large leather ball that is not fully inflated.
Our hypothetical ball can spin in any direction at high speed , you try to strike the ball or touch it but your force is spun away by the rotation of the ball.
Because our hypothetical ball is not fully inflated it can also absorb a certain degree of force as well , this is like having relaxed arms instead of a tense rigid structure.

I say the theory is perfect , because the tools of Tan sau , Fook sau and Bong sau when extended form the structure of the rotating sphere , these tools are designed to be able to withstand heavy outside force.
With these three structures , the sphere is already perfect , anything else added would only weaken the structure of the sphere.

One of the seniors in my lineage explains better than I can , in this series of videos why strength should not be used in Wing Chun.
Even non Wing Chun people should be able to take something away from this info.
]

The video does make good points. And I do try to adopt a few of those principles. Structural strength over muscular strength is important.

I agree with parts of that concept. Not sold on the knocking guys 3 feet backwards with one inch punches.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Normally you don't mix oil and water.

MA training is to solve problems. Most of the problems come from systems other than your own system. You have to know how people from other styles train in order to be able to deal with them effectively. IMO, if a WC guy doesn't know how to deal with an "arm wrap", it's a hole in his training.

One of my wrestlers had no Gi wrestling experience. The 1st time he competed in Gi wrestling, his opponent's "stiff arm" gave him a lot of problem that he didn't know how to handle it. Of course he could avoid this problem by never try to:

- compete in any Gi wrestling tournament,
- fight any Judo guy on ski slopes during winter time.

That will be the price that he has to pay for not "cross train". Since most of the MMA gyms have both Gi and no Gi. He has to train both in order to fit into those environment.

 

[drop bear]

MA training is to solve problems. Most of the problems come from systems other than your own system. You have to know how people from other styles train in order to be able to deal with them effectively. IMO, if a WC guy doesn't know how to deal with an "arm wrap", it's a hole in his training.

One of my wrestlers had no Gi wrestling experience. The 1st time he competed in Gi wrestling, his opponent's "stiff arm" gave him a lot of problem that he didn't know how to handle it. Of course he could avoid this problem by never try to:

- compete in any Gi wrestling tournament,
- fight any Judo guy on ski slopes during winter time.

That will be the price that he has to pay for not "cross train". Since most of the MMA gyms have both Gi and no Gi. He has to train both in order to fit into those environment.

An example of oil and water in a technique. Hard and soft being used together.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=R6xQFgFbAA8

And a bit on structural strength as well.

 

[Punchy]

Not sold on the knocking guys 3 feet backwards with one inch punches.

You need to find a good WC guy and have him demonstrate this on you.

There are actually two versions of the inch punch. The first is the one shown for demonstration that knocks the person back several feet. The second is the one that is truly used in combat situations and drops the person right where they stand.

 

[K-man]

I just wanted to look at this because I think hard and soft techniques together have merit.

Conceptually it is nice to have different methods in which to think it is just empowering to be comfortable in the moment and whether that is a hard or soft moment shouldn't make a difference. I have found people with a great deal of control are able to dial up and down very easily. And it makes them mentality very versatile.

That is why we have Goju Ryu, 'hard and soft' and Uechi Ryu, previously Pangai-noon, 'half hard half soft'. Hard and soft together are fantastic but knowing when to be hard and when to be soft is the art. Hard and soft are in different techniques, not a technique that is practised on a sliding scale of force. A punch is a hard punch, a kick is a hard kick. You don't have such a thing as a soft punch. A wrist lock is a soft technique where using strength can cause it to fail.

Tactically I would suggest that the oil and water engine breaking mix is applied to the other guy. Not knowing what is going to be resisted what is going to be passed and what is going to be absorbed breaks your own rhythm. And sets up its own openings.

And then mention something about ying yang.

Yin and yang are separate, hard and soft are separate, oil and water are separate.

Mixing oil and water is possible, as an emulsion. That requires special preparation or it doesn't work. Putting hard and soft together requires the same attention.

MA training is to solve problems. Most of the problems come from systems other than your own system. You have to know how people from other styles train in order to be able to deal with them effectively. IMO, if a WC guy doesn't know how to deal with an "arm wrap", it's a hole in his training.

One of my wrestlers had no Gi wrestling experience. The 1st time he competed in Gi wrestling, his opponent's "stiff arm" gave him a lot of problem that he didn't know how to handle it. Of course he could avoid this problem by never try to:

- compete in any Gi wrestling tournament,
- fight any Judo guy on ski slopes during winter time.

That will be the price that he has to pay for not "cross train". Since most of the MMA gyms have both Gi and no Gi. He has to train both in order to fit into those environment.

Which brings us back to the sport vs SD arguement. None of my problems come from other styles because I don't compete against other styles. Any problems I have are gaps I may perceive in my training which I can then address by cross training. That is precisely why I began training Aikido to address the lack of soft in my karate. However, if my principal art was Aikido, there is no way I would cross train karate. In that situation I might look at BJJ. Mixing arts is a question of balance.

An example of oil and water in a technique. Hard and soft being used together.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=R6xQFgFbAA8

And a bit on structural strength as well.

May be it is in the definition. I don't see the soft here at all. Shooting requires a physical clash by its very nature. Protecting against the sprawl is redirecting your opponent's body, in this case by removing his support. Chi sau in WC is soft, most Aikido is soft. Both are internal arts requiring sensitivity, not strength.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XX4gzo14n14
:asian:

 

[RTKDCMB]

Kids grow up in some countries and know 7 different languages. You should be able to handle more than one martial art if that sort of thing interests you.

Not the best analogy when you consider that often physical skills are harder to get down than mental skills. Many beginners think they know how to perform a technique well until they actually try it.

 

[drop bear]

Mixing oil and water is possible, as an emulsion. That requires special preparation or it doesn't work. Putting hard and soft together requires the same attention.

Which brings us back to the sport vs SD arguement. None of my problems come from other styles because I don't compete against other styles. Any problems I have are gaps I may perceive in my training which I can then address by cross training. That is precisely why I began training Aikido to address the lack of soft in my karate. However, if my principal art was Aikido, there is no way I would cross train karate. In that situation I might look at BJJ. Mixing arts is a question of balance.

May be it is in the definition. I don't see the soft here at all. Shooting requires a physical clash by its very nature. Protecting against the sprawl is redirecting your opponent's body, in this case by removing his support. Chi sau in WC is soft, most Aikido is soft. Both are internal arts requiring sensitivity, not strength.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XX4gzo14n14
:asian:

See I would have said that redirecting your oponants force the definition of soft. Hence sprawl defence.

A fake would be a soft punch wouldn't it?

 

[K-man]

See I would have said that redirecting your oponants force the definition of soft. Hence sprawl defence.

A fake would be a soft punch wouldn't it?

Redirecting certainly can be soft but in the video clip it was a physical pull on the leg breaking the balance, not a redirection of force.

And a fake is not a soft punch, it is what it is called, a fake.

So, not by my definition ... for either.
:asian:

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

The whole purpose behind certain styles is you don't need to add the force.

It's better to "make" something to happen than to "wait" for something to happen. In order to do so, you will need to give before you can take. If you don't use your force, you can't force your opponent to respond.

The difference between:

1. Your opponent attacks you, you yield, and borrow his force.
2. You attack, your opponent responds to your attack, you then yield, and borrow his force.

is in 1, your opponent makes it happen (you have dependency on him). In 2, you make it happen (you don't have dependency on him). You will need to have your own force before you can borrow your opponent's force.

In the following example, the harder that you pull your opponent "forward", the harder that your opponent will resist "backward", the easier it's for you to throw him "backward".