The Complete Package

[7starmantis]

Welcome to MartialTalk Fumanchu. Its good to have you on the boards, make yourself comfortable and please feel free to ask if you have any questions. You will find some very knowledgeable and experienced people on this board.

As far as mantis' origination, what sources are you using? Its pretty widely accepted that Wong Long (creator of mantis) stayed at and trained at shaolin temple. In fact its accepted by many that he created mantis specifically to defeat his shaolin monk brothers. Many believe to this day that mantis is the only system developed to fight against shaolin. So its connections to long fist or shaolin styles of any kind are more in defending against rather than using. Also I'm not quite sure I understood you, but your saying mantis is islamic rather than buddist in nature?

I've never heard that about mantis and taiji being originated at the same time. I would be interested in knowing where you got that as well. There are significant degrees of "crosspolination" between most internal CMA and tai chi. mantis does have alot of "internal" qualities.

Dont get me wrong, I'm not trying to attack you or even say your wrong, I'm just interested in where you are getting your sources from.

7sm

 

[ninhito]

Hey i have a question is there any Mantis in the Detroit, Michigan area? I havent found any and i have searched, O and how do you find a dojo in someone's backyard?

 

[7starmantis]

Hey i have a question is there any Mantis in the Detroit, Michigan area? I havent found any and i have searched, O and how do you find a dojo in someone's backyard?

How close is that to Midland? Master Henry Chung is in Midland. I would say some of the best mantis around.

7sm

 

[ninhito]

I have never heard of Midland, Michigan so i guess there isnt a person around here who knows seven star mantis.

 

[Blooming Lotus]

alot of ppl with "back yard dojos" just advertise as a school. To find out where they're operating from, you'll just have to call them I suppose.

 

[ninhito]

o so they would be schools uuum how do i find them i mean if there out of detroit the yellow pages that i have dont cover them?

 

[Blooming Lotus]

I don't know about Detroit, but here, alot of the ones you see in the yellow pages are actually instructors operating out of their homes. Failing that, try your local china town or local papers and newsletters etc. Also try under health centres / gyms / clubs and associations etc.



So you actually prefer a backyard training gig?? Curious.

 

[ninhito]

Well with a back yard training uuum environment you get a one on one type atmosphere with your instructor. I mean if you have alot of students then its kinda hard to look at one student and see the problems, ya know. I would love to try and do that i mean there should be other students but not like a normal classroom (30+ students).

 

[Blooming Lotus]

Fair enough and good luck with that, but I think we're bordering on a thread jack, so back to the topic...........

 

[Fumanchu]

7starmantis,

Thanks, As for the relationship between mantis and tai chi, geographic proximity, looking at the theory and application it's similar as well. They both originated about the same time.

If you compare the fighting theories behind mantis and chinese straight sword, they are similar. I would think that whoever (person or group of people) who invented mantis were skilled with the straight sword.

I don't think mantis was designed specifically to defeat shaolin monks per se. The mantis system is good in providing entries into an opponent. from that point on you can follow in with basic punches and kicks. For example looking at the first form in mantis - bung bu, it is all about strategy. Mantis was used by body guard of government officials and to protect caravens against bandits on the silk roads. I see this as "practical history". whether someone used it to defeat some shaolin monks is less relevant to me.

Not saying that mantis is islamic. What i'm saying is that tan tui orignated from the islamic group of people in china. This style of fighting later evolved in the hands of people who practiced the daoist religion to systems like baji etc.... mantis was yet another evolution. However there is no practical relevance between the fighting system and the religion those particular people were practicing in those days.

 

[7starmantis]

7starmantis,

Thanks, As for the relationship between mantis and tai chi, geographic proximity, looking at the theory and application it's similar as well. They both originated about the same time.

Do you mind sharing the sources you used to come to this conclusion? I've never heard anyone say they believed mantis and taiji originated around the same time. In fact, mantis is generally accepted as being alot more recent than alot of other CMA. It would be interesting to see your sources.

If you compare the fighting theories behind mantis and chinese straight sword, they are similar. I would think that whoever (person or group of people) who invented mantis were skilled with the straight sword.

What exactly do you mean? What theories? I dont see how that lends itself to taiji and mantis being created at the same time. If anything it helps the opposite belief since taiji would have to allready have been created if he was skilled in it and then creating mantis. There are similarities between mantis theories and taiji, however that same similarity is shared with many other CMAs.

I don't think mantis was designed specifically to defeat shaolin monks per se. The mantis system is good in providing entries into an opponent. from that point on you can follow in with basic punches and kicks. For example looking at the first form in mantis - bung bu, it is all about strategy. Mantis was used by body guard of government officials and to protect caravens against bandits on the silk roads. I see this as "practical history". whether someone used it to defeat some shaolin monks is less relevant to me.

So you dont accept the generally accepted history of the mantis system? Thats ok, what do you accept as the history of mantis creation then? So your summing up the whole system with, "its good in providing entries into an opponent"? Thats a little understated isn't it? Have you studied mantis kung fu? I'm not following what your saying about Bung Bo being about strategy. The "practical history" of mantis is great, and I'm with you on it meaning more than defeating some monk, but just because it doesn't mean alot to you or I doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Not saying that mantis is islamic. What i'm saying is that tan tui orignated from the islamic group of people in china. This style of fighting later evolved in the hands of people who practiced the daoist religion to systems like baji etc.... mantis was yet another evolution. However there is no practical relevance between the fighting system and the religion those particular people were practicing in those days.

Mantis is just another evolution of tan tui? I'm not sure I understand what your saying here either.

7sm

 

[Blooming Lotus]

doesn't tam tui have shaolin rooting itself?? Maybe that's the association???

 

[Fumanchu]

Quote: "Do you mind sharing the sources you used to come to this conclusion? I've never heard anyone say they believed mantis and taiji originated around the same time. In fact, mantis is generally accepted as being alot more recent than alot of other CMA. It would be interesting to see your sources."

Conclusion is from seeing the similar concepts that are being applied in both the tai chi and mantis systems. The way you engage an opponent’s force and disrupting their balance is the same. I would say that in the tai chi form they practice a larger range of movement for more of the time. But in application you might be shortening the movement depending on what you encounter.


Quote: "What exactly do you mean? What theories? I dont see how that lends itself to taiji and mantis being created at the same time. If anything it helps the opposite belief since taiji would have to allready have been created if he was skilled in it and then creating mantis. There are similarities between mantis theories and taiji, however that same similarity is shared with many other CMAs.


Well if you look at the way you work the angles with a straight sword and the empty hand tech in mantis, they’re both very similar. So the upward cutting action with the straight sword which uses considerable wrist action is similar to the wrist strike in lann zhaat. Both are used in fast-reaction situations. There’s other examples.

Quote: "So you dont accept the generally accepted history of the mantis system? Thats ok, what do you accept as the history of mantis creation then? So your summing up the whole system with, "its good in providing entries into an opponent"? Thats a little understated isn't it? Have you studied mantis kung fu? I'm not following what your saying about Bung Bo being about strategy. The "practical history" of mantis is great, and I'm with you on it meaning more than defeating some monk, but just because it doesn't mean alot to you or I doesn't mean it didn't happen."

The monk-history of mantis may or may not be true. I don’t know how reliable the records are. Providing good entries into opponents is not the only thing that mantis is good at, but it is definitely one of the advantages of the system. Yes, I do mantis, as a general benchmark of where I’m at, I’m working on the baat zhao routine. If you look at the first line of bung bu, it contains the ways of creating the angle, closing into an opponent – this is what I mean by strategy. Mantis doesn’t teach you basic punch and kicks – this is considered assumed knowledge which a student would have experience from learning tam tui and basic pad work. Mantis at the bung bu level provides the strategy from which you can more effectively deploy the "kicks and punches"


Quote: "Mantis is just another evolution of tan tui? I'm not sure I understand what your saying here either."

What I’m saying is, the origin of mantis is probably derived from tam tui and other systems such as baji and piqua. I think it is simplistic to say that it came about all of a sudden when a monk observed a bug and came up with this fighting system. I think it is more likely that the person or group of people who arrive at this system were skilled in the above northern systems as well as the straight sword. I would even go so far to say that the name "mantis" was coined after the creation of the system when someone discovered that the hook hands looked somewhat like the bug.

 

[7starmantis]

Conclusion is from seeing the similar concepts that are being applied in both the tai chi and mantis systems. The way you engage an opponent’s force and disrupting their balance is the same. I would say that in the tai chi form they practice a larger range of movement for more of the time. But in application you might be shortening the movement depending on what you encounter.

So your belief of the time of creation of the mantis system is based simply on your own observances to similarities betweeen mantis and taiji. Its good that you see these similarites and are looking that deep into the sets, but its not really any kind of source, its just your opinion.

Well if you look at the way you work the angles with a straight sword and the empty hand tech in mantis, they’re both very similar. So the upward cutting action with the straight sword which uses considerable wrist action is similar to the wrist strike in lann zhaat. Both are used in fast-reaction situations. There’s other examples.

Good observation, mantis does make use of many angles as well does most usage of the gim. The wrist action is very similar, but is actually different. In the form it is a soft point strike with the fingers, which involves not only wrist movement, but applied force to the fingers. The cut with the gim is more relient on the wrist alone. Very good observation again, but nothing that shows mantis and taiji to have been created at the same time. If anything it shows that one influenced the other, not that they were created at the same time.

The monk-history of mantis may or may not be true. I don’t know how reliable the records are.

I can agree with that, but then the "practical-history" may or may not be true as well. Discounting one also discounts the other.

Providing good entries into opponents is not the only thing that mantis is good at, but it is definitely one of the advantages of the system. Yes, I do mantis, as a general benchmark of where I’m at, I’m working on the baat zhao routine. If you look at the first line of bung bu, it contains the ways of creating the angle, closing into an opponent – this is what I mean by strategy. Mantis doesn’t teach you basic punch and kicks – this is considered assumed knowledge which a student would have experience from learning tam tui and basic pad work. Mantis at the bung bu level provides the strategy from which you can more effectively deploy the "kicks and punches"

"Closing the gap" as many call it, is a great aspect of the mantis system, but pales in comparison to many of the more advanced principles and concepts in mantis. I wouldn't describe mantis' strogest points using the argument of "closing the gap"; many systems provide that quite effectively as well. I dont agree with the "kicks and punches" you spoke about. While mantis doesn't focus heavily on punching and kicking (the reason we teach wah lum sets first in our school), it does teach different ways of punching \and kicking. The basic knowledge is assumed, however new ways of punching adn kicking are taught to relate more to the system. Few martial arts teach hueng choy, bong choy, mantis hand type punching. These are learned in mantis itself. How to punch and kick without hurting yourself, and with sufficient power, is asumed.

What I’m saying is, the origin of mantis is probably derived from tam tui and other systems such as baji and piqua. I think it is simplistic to say that it came about all of a sudden when a monk observed a bug and came up with this fighting system. I think it is more likely that the person or group of people who arrive at this system were skilled in the above northern systems as well as the straight sword. I would even go so far to say that the name "mantis" was coined after the creation of the system when someone discovered that the hook hands looked somewhat like the bug.

So you do not accept mantis history. Has your sifu spoke about the history? Does he feel the same as you? If you studied the accepted history, Wong Long (creator) was believed to be a very well rounded and highly skilled martial artist. So you saying they were probably skilled in northern arts and even the gim, is quite along the lines of the accpeted history. Its interesting that you also believe the name "mantis" was given after the system was created. How do you explain the "mantis catches cicada" positions and the "wind movement" the southern mantis guys perform?

May I ask who you study under and how long you have studied mantis? Your profile only lists TKD. What style of mantis are you studying?

7sm

 

[Fumanchu]

Quote: "So your belief of the time of creation of the mantis system is based simply on your own observances to similarities betweeen mantis and taiji. Its good that you see these similarites and are looking that deep into the sets, but its not really any kind of source, its just your opinion."

Yes I guess it is just my opinion as I can’t provide you with documents that support my view. I tend to classify martial arts in terms of their underlying concepts. If they are similar and belong to the same geographic region, then it is likely their development is linked. After all, martial arts evolve to "solve-problems" affecting people in a given period of time, that’s also why I feel tai chi and mantis appeared around the same time.

Quote: "Good observation, mantis does make use of many angles as well does most usage of the gim. The wrist action is very similar, but is actually different. In the form it is a soft point strike with the fingers, which involves not only wrist movement, but applied force to the fingers. The cut with the gim is more relient on the wrist alone. Very good observation again, but nothing that shows mantis and taiji to have been created at the same time. If anything it shows that one influenced the other, not that they were created at the same time."

Not really, the soft point strike with the fingers (in the hook configuration) is only touched on in the Zhao Yao form – last form of mantis. The wrist is used a lot more as to attack soft points at very close range in Laan Zhaat, which is developed from Bung Bu. The formation of the mantis hook also provides speed in the elbows in protecting your soft abdominal parts or to increase the explosive speed in elbow strikes. The hook itself as I use it, is the full range of a grappling move, which you may or may not get into depending on how the opponent response. The control with the hook is similar to the way tai chi or baji controls with the hands – although in their form they don’t create the hook position. In most practical situations you don’t need to form the full hook position in grappling.

Quote: "I can agree with that, but then the "practical-history" may or may not be true as well. Discounting one also discounts the other."

Quite possibly yes. But I think records that enough people use mantis for bodyguard duties or to protect valuable cargo is more reliable than one person’s creation from one source for one purpose (to defeat shaolin).

""Closing the gap" as many call it, is a great aspect of the mantis system, but pales in comparison to many of the more advanced principles and concepts in mantis. I wouldn't describe mantis' strogest points using the argument of "closing the gap"; many systems provide that quite effectively as well. I dont agree with the "kicks and punches" you spoke about. While mantis doesn't focus heavily on punching and kicking (the reason we teach wah lum sets first in our school), it does teach different ways of punching \and kicking. The basic knowledge is assumed, however new ways of punching adn kicking are taught to relate more to the system. Few martial arts teach hueng choy, bong choy, mantis hand type punching. These are learned in mantis itself. How to punch and kick without hurting yourself, and with sufficient power, is asumed."

I agree, that within the mantis system there are specialised hits to get the harder to reach targets. But they do not substitute the bread and butter kicks and punches. Generally the more specialised strikes are initiated when you (as a mantis practitioner) know that your basic punches are not going to strike the target. The more sophisticated hits are generated in mid-stream of doing more basic techniques.

"So you do not accept mantis history. Has your sifu spoke about the history? Does he feel the same as you? If you studied the accepted history, Wong Long (creator) was believed to be a very well rounded and highly skilled martial artist. So you saying they were probably skilled in northern arts and even the gim, is quite along the lines of the accpeted history. Its interesting that you also believe the name "mantis" was given after the system was created. How do you explain the "mantis catches cicada" positions and the "wind movement" the southern mantis guys perform? "

I’m not sure what my instructor accepts. From what I know we’re discovering more about kung fu history as China is opening up more to the world. I haven’t really dealt much with the historical aspects. Sure Wong Long may well be a person or might be a representation of the "type of people" who developed mantis. Who knows, but I think the important thing is to be able to see the relationship between mantis and other northern arts and the gim in our own training in mantis. Mantis catches the cicada position is the full-movement of a smothering hand action. This action is used by baji and other northern systems but is not represented as the full-movement in the forms as it is in mantis. Southern Mantis developed independently to northern mantis. The only thing similar between the 2 is the name.


Quote: "May I ask who you study under and how long you have studied mantis? Your profile only lists TKD. What style of mantis are you studying?"

I’ve been doing mantis for 4.5yrs now. The system is the seven star branch.

 

[Black Tiger Fist]

Many believe to this day that mantis is the only system developed to fight against shaolin. So its connections to long fist or shaolin styles of any kind are more in defending against rather than using. 7sm

Developed to fight against shaolin is being too broad.

There are way too many styles that were taught at shaolin to make a statement like that.That is another one of those legend half-truths type statements. Wong Long used mantis to defeat the monks that he was training with ,noone has ever determined or has it ever been stated what style(s) those monks were skilled in.





jeff

 

[7starmantis]

Yes I guess it is just my opinion as I can’t provide you with documents that support my view. I tend to classify martial arts in terms of their underlying concepts. If they are similar and belong to the same geographic region, then it is likely their development is linked. After all, martial arts evolve to "solve-problems" affecting people in a given period of time, that’s also why I feel tai chi and mantis appeared around the same time.

Its good to have your own opinions and beliefs about your system, but dont expect everyone to agree if its something you have come up with on your own. There are people who do and have done alot of research on the history of MA and CMA and each specific style. To disagree with the agreed upon history by these guys is fine. In fact, I dont place much emphasis on history, as I would much rather be out training instead of talking about it. My only question, is what do you say about all the research that has been done and the accepted history of mantis? Why do so many people believe something so different from you?

Not really, the soft point strike with the fingers (in the hook configuration) is only touched on in the Zhao Yao form – last form of mantis. The wrist is used a lot more as to attack soft points at very close range in Laan Zhaat, which is developed from Bung Bu. The formation of the mantis hook also provides speed in the elbows in protecting your soft abdominal parts or to increase the explosive speed in elbow strikes. The hook itself as I use it, is the full range of a grappling move, which you may or may not get into depending on how the opponent response. The control with the hook is similar to the way tai chi or baji controls with the hands – although in their form they don’t create the hook position. In most practical situations you don’t need to form the full hook position in grappling.

I'm sorry, I must have misunderstood what technique you wre refering to. The attacks with the wrist ( where your hand is in a dil sau, and you actually make contact with the back of the wrist) you are correct about, but that technique shares no similarities to taiji. I thought you were refering to the finger strike at the beginning, where you are blocking with both hands in pak sau, then strike under the armpit with your fingers. That techniques does share a resemblance to the uppward cutting movements of the gim. Still, none of this lends itself to both systems being created together, or at the same time. In fact, most 7 star mantis schools do not emphasize as much "taiji principles" such as disrupting the center, staying lower than your opponant. That is why I was interested in knowing your lineage. May I ask again who you study under?

Quite possibly yes. But I think records that enough people use mantis for bodyguard duties or to protect valuable cargo is more reliable than one person’s creation from one source for one purpose (to defeat shaolin).

Thats doesnm't make any sense though. Your going to blindly accept one part of the history and not another part, because you personally have an emotional reaction to one part. I dont mind people having different beliefs about the history of mantis, most of it is hearsay at best anyway, but to just pick and choose what you are going to believe by what sounds good to you, is, in my opinion nieve. I do think you should read up more on the accepted history of mantis, no where does it talk about only one source, he used techniques from the insect, then monkey footwork, then later on 17 techniques from other systems. Remember, he was a skilled MAist before developing mantis.

I’m not sure what my instructor accepts. From what I know we’re discovering more about kung fu history as China is opening up more to the world. I haven’t really dealt much with the historical aspects. Sure Wong Long may well be a person or might be a representation of the "type of people" who developed mantis. Who knows, but I think the important thing is to be able to see the relationship between mantis and other northern arts and the gim in our own training in mantis. Mantis catches the cicada position is the full-movement of a smothering hand action. This action is used by baji and other northern systems but is not represented as the full-movement in the forms as it is in mantis. Southern Mantis developed independently to northern mantis. The only thing similar between the 2 is the name.

It is important to see relationships between different systems and your own, however be careful assuming those relationships lend some type of heavy connection. To see a similarity and immediately claim the two systems were created together, is jumping the gun a little bit. Where in taiji is the dil sau? Or the wrist locks and breaks as in the beginning of Da Goon? There are similarities, and there are differences. saying the similarities mean simultaneous creation is the same as saying the differences mean they are from different countries of origin. Without research and any type of proof its hard to make any concrete statements in CMA history.
I didnt say anything about similarities between northern and southern mantis, I just said they both use techniques from the mantis insect.

Let me say this. I am impressed with your level of observance into the systems, many dont take the time. However, be leary of coming to hard concrete facts in your head because of those observations. Like mantis kung fu, be soft and yield. Dont assume your answer is the only one because you have come to it by yourself.

Developed to fight against shaolin is being too broad.

There are way too many styles that were taught at shaolin to make a statement like that.That is another one of those legend half-truths type statements. Wong Long used mantis to defeat the monks that he was training with ,noone has ever determined or has it ever been stated what style(s) those monks were skilled in.

How so? What does the amount of styles taught at shaolin have to do with it? Ok, so wong long defeated the monks he was training with. I dont think determining the exact systems is needed. Were these monks shaolin monks? Where they at a shaolin temple? Then would not his new system have defeated shaolin arts? No one is saying the only use for mantis is to defeat said certain specific styles. What I said was that it is generally accepted that mantis was created to fight against shaolin arts. If you buy any of the accepted history, that statement is correct.

7sm

 

[Fumanchu]

Quote: "My only question, is what do you say about all the research that has been done and the accepted history of mantis? Why do so many people believe something so different from you?"

I don’t know why people believe different things from me. But I can try to explain why I believe what I do. It is more likely that a martial art is composed by 2 or more persons. You need at least one partner to test out your techniques and that partner would have to be quite competent as well. Though the act of testing, the partners would be able to refine their ideas. I don’t think the generation of ideas would be one sided (ie by one person and the other person is just a test dummy). This seems more logical than to think that someone sat in a cave, observed an insect and came up with a new system.

Quote: "I'm sorry, I must have misunderstood what technique you wre refering to. The attacks with the wrist ( where your hand is in a dil sau, and you actually make contact with the back of the wrist) you are correct about, but that technique shares no similarities to taiji. I thought you were refering to the finger strike at the beginning, where you are blocking with both hands in pak sau, then strike under the armpit with your fingers. That techniques does share a resemblance to the uppward cutting movements of the gim. Still, none of this lends itself to both systems being created together, or at the same time. In fact, most 7 star mantis schools do not emphasize as much "taiji principles" such as disrupting the center, staying lower than your opponant. That is why I was interested in knowing your lineage. May I ask again who you study under?"

Same body movement underpinning the "rounded feeling" in tai chi and the wrist strike. Tai chi may not have the exact hand configuration but the body movement behind that move is similar. What makes the move work is not so much that the point of your wrist hits the target precisely – that may / may not happen. But the rounded feeling in your arms supported by your body that creates a "wedge". Oh yes, heaps of what mantis does involves staying lower compared to your opponent and slicing hits upwards or taking away their balance – by wedging and / or sweeps. That includes getting your opponent to cross their own centre. The objectives of control is similar to tai chi. In the opening moves when you have side stepped your opponent – you say that you launch finger strikes to the armpit. We’re not that precise – using the straight punch instead of a finger strike. That’s because we treat the whole flank of the opponent as a legitimate target as opposed to one particular point. As for the lineage, my instructor’s instructors were from Taiwan originally.

Quote: "Thats doesnm't make any sense though. Your going to blindly accept one part of the history and not another part, because you personally have an emotional reaction to one part. I dont mind people having different beliefs about the history of mantis, most of it is hearsay at best anyway, but to just pick and choose what you are going to believe by what sounds good to you, is, in my opinion nieve. I do think you should read up more on the accepted history of mantis, no where does it talk about only one source, he used techniques from the insect, then monkey footwork, then later on 17 techniques from other systems. Remember, he was a skilled MAist before developing mantis."

It is not really an emotionally reaction as such. There are more accounts from different sources of bodyguards of important people who know mantis then there is verifiable evidence of the system’s creation. So the conclusion I come to results from a balance of available facts as opposed to emotion. I’m not sure about 17 techniques. Mantis does not lend itself to techniques as such, the basis of it’s body movement comes from earlier northern systems such as long fist, baji etc.



Quote: "It is important to see relationships between different systems and your own, however be careful assuming those relationships lend some type of heavy connection. To see a similarity and immediately claim the two systems were created together, is jumping the gun a little bit. Where in taiji is the dil sau? Or the wrist locks and breaks as in the beginning of Da Goon? There are similarities, and there are differences. saying the similarities mean simultaneous creation is the same as saying the differences mean they are from different countries of origin. Without research and any type of proof its hard to make any concrete statements in CMA history. I didnt say anything about similarities between northern and southern mantis, I just said they both use techniques from the mantis insect."

I don’t think Tai Chi misses out on getting into positions where you can do joint locks. Both mantis and Tai Chi attampt to control an opponent without having to lock on to one specific point in a grabbing action. Sure part of the act of controlling may lead to a grab and hold, but that results from an interplay between what you do and what your partner is doing at that time. In most situations (in tai chi or mantis), the control techniques allow you to disrupt the opponent and give you an advantage. What is Da Goon? Is it a form?

 

[7starmantis]

This seems more logical than to think that someone sat in a cave, observed an insect and came up with a new system.

Your combining two different stories about different things. I can accept that you have your own beliefs, your welcome to your own opinions as are we all.

In the opening moves when you have side stepped your opponent – you say that you launch finger strikes to the armpit. We’re not that precise – using the straight punch instead of a finger strike. That’s because we treat the whole flank of the opponent as a legitimate target as opposed to one particular point. As for the lineage, my instructor’s instructors were from Taiwan originally.

First, we must be talking about different forms. Your describing Bung Bo? I was speaking of a different form. nevermind. Bung bo does side step and use a straight punch. I didn't say anything about only one particular point being a legitament target, but being precise is very important in the higher levels of the mantis system. With the 8 points of attack and some of the more serious attack points, presicion is very neccessary.

I'm sorry, I wasn't asking as much about where your instructor was from, but who your instructor was, I may not have been clear.

It is not really an emotionally reaction as such. There are more accounts from different sources of bodyguards of important people who know mantis then there is verifiable evidence of the system’s creation. So the conclusion I come to results from a balance of available facts as opposed to emotion. I’m not sure about 17 techniques. Mantis does not lend itself to techniques as such, the basis of it’s body movement comes from earlier northern systems such as long fist, baji etc.

So would you mind sharing those accounts from important people now? What are the available facts? You said earlier you had no sources for your beliefs. If you do, I would be interested in seeing them.

I don’t think Tai Chi misses out on getting into positions where you can do joint locks. Both mantis and Tai Chi attampt to control an opponent without having to lock on to one specific point in a grabbing action. Sure part of the act of controlling may lead to a grab and hold, but that results from an interplay between what you do and what your partner is doing at that time. In most situations (in tai chi or mantis), the control techniques allow you to disrupt the opponent and give you an advantage. What is Da Goon? Is it a form?

I didn't say taiji missed out on chin na techniques. In true martial application there are many in taiji. I'm not sure what you mean about mantis not having any grabbing action, there is alot of grabbing in mantis. The difference is that the garb is a "non commital" type of a grab where you can let go quickly if needed.

Da Goon is a form, you might know it as Dou Gan Quan or Dore Kwan Kuen. Its one of the first forms in the system, I think maybe #4 or so.

7sm

 

[Fumanchu]

ok, here goes with regard to a brief history. similaritiy between styles and the recorded history places tai chi, mantis, hsingi at round the 1600s. Baji was mentioned in the Ming Dynasty 1368-1644. It does cover the 1600 period but may be developed up to 200 yrs earlier than mantis. Given that all these styles occurred in neighbouring provinces, it is hard to imagine that they sprung up in isolation or that they had a "secret lineage" for many generations before the 1600s. It seems reasonable there is significant co-development between these systems at around the same time.

Yes, it is the non-commital grab that I was also referring to - i wasn't saying there isn't any grabbing action, but that control does not always require grabbing as in tai chi.

No, I haven't come across the form "Dou Gan Quan" or "Dore Kwan Kuen", what material do they cover?

I don't know what 8 points of attack is. Yes I agree that certain strikes at the advance level work best if done with precision. Finger strike to the face would at least distract your opponent. Some times the blade of the hand can slip in towards the throat. But the fact is if you miss you do not damage your hands. There seems to be too many hard things around the arm pit to do finger strikes there. Not good if you miss and hit the ribs. i find that the more advance hits focus on zones as opposed to point strikes.