The Complete Package

[7starmantis]

Balance and leverage are closely related. It comes down to the pivot point, centre of mass and length of lever. Even tai chi players use muscles to move. How else do we move if not with our muscles. It depends of what muscles we use to create the tightness at different parts of our body. We try not to present our tight parts for the opponent to work from. Also we relax before he realise that it is tight. A skilled opponent would also be doing the same, it comes down to who is better. I don’t know who CMC is. But you can feel being pressured going up against a good tai chi player. If you’re not pressuring your opponent to defend, how then can you be aggressive?

Balance and leverage are closely related, yet not the same. Yes, taiji players use muscle to move, yet not to fight. Its sort of a conundrum isn't it? That’s why taiji is so hard to truly understand. CMC is Cheng Man-Ch'Ing, that’s who I was referring to. This tightness you are talking about is the death of your taiji. Tightness doesn't exist in taiji. There is a point to give yee or "tightness" as you say in mantis fighting, but its fake yee, just hard enough to get them to resist, then you quickly collapse and attack. Going up against a good taiji player, you think you feel pressure, but if you resists with pressure, it should be gone. Resisting with pressure goes completely against taiji principles as well as mantis. It’s a common misconception that you can not be aggressive without being "tight" or using your "muscle" or "strength". It depends on how well you understand or define aggressive. What exactly is aggressive to you? You don’t have to resist pressure with pressure; you yield and allow their pressure to move past you, and then attack. You allow them to "empty" their attack, and then attack. I'm curious as to how or what principles you guys use when fighting. It seems all the principles and concepts I know from mantis are opposite to what you know as mantis. Your statement about resisting pressure with pressure is fundamentally wrong and really opposite of what mantis is about. Can you tell me anything about your lineage at all? I mean I know you don’t want to mention your teachers name or something, but I'm really curious to know what lineage you’re from, it’s interesting.

The end result of the disruption is control. Wrestlers do that although their approach would change somewhat depending on the rules such as the ability to strike. If you see Greco-Roman wrestlers square off, there is the "game" where they see if they can cause the opponent to make a mistake or say over extend etc… It is not a conceptual difference – the intent of control is always there but strategy is required.

Again, not true at all. The end result of disruption is simply impeding the opponent's control. I can kick over a heavy bag and it will fall, but that’s not the same as controlling where it lands. Knocking your opponent off balance, and having control of their balance are two completely different things, and are both used in mantis in different situations.

I agree with you the usage of the 2 grabs are different. In the "mantis hook" I use the last 2 fingers as a final impulse to take the opponent’s balance in the case of dealing with a straight punch as an example. How do you use the mantis hook for grabbing? I’m also saying that it is virtually impossible to do a 5-finger grab against a straight punch say a boxer’s jab. If you miss it will leave you exposed. Not so with the mantis hook because if you miss you’ll end up in the dil sau position with torque stored in your waist and elbow to move off.

First, the "mantis hook" or dil sau is a grab and can be used like you said at the end of a straight punch. What I am saying is that the dil sau is using all but the first finger and thumb. Its like making a gun with your hand, the three coiled fingers are used to grab. Its funny, I've done a "full" grab against many straight punches, the technique that you say is virtually impossible. There is no difference in action between a "full" grab and the "mantis" grab. The only difference is in intent. There is nothing that will make you more vulnerable by missing a "full" grab as opposed to the "mantis" grab. That’s ridiculous. I don’t even understand how you can say that. What makes you more vulnerable if you miss the "full" grab? What’s different in the "full" grab to the "mantis" grab? The only differences being a finger and a thumb.

I guess it’s a bit hard without a picture – guess you’ll just have to make do with a thousand words. All I’m saying is you can flex your wrist forward or back. Flexing back allows you to drive the elbow and forearm forward more. You can use this for hitting deflecting, breaking etc…

Yes, and flexing your wrist backwards is not only unnatural, but opens the fingers up, exposes the underside of the wrist, and leaves the hand virtually un-usable, unless your making a palm strike from underneath. You’re talking about an elbow break and I was talking about a forearm break, different techniques. The elbow break is useful, but not with the backwards flexed wrist with open fingers and exposed wrist.

May I ask where you train as in where in the world? Your profile says china, but also says you’re a yellow belt and train in TKD by getting high kicks. Why is your profile so different form what you train?

7sm

 

[Fumanchu]

Quote:"Balance and leverage are closely related, yet not the same. Yes, taiji players use muscle to move, yet not to fight. Its sort of a conundrum isn't it? That’s why taiji is so hard to truly understand. CMC is Cheng Man-Ch'Ing, that’s who I was referring to. This tightness you are talking about is the death of your taiji. Tightness doesn't exist in taiji. There is a point to give yee or "tightness" as you say in mantis fighting, but its fake yee, just hard enough to get them to resist, then you quickly collapse and attack. Going up against a good taiji player, you think you feel pressure, but if you resists with pressure, it should be gone. Resisting with pressure goes completely against taiji principles as well as mantis. It’s a common misconception that you can not be aggressive without being "tight" or using your "muscle" or "strength". It depends on how well you understand or define aggressive. What exactly is aggressive to you? You don’t have to resist pressure with pressure; you yield and allow their pressure to move past you, and then attack. You allow them to "empty" their attack, and then attack. I'm curious as to how or what principles you guys use when fighting. It seems all the principles and concepts I know from mantis are opposite to what you know as mantis. Your statement about resisting pressure with pressure is fundamentally wrong and really opposite of what mantis is about. Can you tell me anything about your lineage at all? I mean I know you don’t want to mention your teachers name or something, but I'm really curious to know what lineage you’re from, it’s interesting."

Balance and leverage is interconnected. In the end muscles contrect and relax that's how people move and fighting is a subset of movement. Aggressiveness starts with an intent. How we use these principals, we just do I guess. If we need to apply pressure we do, if we need to change angles we do, it seems to work. Hold that lineage question for the time being, because I feel regardless of lineage, body mechanics is universal - we just try to find the best way of moving. To say I will never counter pressure with pressure is cutting out an option entirely regardless of what CMC says. For example if someone is trying to do a tackle on to you - you need to counter his pressure until such time you can redirect it. Otherwise he will have you pinned.

Quote: "Again, not true at all. The end result of disruption is simply impeding the opponent's control. I can kick over a heavy bag and it will fall, but that’s not the same as controlling where it lands. Knocking your opponent off balance, and having control of their balance are two completely different things, and are both used in mantis in different situations."

Yes you've impeded your opponent's movement so now you have the upper hand - ie. in control of the situation. In some cases you might even be able to direct his fall other cases not so.

Quote: "First, the "mantis hook" or dil sau is a grab and can be used like you said at the end of a straight punch. What I am saying is that the dil sau is using all but the first finger and thumb. Its like making a gun with your hand, the three coiled fingers are used to grab. Its funny, I've done a "full" grab against many straight punches, the technique that you say is virtually impossible. There is no difference in action between a "full" grab and the "mantis" grab. The only difference is in intent. There is nothing that will make you more vulnerable by missing a "full" grab as opposed to the "mantis" grab. That’s ridiculous. I don’t even understand how you can say that. What makes you more vulnerable if you miss the "full" grab? What’s different in the "full" grab to the "mantis" grab? The only differences being a finger and a thumb."

How do you grab a straight punch? where is your hand if you miss the grab? The first point of contact with the mantis hook is actually some where along your forearm and the 2 finger hook just slips in and causes temporary disruption - that's how we use it. Is that how you use it? There is much advantage in doing this than a 5 finger grab.

Quote: "Yes, and flexing your wrist backwards is not only unnatural, but opens the fingers up, exposes the underside of the wrist, and leaves the hand virtually un-usable, unless your making a palm strike from underneath. You’re talking about an elbow break and I was talking about a forearm break, different techniques. The elbow break is useful, but not with the backwards flexed wrist with open fingers and exposed wrist. May I ask where you train as in where in the world? Your profile says china, but also says you’re a yellow belt and train in TKD by getting high kicks. Why is your profile so different form what you train?"

Yes certain parts are exposed but the danger shouldn't be there when you're doing it. There is quite a bit of tension in your waist where you can move off from that position. I'm not that precise as to whether it is the lower part of the fore arm of elbow that hits the target. In a practical situation something around there might hit a target. Where I train in the world shouldn't matter much, it's about body movement. That's why I have not focused on where you train, who your instructors are etc. I go by the logic of what you write. I don't train TKD anymore and not fond of high kicks. Mantis superseeds other stuff I'd done before.

 

[7starmantis]

Balance and leverage is interconnected. In the end muscles contrect and relax that's how people move and fighting is a subset of movement. Aggressiveness starts with an intent. How we use these principals, we just do I guess. If we need to apply pressure we do, if we need to change angles we do, it seems to work. Hold that lineage question for the time being, because I feel regardless of lineage, body mechanics is universal - we just try to find the best way of moving. To say I will never counter pressure with pressure is cutting out an option entirely regardless of what CMC says. For example if someone is trying to do a tackle on to you - you need to counter his pressure until such time you can redirect it. Otherwise he will have you pinned.

Interconnected maybe, not the same though which was my point. I'm not disputing that moving or fighting uses muscle. Your misunderstanding what I'm trying to say, which is why I keep saying your missing some of the upper level principles and concepts contained in the advanced mantis sets and drills. Cutting out what option? The option of overcoming your opponent with more force than they are using? That’s a viable option, but not in mantis or generally in most CMA. If someone is trying to do a tackle on you, you are going to trust that you are stronger than them and try to resist their tackle? That’s exactly what most grapplers want you to do. Explain how he will have me pinned if when he attempts the tackle I'm not there? Once you resist wit pressure he has you, if you yield and move out of the way and let his pressure or energy go by, your safe and he is in a bad situation. You better do alot of strength training if you’re going to go head to head with grapplers and heavy groundfighters. The point is though that your incorrectly associating this resisting technique to taiji and mantis, it is far against both systems principles. Bottom line. You keep saying "Body Mechanics" is where it’s at. Let’s get something straight, you can't see my body mechanics via the internet and I can't see yours, so lineage, teachers, and such are important to help us understand in which manner we train. What we write here may or may not be an exact representation of what our teachers are teaching us, or even the way in which we train. As you spend more time on the internet, you will understand that there are lots of people who write things that have no truth or fact behind them. That being said, there are also lots of people who write truthfully, but because of the nature of internet communication, you can't see what I'm talking about, you only have some words, it makes communication different and even difficult at times. If you do not know your lineage or are afraid to list it, that’s fine, just say so. I only ask lineage and instructor type questions to get a better hold or understanding on what you’re saying. See different groups train in different ways, and if I know what "group" you’re a part of it will help me understand some of the techniques and training methods you are talking about. I've never run across a 7 star group that uses only 4 forms, neither has my sifu, it would be interesting to see what group you belong to so that we can learn about you guys training.

Yes you've impeded your opponent's movement so now you have the upper hand - ie. in control of the situation. In some cases you might even be able to direct his fall other cases not so.

Control of the situation is hard t define and is different from control of your opponent which is what we were talking about. Don’t change the subject; we were referring to control over your opponent's center, not control of the situation. You don’t have to have control over your opponent to be in control of the situation. You just said it yourself, "In some cases you might even be able to direct his fall other cases not so." See, sometimes you have control over him, sometimes you don’t.

How do you grab a straight punch? where is your hand if you miss the grab? The first point of contact with the mantis hook is actually some where along your forearm and the 2 finger hook just slips in and causes temporary disruption - that's how we use it. Is that how you use it? There is much advantage in doing this than a 5 finger grab.

What do you mean? You grab the punch the same way with either grab. Once again, the only difference between the grabs is the amount of fingers used. You make you contact with the forearm (if called for) and slide down to the grab, the change comes by how many fingers you use at this point. What are the advantages of "your" grab verses the full grab, other than what I mentioned earlier?

Yes certain parts are exposed but the danger shouldn't be there when you're doing it. There is quite a bit of tension in your waist where you can move off from that position. I'm not that precise as to whether it is the lower part of the fore arm of elbow that hits the target. In a practical situation something around there might hit a target. Where I train in the world shouldn't matter much, it's about body movement. That's why I have not focused on where you train, who your instructors are etc. I go by the logic of what you write. I don't train TKD anymore and not fond of high kicks. Mantis superseeds other stuff I'd done before.

Ok, certain parts are exposed = bad idea. To say the danger isn't there because I'm so amazingly fast and accurate is naive. Someone with good feel can yield out of your break and then have a field day with your exposed, backwards flexed wrist. I do it all the time in hands (jeem leem). Precision is a major component of mantis, to "not be that precise" is to not study mantis kung fu. I'm not talking about the lower part of the forearm, but the higher/middle part. In a practical situation the two different areas are used differently. You keep saying things like in a practical situation something around there, or close to that, or near there, will work. That’s nonsensical, how can you train and fight with that mentality? Well, I'll punch at the head, but it will make contact somewhere around there. If you don’t train to be precise you won’t be, and if you’re fighting a skilled mantis practitioner, they are going to eat you alive if you’re not precise with them. In fact, most skilled MA in any style will.

I'm getting from your posts that you study mantis on your own, is that correct? If so, that’s fine, I'm not saying it can't be done or anything, just curious. Also, where you train in the world has great importance to me understanding what you’re saying. Logic of what I write? Mantis isn't really able to be put on paper or internet by words, you can’t possibly understand the logic behind everything I write, it’s just not possible. I'm so interested in where you train, who you train with, your lineage, because I'm interested in mantis kung fu. I want to know about all sects and groups, and opinions, and beliefs, and training methods and etc... Make sense? The fact that you refuse to divulge any info about any of those things is a bit disappointing as mantis practitioners should be open to sharing their methods and such. If you can't reveal anything to others, how do you expect to learn from others? Your already set in your head that what you know is the best, the coolest, the most correct, the oldest, everything. Don’t be so narcissistic, open your mind to others point of view as well, you'll have alot more insight and less stress throughout your life.

7sm

 

[Fumanchu]

Quote:"Interconnected maybe, not the same though which was my point. I'm not disputing that moving or fighting uses muscle. Your misunderstanding what I'm trying to say, which is why I keep saying your missing some of the upper level principles and concepts contained in the advanced mantis sets and drills. Cutting out what option? The option of overcoming your opponent with more force than they are using? That’s a viable option, but not in mantis or generally in most CMA. If someone is trying to do a tackle on you, you are going to trust that you are stronger than them and try to resist their tackle? That’s exactly what most grapplers want you to do. Explain how he will have me pinned if when he attempts the tackle I'm not there? Once you resist wit pressure he has you, if you yield and move out of the way and let his pressure or energy go by, your safe and he is in a bad situation. You better do alot of strength training if you’re going to go head to head with grapplers and heavy groundfighters. The point is though that your incorrectly associating this resisting technique to taiji and mantis, it is far against both systems principles. Bottom line. You keep saying "Body Mechanics" is where it’s at. Let’s get something straight, you can't see my body mechanics via the internet and I can't see yours, so lineage, teachers, and such are important to help us understand in which manner we train. What we write here may or may not be an exact representation of what our teachers are teaching us, or even the way in which we train. As you spend more time on the internet, you will understand that there are lots of people who write things that have no truth or fact behind them. That being said, there are also lots of people who write truthfully, but because of the nature of internet communication, you can't see what I'm talking about, you only have some words, it makes communication different and even difficult at times. If you do not know your lineage or are afraid to list it, that’s fine, just say so. I only ask lineage and instructor type questions to get a better hold or understanding on what you’re saying. See different groups train in different ways, and if I know what "group" you’re a part of it will help me understand some of the techniques and training methods you are talking about. I've never run across a 7 star group that uses only 4 forms, neither has my sifu, it would be interesting to see what group you belong to so that we can learn about you guys training."

You shouldn't need to ask for lineage to understand what I'm saying. How i'm putting the information across is physics. You need strength to create a force to move an object or change the direction in which is currently moving. In tai chi, some people call that yielding or redirecting the energy. But at the point of contact there is going to opposing pressure before you can redirect it. It is not going to happen instantanously - physically not possible, it's due to inertia.

Quote: "Control of the situation is hard t define and is different from control of your opponent which is what we were talking about. Don’t change the subject; we were referring to control over your opponent's center, not control of the situation. You don’t have to have control over your opponent to be in control of the situation. You just said it yourself, "In some cases you might even be able to direct his fall other cases not so." See, sometimes you have control over him, sometimes you don’t."

What you're referring to is the level of control. some control or full control. i agree you don't need full control of the opponent to have control over the situation.

Quote: "What do you mean? You grab the punch the same way with either grab. Once again, the only difference between the grabs is the amount of fingers used. You make you contact with the forearm (if called for) and slide down to the grab, the change comes by how many fingers you use at this point. What are the advantages of "your" grab verses the full grab, other than what I mentioned earlier? "

I was asking you about the process in which you grab an incoming punch. I throw my arm out straight at the opponent like a wet rag. At the moment of contact it is soft but heavy. Depending on what I encounter The force from my throw would either drive through or start working on controlling what I'd met. It might slip into a 2 finger hook. Much faster to use 2 fingers do disrupt. 5 finger grab too slow and committed. advantage, if I miss my had hovers in a dil sau fashion ready to move again thereby i don't give up initiative.

Quote: "Ok, certain parts are exposed = bad idea. To say the danger isn't there because I'm so amazingly fast and accurate is naive. Someone with good feel can yield out of your break and then have a field day with your exposed, backwards flexed wrist. I do it all the time in hands (jeem leem). Precision is a major component of mantis, to "not be that precise" is to not study mantis kung fu. I'm not talking about the lower part of the forearm, but the higher/middle part. In a practical situation the two different areas are used differently. You keep saying things like in a practical situation something around there, or close to that, or near there, will work. That’s nonsensical, how can you train and fight with that mentality? Well, I'll punch at the head, but it will make contact somewhere around there. If you don’t train to be precise you won’t be, and if you’re fighting a skilled mantis practitioner, they are going to eat you alive if you’re not precise with them. In fact, most skilled MA in any style will."

Some parts are always exposed. We can only guard against the percentage hits. We don't have a protective shield that covers 100%. That's what I'm saying and not saying that you have to be amazingly fast or accurate. I have to say most of my punches miss the target. If it's a still target like a hand pad, I pretty much hit it most of the time. That's reality, because my oppoents are skilled and they can move. That's why in executing moves, some times they work sometimes they don't. You might contact upper / lower forearm or elbow who knows, but the main thing is not to stop at one precise technique, but just to keep going and going and going.

Quote: "I'm getting from your posts that you study mantis on your own, is that correct? If so, that’s fine, I'm not saying it can't be done or anything, just curious. Also, where you train in the world has great importance to me understanding what you’re saying. Logic of what I write? Mantis isn't really able to be put on paper or internet by words, you can’t possibly understand the logic behind everything I write, it’s just not possible. I'm so interested in where you train, who you train with, your lineage, because I'm interested in mantis kung fu. I want to know about all sects and groups, and opinions, and beliefs, and training methods and etc... Make sense? The fact that you refuse to divulge any info about any of those things is a bit disappointing as mantis practitioners should be open to sharing their methods and such. If you can't reveal anything to others, how do you expect to learn from others? Your already set in your head that what you know is the best, the coolest, the most correct, the oldest, everything. Don’t be so narcissistic, open your mind to others point of view as well, you'll have alot more insight and less stress throughout your life."

No, I'm not training on my own. I don't think anyone can train on their own. In my earlier posts I had already said that it is likely that it took at least 2 people to develop a system. I'm surprised that you came to the conclusion like the one you did given the philosophy I'd expressed. I try not to go by groups or lineage. I take every conversation as a clean slate and ask myself does it make sense from a physics perspective. And if anyone says something that its different all I need to do is try it with a student in class and come back with the results. i don't go by the supposed reputation of anyone - for example on the LKW website, Zaho Yao taught at the bung bu level does not make sense irrespective of the status he holds in mantis society.

 

[7starmantis]

You shouldn't need to ask for lineage to understand what I'm saying. How i'm putting the information across is physics. You need strength to create a force to move an object or change the direction in which is currently moving. In tai chi, some people call that yielding or redirecting the energy. But at the point of contact there is going to opposing pressure before you can redirect it. It is not going to happen instantanously - physically not possible, it's due to inertia.

And you shouldn't have to withhold lineage information to still focus on physics. Lineage and such doesn't really have much to do with our kung fu skill in my opinion, it does however tell a great deal about our training methods and sometimes intent of training. It’s like meeting someone and they will only talk about themselves from the last year. They won’t talk about anything past that amount of time. Makes it kind of difficult to really understand their past and who they are, no? That’s my point in asking lineage. Also I tend to be the one who thinks I can learn from others and they can learn from me. By sharing lineage, ideas, training methods, etc; I can learn from others at the same time that they are learning from me. I would enjoy seeing an open community readily sharing thoughts and ideas back and forth in CMA.

Actually you don’t need strength for that. If you want to play simply on the physics side of it; something moving in a straight line such as a punch is affected mostly by what? Gravity and ending point; correct? Ending point being where they aimed their punch to land. If the path from origin of punch to landing area is downward, then you simply put your weight on top and let gravity and your center of balance do its thing. What you do not understand is the timing of redirecting a punch. You don’t redirect it while in mid punch, you allow the punch or attack to "empty" and then at that precise moment you redirect, pluck, etc. If I'm punching and you use strength to redirect my punch, the attack will change. Say I'm punching straight and you redirect my punch by pak sau (open palm block). Wherever you make contact on my arm and push, that part of my arm will collapse. If you make contact on the had, it will collapse at the wrist, if you hit the forearm it will collapse at the elbow, then after it collapses it continues the circle of where your energy forced it, and becomes another attack. See, it’s about circles. If I'm punching and you intercept it with force, it will redirect and finish the circle of your force, meeting back at you. It’s not physically impossible, it’s perfectly explainable. A yield requires no contact at all, so why would you need pressure or force for that? Yielding simply requires you move your body out of the way of the attack and let their attack continue forward. Inertia is only important if you get hit by it. In the form of a punch, inertia can only last so long. It has to stop at the end of their arm. That’s the point where you pluck, or redirect. There are times to intercept earlier with more force, but these are few and far between in the mantis system. That’s why people don’t respect it thinking it’s too soft.

What you're referring to is the level of control. some control or full control. i agree you don't need full control of the opponent to have control over the situation.

No, I'm referring to full control just by different people. For me to knock you off balance doesn't require me to have any type of control over you whatsoever. It does require that you loose control however. I wasn't talking about control of the situation, you brought that up. It’s possible to knock someone off balance and also away from you. There you wouldn't have any contact with them at all, how could you still have control over them? I have control over where I send them, but not anymore after I loose contact with them. That’s why in mantis we stick to the opponent at all times and follow them even after a throw or something like that.

I was asking you about the process in which you grab an incoming punch. I throw my arm out straight at the opponent like a wet rag. At the moment of contact it is soft but heavy. Depending on what I encounter The force from my throw would either drive through or start working on controlling what I'd met. It might slip into a 2 finger hook. Much faster to use 2 fingers do disrupt. 5 finger grab too slow and committed. advantage, if I miss my had hovers in a dil sau fashion ready to move again thereby i don't give up initiative.

First, I don’t ever really "throw" my hand out there, there needs to always be intent. I'm also not trying to drive through really ever. If what I encounter lets me, I will trap or lock, but not drive through, it’s against mantis principles. Yes, make contact and follow back into a grab. If you miss on either the 2 finger or full 5 finger grab, your hand is still at the same place. It doesn't make sense to say your hand is in an advantageous position if using the 2 finger grab, but not if you try for all 5 fingers. Yes, the full grab is more committed; we already discussed this I thought. There are different times to do each grab. To always rely on one type of grab is limiting yourself and once again throwing away valid mantis principles. The difference in intent is that the "partial grab" is generally used to pluck which means using it at the end of their punch, the "full grab" is used to trap, lock, or control and generally used farther into their attack, not only at the end.

Some parts are always exposed. We can only guard against the percentage hits. We don't have a protective shield that covers 100%. That's what I'm saying and not saying that you have to be amazingly fast or accurate.

I thought the point of learning martial arts was to not leave yourself exposed all the time? You only guard against a percentage of hits? Is that what you’re saying? In my opinion you should try to avoid or defend against 100% of attacks, that’s just my opinion though. I can't understand why you wouldn't. Sure, you not going to defend against them all successfully, but the intent is still there. Doing a technique that purposely leaves you exposed is in my opinion asking to be beaten. Why perform a technique like that which you know makes your wrist exposed, when you can rotate the hand, make a fist, and still accomplish the same goal? It sounds like your trying to accomplish looking like something more than I am. I wouldn't do something to expose myself simply to look like the insect, why do you purposely leave yourself exposed?

I have to say most of my punches miss the target. If it's a still target like a hand pad, I pretty much hit it most of the time. That's reality, because my opponents are skilled and they can move. That's why in executing moves, some times they work sometimes they don't. You might contact upper / lower forearm or elbow who knows, but the main thing is not to stop at one precise technique, but just to keep going and going and going.

Your right, you may make contact with a different area than what you’re aiming for, so does that mean you shouldn't train to hit with the precise strike? Of course not. Precision is a main key in mantis kung fu, to ignore it because in a situation you might miss, blows my mind. Sure you need to keep going, I wouldn't say it’s the main thing, but certainly important. However important, it still doesn't negate the fact that precision is very important in mantis and is needed and used in these strikes. Sure you may miss, that’s why your already attacking again before they even realize you missed. The follow-up attack however successful doesn't make missing ok though. It’s like your resting on your amount of attacks to overshadow your misses, thats wrong, and an incorrect way to train, especially in mantis. Don’t rely on the odds of hitting with one of your attacks overshadow the need to be precise and accurate. If you throw 12 attacks in a row but do no damage or make no contact, what’s the point? It sounds to me that you’re the one relying on traditional aspects rather than me like you claimed. See, you’re saying the exposure of the wrist is ok because your opponent will probably not be able to take advantage of it. Do you really want to take that chance? If that idea permeates your fighting it sounds like it’s riddled with holes. Why willingly give your opponent a chance? Do everything possible to keep them from having an attack; don’t lay them out there for them to take if they can.

No, I'm not training on my own. I don't think anyone can train on their own. In my earlier posts I had already said that it is likely that it took at least 2 people to develop a system. I'm surprised that you came to the conclusion like the one you did given the philosophy I'd expressed.

I came to this conclusion from the amount of differences we have in "7 star" mantis. From the many times you say you decide what works and what doesn't, from the refusals to give lineage or even name your teacher, from your lack of knowledge of core mantis principles, from your obvious difference in training methods, and from your differences from myself in intent while fighting. You seem to not know or understand things like "emptying the attack" or yielding. What about the 12 soft and 8 hard principles of the mantis system? These are the things that made me think you may be training on your own. Also, what does it matter how many people you believe created an art? What does that have to do with the question of you training by yourself or not? I'm kind of getting lost here. Your philosophy of the creation of mantis has nothing to do with whether you believe someone can train in mantis by themselves. It’s these types of statements that make me think you were training by yourself.

I try not to go by groups or lineage. I take every conversation as a clean slate and ask myself does it make sense from a physics perspective. And if anyone says something that its different all I need to do is try it with a student in class and come back with the results. i don't go by the supposed reputation of anyone - for example on the LKW website, Zaho Yao taught at the bung bu level does not make sense irrespective of the status he holds in mantis society.

No one is asking you to go by groups or lineage, its simply a tool for better understanding where someone is coming from. Physics have no part in beliefs of creation of the system, or training methods or such. See, you make a statement like "all I have to do is try it and see"; this to me shows arrogance that you feel you already understand everything. Is there nothing out there that you don’t understand or that you could still learn? You can come back with your results, but who says you did it correctly? Or even completely understood what was said?

No one is going only on reputation. LKW's reputation is simply a respect for his knowledge and skill, nothing more. It’s simply that his skill level surpasses many, many people I've seen. So I guess I should ignore that and if what he says doesn't make sense to me, throw it out? That’s ignorant and not conducive to learning. I could care less if we are talking about LKW or someone else with high level of skill. Let’s take Henry Chung, Chiu Luen, Raymond Fogg, Brandon Jones, one of my sihings... Their skill all surpasses my own. Should I not listen to what they have to say? Should I throw away their knowledge because it doesn't make sense to me right now? If Donald Trump came to you and told you to do a certain thing to make lots of money, would you do it? Even if you didn't think it would work? I think I sure would. See he obviously knows more about making money than I do, and so therefore I would listen to him and take what he says and learn form it. You have trained for 4 1/2 years (correct?) and now you’re going to tell someone with the skill and knowledge of Lee Kam Wing that teaching one form at a certain level makes no sense? The mantis system is not held within one form or two form, or three, 4,5,6,7,8,9, or even in forms at all. It’s collaboration and is about concepts and principles. Irregardless of LKW "status" his skill and his student’s skill speak for themselves. That’s what I mean when I always say; you must be able to stand on your own kung fu. Debating is interesting and nice, but it comes down to standing on your own skill. If our skill doesn't match our mouths, then we need to "shut up and train" like so many say.

7sm

 

[Fumanchu]

Quote: "And you shouldn't have to withhold lineage information to still focus on physics. Lineage and such doesn't really have much to do with our kung fu skill in my opinion, it does however tell a great deal about our training methods and sometimes intent of training. It’s like meeting someone and they will only talk about themselves from the last year. They won’t talk about anything past that amount of time. Makes it kind of difficult to really understand their past and who they are, no? That’s my point in asking lineage. Also I tend to be the one who thinks I can learn from others and they can learn from me. By sharing lineage, ideas, training methods, etc; I can learn from others at the same time that they are learning from me. I would enjoy seeing an open community readily sharing thoughts and ideas back and forth in CMA."

My instructor also designs his own training methods that may or may not be the same as his instructors. If I were an instructor, I might do things slightly differently. What I’m saying is you can be taught be the same teacher and learn the material but not having to be carbon copies of your teachers. It’s possible to achieve the same objectives through different methods. As for the intent of training, I have already explained that. It varies from person to person (obviously) in the class I train in. It has nothing to do with lineage rather a personal objective.

Quote" Actually you don’t need strength for that. If you want to play simply on the physics side of it; something moving in a straight line such as a punch is affected mostly by what? Gravity and ending point; correct? Ending point being where they aimed their punch to land. If the path from origin of punch to landing area is downward, then you simply put your weight on top and let gravity and your center of balance do its thing. What you do not understand is the timing of redirecting a punch. You don’t redirect it while in mid punch, you allow the punch or attack to "empty" and then at that precise moment you redirect, pluck, etc."

Good, that’s why I like to talk in physics terms it makes things a lot easier to discuss because it is a universal foundation. I disagree. I would want to engage the punch as early as possible, instead of letting it complete it’s path. Why not stop the punch even before it begins. The long movements in tai chi does not mean you have to follow your opponent’s line of force until it stops then redirect when he is going. Rather, upon appropriate timing, you can redirect the force anywhere along its path of movement.

Quote" If I'm punching and you use strength to redirect my punch, the attack will change. Say I'm punching straight and you redirect my punch by pak sau (open palm block). Wherever you make contact on my arm and push, that part of my arm will collapse. If you make contact on the had, it will collapse at the wrist, if you hit the forearm it will collapse at the elbow, then after it collapses it continues the circle of where your energy forced it, and becomes another attack. See, it’s about circles. If I'm punching and you intercept it with force, it will redirect and finish the circle of your force, meeting back at you. It’s not physically impossible, it’s perfectly explainable. A yield requires no contact at all, so why would you need pressure or force for that?"

Yes, it come down to skill as to who can turn tighter circles like in air to air combat. Like say a tennis match I do something you respond, how quickly can you assimilate the information that your body is collecting.

Quote:" Yielding simply requires you move your body out of the way of the attack and let their attack continue forward. Inertia is only important if you get hit by it. In the form of a punch, inertia can only last so long. It has to stop at the end of their arm. That’s the point where you pluck, or redirect. There are times to intercept earlier with more force, but these are few and far between in the mantis system. That’s why people don’t respect it thinking it’s too soft."


Don’t forget that your opponent is also trying to hit you. If there is such a big disparity of skill such that he has no chance of hitting you then you’re safe. In most practical situations and training in class where skill levels are more closely match, then it is necessary to engage incoming stuff early. Like you said before – upon contact you can go by feel. Such short distances, it is very difficult for the eye alone to pick distances and movement. It is more like a blurr, zones and probabilities of where things might be as opposed to discrete objects in a particular space and time. Disagree, in the mantis system, you engage it as early as possible and stop your opponent from building up momentum – why wouldn’t you?

Quote: "No, I'm referring to full control just by different people. For me to knock you off balance doesn't require me to have any type of control over you whatsoever. It does require that you loose control however. I wasn't talking about control of the situation, you brought that up. It’s possible to knock someone off balance and also away from you. There you wouldn't have any contact with them at all, how could you still have control over them? I have control over where I send them, but not anymore after I loose contact with them. That’s why in mantis we stick to the opponent at all times and follow them even after a throw or something like that."

How could you knock someone off balance without being in contact with him? Why would I sudden lose control of my balance on my own account? If you’re dealing with such opponents then there is nothing to worry about. It is those opponents who are balanced and can counter what you’re trying to do. Sometimes we stick, sometimes we break away. We break away if you feel that they are using the contact to more of an advantage than we are – ie. we have lost the initiative because we’re dealing with someone of superior skill. There should not be a hard and fast rule of always sticking- got to know when to let go.



Quote: "First, I don’t ever really "throw" my hand out there, there needs to always be intent. I'm also not trying to drive through really ever. If what I encounter lets me, I will trap or lock, but not drive through, it’s against mantis principles. Yes, make contact and follow back into a grab. If you miss on either the 2 finger or full 5 finger grab, your hand is still at the same place. It doesn't make sense to say your hand is in an advantageous position if using the 2 finger grab, but not if you try for all 5 fingers. Yes, the full grab is more committed; we already discussed this I thought. There are different times to do each grab. To always rely on one type of grab is limiting yourself and once again throwing away valid mantis principles. The difference in intent is that the "partial grab" is generally used to pluck which means using it at the end of their punch, the "full grab" is used to trap, lock, or control and generally used farther into their attack, not only at the end."

It doesn’t make sense that driving through is against the principal of mantis. Say if you can hit an opponent with a punch, don’t you do so? You would only need to escalate your tactics should simple attacks fail. In bung bu we learn to work the angles for driving through – ie. right from the beginning of the mantis system. I don’t rely on one type of grab. There are different stages of control, the 5-finger grab being in the later stages.


Quote: " I thought the point of learning martial arts was to not leave yourself exposed all the time? You only guard against a percentage of hits? Is that what you’re saying? In my opinion you should try to avoid or defend against 100% of attacks, that’s just my opinion though. I can't understand why you wouldn't. Sure, you not going to defend against them all successfully, but the intent is still there. Doing a technique that purposely leaves you exposed is in my opinion asking to be beaten. Why perform a technique like that which you know makes your wrist exposed, when you can rotate the hand, make a fist, and still accomplish the same goal? It sounds like your trying to accomplish looking like something more than I am. I wouldn't do something to expose myself simply to look like the insect, why do you purposely leave yourself exposed?"

It’s not possible to defend against 100% of attacks, because you know that some attacks from certain angles can sneek through. In fact what we do is cover the likely zones anyway instead of seeing a line of attack and then trying to defend. For example, say an F-16 jet is coming in for a bombing run, you have electro-counter-measures Prowlers hovering overhead and other F-16s with air to air missiles providing fighter support. Basically we don’t do one unit move at a time, but rather a set of moves each time forming a complete package that works together. Like the F-16 scenario, sure it would stop most surface to air missiles but it would not stop them 100% of the time. As for that move in particular, the threat to the hand has been dealt with else where. Again, nothing to do with insects.

Quote: "Your right, you may make contact with a different area than what you’re aiming for, so does that mean you shouldn't train to hit with the precise strike? Of course not. Precision is a main key in mantis kung fu, to ignore it because in a situation you might miss, blows my mind. Sure you need to keep going, I wouldn't say it’s the main thing, but certainly important. However important, it still doesn't negate the fact that precision is very important in mantis and is needed and used in these strikes. Sure you may miss, that’s why your already attacking again before they even realize you missed. The follow-up attack however successful doesn't make missing ok though. It’s like your resting on your amount of attacks to overshadow your misses, thats wrong, and an incorrect way to train, especially in mantis. Don’t rely on the odds of hitting with one of your attacks overshadow the need to be precise and accurate. If you throw 12 attacks in a row but do no damage or make no contact, what’s the point? It sounds to me that you’re the one relying on traditional aspects rather than me like you claimed. See, you’re saying the exposure of the wrist is ok because your opponent will probably not be able to take advantage of it. Do you really want to take that chance? If that idea permeates your fighting it sounds like it’s riddled with holes. Why willingly give your opponent a chance? Do everything possible to keep them from having an attack; don’t lay them out there for them to take if they can. "

Every move you make is a chance. As for missing a lot of your attacks against a real life opponent who is skilled – that’s reality. Against such an opponent, how precise can you get as a result of your precision training? What do you consider precision training? As for your question, if you throw 12 attacks and make not contact, perhaps you have set the person up for a hit on the 13th attack. As long as you keep attacking, you’re not having to be the one who’s having to defend.


Quote: "I came to this conclusion from the amount of differences we have in "7 star" mantis. From the many times you say you decide what works and what doesn't, from the refusals to give lineage or even name your teacher, from your lack of knowledge of core mantis principles, from your obvious difference in training methods, and from your differences from myself in intent while fighting. You seem to not know or understand things like "emptying the attack" or yielding. What about the 12 soft and 8 hard principles of the mantis system? These are the things that made me think you may be training on your own. Also, what does it matter how many people you believe created an art? What does that have to do with the question of you training by yourself or not? I'm kind of getting lost here. Your philosophy of the creation of mantis has nothing to do with whether you believe someone can train in mantis by themselves. It’s these types of statements that make me think you were training by yourself. "

I’m sure you also have an idea of what works and what doesn’t. If not why bother training. As for changing the path of an object, I have also explained why counter force is necessary – it’s one of Newton’s Laws. As for emptying (ie moving away from its path), you’re assuming that your opponent does not anticipate your move and change its path to chase you down. If I think that it takes more than one person to create an art because you need at least one sparring partner to bounce ideas off, how could I ever think that you can learn mantis on your own – that’s the logic.

Quote: " No one is asking you to go by groups or lineage, its simply a tool for better understanding where someone is coming from. Physics have no part in beliefs of creation of the system, or training methods or such. See, you make a statement like "all I have to do is try it and see"; this to me shows arrogance that you feel you already understand everything. Is there nothing out there that you don’t understand or that you could still learn? You can come back with your results, but who says you did it correctly? Or even completely understood what was said?"

Physics has nothing to do with beliefs. It is how the world works. Therefore we need to make sure that our training methods have a solid foundation in physics. "all I have to do is try and see" is not arrogance, it is called experimentation, not to do so is arrogance. If I understood everything or think that I do, I would not need to try and see, would I. As for the possibility of coming back with the results from an incorrect experiment, I guess we can only try, at least that’s a place to start.

Quote: "No one is going only on reputation. LKW's reputation is simply a respect for his knowledge and skill, nothing more. It’s simply that his skill level surpasses many, many people I've seen. So I guess I should ignore that and if what he says doesn't make sense to me, throw it out? That’s ignorant and not conducive to learning. I could care less if we are talking about LKW or someone else with high level of skill. Let’s take Henry Chung, Chiu Luen, Raymond Fogg, Brandon Jones, one of my sihings... Their skill all surpasses my own. Should I not listen to what they have to say? Should I throw away their knowledge because it doesn't make sense to me right now? If Donald Trump came to you and told you to do a certain thing to make lots of money, would you do it? Even if you didn't think it would work? I think I sure would. See he obviously knows more about making money than I do, and so therefore I would listen to him and take what he says and learn form it. You have trained for 4 1/2 years (correct?) and now you’re going to tell someone with the skill and knowledge of Lee Kam Wing that teaching one form at a certain level makes no sense? The mantis system is not held within one form or two form, or three, 4,5,6,7,8,9, or even in forms at all. It’s collaboration and is about concepts and principles. Irregardless of LKW "status" his skill and his student’s skill speak for themselves. That’s what I mean when I always say; you must be able to stand on your own kung fu. Debating is interesting and nice, but it comes down to standing on your own skill. If our skill doesn't match our mouths, then we need to "shut up and train" like so many say."

From your statement regarding Donald Trump and willingness to do something he says even you don’t understand it shows that you’re going on by someone’s reputation. In all cases, my instructor explains to me what each exercise / form etc is set out to achieve and it would give me a target to work towards and allow me to raise any questions. As for that form in question being taught at Bung Bu level, if someone can explain this to me, I’m happy to listen. If someone can suggest examples that I can try, I’ll be more than happy to experiment.

 

[7starmantis]

My instructor also designs his own training methods that may or may not be the same as his instructors. If I were an instructor, I might do things slightly differently. What I’m saying is you can be taught be the same teacher and learn the material but not having to be carbon copies of your teachers. It’s possible to achieve the same objectives through different methods. As for the intent of training, I have already explained that. It varies from person to person (obviously) in the class I train in. It has nothing to do with lineage rather a personal objective.

No one is talking about being a "carbon copy" of your instructor. I am saying there are certain principles and concepts that make up mantis kung fu. To do things opposite of these is certainly ok, but is also certainly not mantis kung fu. So the end justifies the means in your training?

Good, that’s why I like to talk in physics terms it makes things a lot easier to discuss because it is a universal foundation. I disagree. I would want to engage the punch as early as possible, instead of letting it complete it’s path. Why not stop the punch even before it begins. The long movements in tai chi does not mean you have to follow your opponent’s line of force until it stops then redirect when he is going. Rather, upon appropriate timing, you can redirect the force anywhere along its path of movement.

Engaging the punch is subjective. You’re talking about engaging it with force. I agree that you want to make contact early, but not using force, allow their force to continue and then use it against them. It’s the core principle of the mantis system. How on earth can you practice mantis without using that principle? You might as well still be doing your high kicks and TKD. I'm not talking about tai chi, but rather mantis. I know you believe everything is tai chi, but there are differences. Once again you do not understand another core principle. I didn't say follow your opponent’s line of force until it stops and then redirect it, that’s the same thing you are talking about; using force. You let their attack or punch empty and that’s the point of redirection. Yes, you can redirect earlier using force, but be careful because against a skilled opponent with good feel, they will sense your pressure and already be gone and into another attack by the time you realize there is no pressure against your pressure. You shouldn't really have to "engage" the punch at all really, unless it’s the first punch. After that you should already be in contact with the opponent.

Yes, it come down to skill as to who can turn tighter circles like in air to air combat. Like say a tennis match I do something you respond, how quickly can you assimilate the information that your body is collecting.

No, you do still not understand what I'm saying. Not tighter circles necessarily but better feel. You could turn a circle 100 times tighter than mine, but if I can feel your energy or force change, I can ride your circle and redirect your attack.

Don’t forget that your opponent is also trying to hit you. If there is such a big disparity of skill such that he has no chance of hitting you then you’re safe. In most practical situations and training in class where skill levels are more closely match, then it is necessary to engage incoming stuff early. Like you said before – upon contact you can go by feel. Such short distances, it is very difficult for the eye alone to pick distances and movement. It is more like a blurr, zones and probabilities of where things might be as opposed to discrete objects in a particular space and time. Disagree, in the mantis system, you engage it as early as possible and stop your opponent from building up momentum – why wouldn’t you?

Why would I forget that the opponent is trying to hit me? It doesn't seem you understand what I mean by yielding. Me yielding is accepting the attack, but collapsing the body or moving the body out of the way of the attack. Not moving 6 feet away, but maybe just 1 inch, or maybe you still get hit, but you yield and go with their force. Again, it’s a huge core principle in mantis kung fu. Have you never dodged a punch, or moved out of the way of a kick? Your acting like that can never happen. If you’re training with people who cannot move out of the way of a punch or a kick now and again, I suggest new training partners.

You made my point for me. It is hard to impossible to keep track with the eyes, hence the importance of "feel". With your eyes it may be probabilities and zones, but with feel you can close your eyes and still know where your opponent’s limbs and energy is at; even as discrete objects in a particular space and time. That’s why it’s so important. Combined with your eyes, ears, nose, etc, your feel plays a huge role in discerning where your opponent is and what he is doing, especially in where his center of balance is at. You’re still not getting what I'm saying with the engaging early. The mantis system isn't about stopping momentum, but using momentum against them. Yes, engage early, but you engage my arm and use force to stop my punch and its going to change into about 3 or 4 different attacks. Force met with force is a bad idea against a skilled mantis practitioner. Trust me; I've learned that the hard way. Why wouldn't you? I'll tell you. If I stop your attack before it gets started with force, I've given you an option to change attacks. If I allow your attack to continue and at the last moment be gone and then follow your momentum into a nice break, lock, or attack of my own, I've stolen your attack and left you (hopefully) without defense, at least that’s the goal. Now I think one issue we are having is that you’re taking what I say as me saying, "this way 100% of the time". That’s not the case in mantis, the situation and your opponent will dictate and determine your actions. There are times to do things differently; I'm just explaining some of the main, basic, core concepts and principles of my training. It seems we aren't even talking about the same animal (pun intended).

How could you knock someone off balance without being in contact with him? Why would I sudden lose control of my balance on my own account? If you’re dealing with such opponents then there is nothing to worry about. It is those opponents who are balanced and can counter what you’re trying to do. Sometimes we stick, sometimes we break away. We break away if you feel that they are using the contact to more of an advantage than we are – ie. we have lost the initiative because we’re dealing with someone of superior skill. There should not be a hard and fast rule of always sticking- got to know when to let go.

OK, well ever seen a nice push knock someone off balance? I didn't say without making contact, I said without staying in contact. My kick makes contact for what 1 second? After that, I have no contact with the off balance opponent. However, I did say in the mantis system you should follow and stay in contact and control, but it isn't a necessity to steal their balance. I noted your sarcasm, but I'm not talking about you loosing control of your balance by yourself, thats absurd. Sticking is a core principle of the mantis system, breaking away is not. It may happen from time to time, but if you loose contact with someone, you can pretty much count that you just got hit. Being in so close to your opponent makes loosing contact very dangerous. You use your mantis techniques with initiative, thats completely opposite from me. Initiative can be nice, but "riding" their attacks and yielding through their "initiative" while staying in contact with them can really leave you in an amazingly advantageous position. Your also combining sticking with grabbing, not so. You said, "got to know when to let go". I'm not talking about grabbing when I say "sticking" but rather staying in contact with as little pressure against them as possible. Here is a drill we do that illustrates why using pressure against pressure can get you hurt. You and I stand facing each other with the backs of our hands touching each others. You push towards me and I push towards you. I can push harder, and harder, and harder, and then collapse and into a lower attack and your hand rushes forward as mine leaves. See the idea? I can even still stay in contact with that hand, only slide down my arm and do a low punching attack while your arm goes above my head. Thats the point I'm getting at against using too much force. Imagine that drill when you push and actually make contact with the back of my hand, that at that instant, my hand collapses in towards my chest, my waist turns outward, your hand go straight and right by my chest as my hand extends again with a punch to the stomach. Those are some of the drills we do for feel.

It doesn’t make sense that driving through is against the principal of mantis. Say if you can hit an opponent with a punch, don’t you do so? You would only need to escalate your tactics should simple attacks fail. In bung bu we learn to work the angles for driving through – ie. right from the beginning of the mantis system. I don’t rely on one type of grab. There are different stages of control, the 5-finger grab being in the later stages.

It may not make sense to you, but its a core principle. Let me clarify though. I'm talking about driving through their force as you stated. We are not talking about driving through their head with a punch; you were talking about meeting their attack as a punch and driving through it. That is against the principles of mantis. Why drive through hand use all that energy, strength, and danger when you can collapse, redirect and attack using their own force? You may start out with really basic attacks and escalate as needed, but if I'm attacked, I'm not limiting myself to basic, advanced, intermediate, or "gentlemanly" attacks. Its whatever their body allows mine to do. No thinking about it, what is in my "muscle memory" if you will.

Now you say you use the full grab! Before it was to slow and committed, and left you in a disadvantageous position. Now its ok and you use it? You just repeated back to me what I wrote several posts back. Maybe we are having trouble communicating.

It’s not possible to defend against 100% of attacks, because you know that some attacks from certain angles can sneek through. In fact what we do is cover the likely zones anyway instead of seeing a line of attack and then trying to defend. For example, say an F-16 jet is coming in for a bombing run, you have electro-counter-measures Prowlers hovering overhead and other F-16s with air to air missiles providing fighter support. Basically we don’t do one unit move at a time, but rather a set of moves each time forming a complete package that works together. Like the F-16 scenario, sure it would stop most surface to air missiles but it would not stop them 100% of the time. As for that move in particular, the threat to the hand has been dealt with else where. Again, nothing to do with insects.

No its not, again something I said before as well. If you want to face someone determined to kill you with "likely zones", be my guest. I prefer to guard all areas regardless of whether or not I'll actually be successful in defending 100% of the time. Your actually hybridizing (is that a word) mantis, which is ok and fine with me, but its not pure mantis principles. The idea is to defend against the initial attack, steal the attack, and attack back until you needent attack any longer. You lost me with the f-16 analogy, and exactly what move are you referring to? And what does it have to do with your mentioning the insect again? The visual resemblance to the insect is only a minute portion of why the system is called mantis.

Every move you make is a chance. As for missing a lot of your attacks against a real life opponent who is skilled – that’s reality. Against such an opponent, how precise can you get as a result of your precision training? What do you consider precision training? As for your question, if you throw 12 attacks and make not contact, perhaps you have set the person up for a hit on the 13th attack. As long as you keep attacking, you’re not having to be the one who’s having to defend.

A chance for what? A chance of attacking or a chance of being attacked or what? Here’s the thing about missing attacks, you shouldn't really miss, but rather change. Isn't that what 7 star means, continually changing to break down your opponent? If you miss, move to something else, again, and again, and again, and again... Wait, I'm confused about your question. How precise can I get from my precise training? Well the goal would be exactly precise. If you're aiming at the elbow and hit the knee there is a problem, no? If you going for an elbow break and you miss and hit the forearm, you may still get a lock, but isn't that just a miss and a move to something else? The elbow break was a failure. Its like a victorious failure. What do I consider precision training? Drills that focus on hitting precise areas. Chin na, locks, sweeps, throws, pretty much all my mantis training is about precision in one way or another.

I disagree about the keeping attacking point. Sure you may make a hit on the 13th attack, but what if you go 34 attacks with no damage or contact? Are you conditioned enough to still have full speed and power on your 35th attack as you were on your 1st attack? How about the 65th attack? There is a line somewhere that will cause you to loose if you cannot do some type of damage quickly. Even if its that you run out of "seam", thats bad.

I’m sure you also have an idea of what works and what doesn’t. If not why bother training. As for changing the path of an object, I have also explained why counter force is necessary – it’s one of Newton’s Laws. As for emptying (ie moving away from its path), you’re assuming that your opponent does not anticipate your move and change its path to chase you down. If I think that it takes more than one person to create an art because you need at least one sparring partner to bounce ideas off, how could I ever think that you can learn mantis on your own – that’s the logic.

I'm not disputing counter force, but only how much force is used. About emptying, its not just moving out of the path of the attack. If your opponent anticipates your move and changes, then you change as well, I dont see the issue. Emptying isn't something the opponent can anticipate, its not an attack or pressure, its something they are doing. Your simply allowing their attack to reach its end point, thats being empty. If they change their attack, then you let that attack empty, its really quite simple in theory.

Ok, I se your logic in the needing more than one person, but I was really asking if you had a set instructor or if you were learning as you go, sort of bouncing ideas off of each other as you go. Not necessarily having prior knowledge of mantis for either of you. Is that how you train?

Physics has nothing to do with beliefs. It is how the world works. Therefore we need to make sure that our training methods have a solid foundation in physics. "all I have to do is try and see" is not arrogance, it is called experimentation, not to do so is arrogance. If I understood everything or think that I do, I would not need to try and see, would I. As for the possibility of coming back with the results from an incorrect experiment, I guess we can only try, at least that’s a place to start.

Wow, something else I said as well. Experimentation is fine, but what is to say that I can experiment with one technique and really understand it on my own?

From your statement regarding Donald Trump and willingness to do something he says even you don’t understand it shows that you’re going on by someone’s reputation. In all cases, my instructor explains to me what each exercise / form etc is set out to achieve and it would give me a target to work towards and allow me to raise any questions. As for that form in question being taught at Bung Bu level, if someone can explain this to me, I’m happy to listen. If someone can suggest examples that I can try, I’ll be more than happy to experiment.

No, it shows I'm going on someone’s proven track record. Reputation and proven track record are two separate things. I've seen my sifu fight; I've even fought him quite a bit. If I'm fighting someone else and he says I should do a certain thing, you don’t think I'm going to do it? I know where his skill level is at, why wouldn't I do it? Ignoring it would be arrogance in my opinion. Of course I would take Mr. Trumps advice, you wouldn’t? Not even for an "experiment"? Thats ignorant in my opinion. Learning from others and from mistakes is what makes humans different from animals.

Ok, lets get to some meat here, I feel we are running out of things to discuss. I don’t see how we can continue to discuss mantis since we are obviously not both training in the same thing. You wont divulge who your teacher is for reasons unknown (but speculative) and I can't discuss principles with you since you don’t know any of them. What about my question about the 12 soft and 8 hard principles of the mantis system? Do you guys train them?

What explanation would you accept about that form being taught at the "level" you don’t like? What are you looking for as explanation? I'd love to discuss it with you. What is it about where you learn a form that is so important? Or in what order you learn them? I don’t know how to explain it to you, so give me a place to start and I'll do my best. What kind of examples are you wanting to try, I'll give you as many as I can think of. Examples for what? Techniques, principles, forms, what?

7sm

 

[BIGtiny7SM]

I realize I am a little late on this thread. I just wanted to add that Sifu Hughes is my Sifu, and I had been helping him prepare this article for submission for about the last 6 months. I know he had been working on it for much longer than that, and its very nice to see such a awesome showing in the magazine. I think that the article gives a great overview of the Mantis style, but as the saying goes "for more information please inquire inside"


BIGtiny7SM

 

[Fumanchu]

Quote: "No one is talking about being a "carbon copy" of your instructor. I am saying there are certain principles and concepts that make up mantis kung fu. To do things opposite of these is certainly ok, but is also certainly not mantis kung fu. So the end justifies the means in your training?"

You can apply different training methods and still achieve the same result. The difference in training methods can come from the same set of principals. Not sure what you mean by end justifies the means, but what I can say is one’s competency reflects the effectiveness of the training program.


Quote: "Engaging the punch is subjective. You’re talking about engaging it with force. I agree that you want to make contact early, but not using force, allow their force to continue and then use it against them. It’s the core principle of the mantis system. How on earth can you practice mantis without using that principle? You might as well still be doing your high kicks and TKD. I'm not talking about tai chi, but rather mantis. I know you believe everything is tai chi, but there are differences. Once again you do not understand another core principle. I didn't say follow your opponent’s line of force until it stops and then redirect it, that’s the same thing you are talking about; using force. You let their attack or punch empty and that’s the point of redirection. Yes, you can redirect earlier using force, but be careful because against a skilled opponent with good feel, they will sense your pressure and already be gone and into another attack by the time you realize there is no pressure against your pressure. You shouldn't really have to "engage" the punch at all really, unless it’s the first punch. After that you should already be in contact with the opponent."

How can you move without force? Your arm has mass and your accelerating it towards an incoming object with your muscles. Sure redirect the opponent’s force upon contact, sometimes you have to ride with it longer other times you don’t. It all depends on the situation at hand. I don’t see how it violates mantis principals. Maybe we’re using different words to describe the same thing. I don’t use the term "emptying", I just do when the opportunity feels right. I don’t see how you can do this without pressure. There will always be some pressure and this is something you and your opponent would turn up or turn down.

Quote: "No, you do still not understand what I'm saying. Not tighter circles necessarily but better feel. You could turn a circle 100 times tighter than mine, but if I can feel your energy or force change, I can ride your circle and redirect your attack."

Yes you could, but you might not be able to. It come down to who’s the more competent player. You might realise something later than your opponent. It comes down to skill. I had already mentioned in the earlier post about assimilating information.



Quote: "Why would I forget that the opponent is trying to hit me? It doesn't seem you understand what I mean by yielding. Me yielding is accepting the attack, but collapsing the body or moving the body out of the way of the attack. Not moving 6 feet away, but maybe just 1 inch, or maybe you still get hit, but you yield and go with their force. Again, it’s a huge core principle in mantis kung fu. Have you never dodged a punch, or moved out of the way of a kick? Your acting like that can never happen. If you’re training with people who cannot move out of the way of a punch or a kick now and again, I suggest new training partners."

If the opponent is trying to hit you, it’ll be very hard to gauge a 1-inch miss all the time. In fact most times, you’ll have to make contact at some stage. Again as I said earlier, it comes down to the differences in the level of skill between the 2 partners.


Quote: "You made my point for me. It is hard to impossible to keep track with the eyes, hence the importance of "feel". With your eyes it may be probabilities and zones, but with feel you can close your eyes and still know where your opponent’s limbs and energy is at; even as discrete objects in a particular space and time. That’s why it’s so important. Combined with your eyes, ears, nose, etc, your feel plays a huge role in discerning where your opponent is and what he is doing, especially in where his center of balance is at. You’re still not getting what I'm saying with the engaging early. The mantis system isn't about stopping momentum, but using momentum against them. Yes, engage early, but you engage my arm and use force to stop my punch and its going to change into about 3 or 4 different attacks. Force met with force is a bad idea against a skilled mantis practitioner. Trust me; I've learned that the hard way. Why wouldn't you? I'll tell you. If I stop your attack before it gets started with force, I've given you an option to change attacks. If I allow your attack to continue and at the last moment be gone and then follow your momentum into a nice break, lock, or attack of my own, I've stolen your attack and left you (hopefully) without defense, at least that’s the goal. Now I think one issue we are having is that you’re taking what I say as me saying, "this way 100% of the time". That’s not the case in mantis, the situation and your opponent will dictate and determine your actions. There are times to do things differently; I'm just explaining some of the main, basic, core concepts and principles of my training. It seems we aren't even talking about the same animal (pun intended)."

I had already said earlier that many times we go by feel. It was a response of you talking about yielding and missing by an inch without making contact. About stopping momentum and using the momentum against your opponent, think about it this way. You have a race car on a circuit that is travelling at a given speed and it approaches wide turn, if you want to maintain the same speed you would need less force to turn the car if it approaches a tight corner. The amount of force or pressure is related to 1) speed of the incoming object, 2) it’s mass, 3) your speed, 4) your mass and the tightness of the turn. It’s physics. In Laan dzeet, you would learn how to turn objects through tight corners.

Quote: "OK, well ever seen a nice push knock someone off balance? I didn't say without making contact, I said without staying in contact. My kick makes contact for what 1 second? After that, I have no contact with the off balance opponent. However, I did say in the mantis system you should follow and stay in contact and control, but it isn't a necessity to steal their balance. I noted your sarcasm, but I'm not talking about you loosing control of your balance by yourself, thats absurd. Sticking is a core principle of the mantis system, breaking away is not. It may happen from time to time, but if you loose contact with someone, you can pretty much count that you just got hit. Being in so close to your opponent makes loosing contact very dangerous. You use your mantis techniques with initiative, thats completely opposite from me. Initiative can be nice, but "riding" their attacks and yielding through their "initiative" while staying in contact with them can really leave you in an amazingly advantageous position. Your also combining sticking with grabbing, not so. You said, "got to know when to let go". I'm not talking about grabbing when I say "sticking" but rather staying in contact with as little pressure against them as possible. Here is a drill we do that illustrates why using pressure against pressure can get you hurt. You and I stand facing each other with the backs of our hands touching each others. You push towards me and I push towards you. I can push harder, and harder, and harder, and then collapse and into a lower attack and your hand rushes forward as mine leaves. See the idea? I can even still stay in contact with that hand, only slide down my arm and do a low punching attack while your arm goes above my head. Thats the point I'm getting at against using too much force. Imagine that drill when you push and actually make contact with the back of my hand, that at that instant, my hand collapses in towards my chest, my waist turns outward, your hand go straight and right by my chest as my hand extends again with a punch to the stomach. Those are some of the drills we do for feel."

This is what you said "For me to knock you off balance doesn't require me to have any type of control over you whatsoever.", I never said that you need to stay in contact all time to have control. You seem to be using different definations of explaining things when they are the same thing along a continuum. Sometimes you have to break away. In bung bu we learn concepts of sticking and breaking away. Riding someone’s attack doesn’t mean you’re losing initiative. Sucking an opposing army into a killing zone is not losing initiative. You may not see the term initiative as I do. Yes of course you can collapse into a lower attack or some other attack, but an equally skilled player would be able to modify the direction of the pressure. Hence it comes down to skill rather than a do and don’t.


Quote: "It may not make sense to you, but its a core principle. Let me clarify though. I'm talking about driving through their force as you stated. We are not talking about driving through their head with a punch; you were talking about meeting their attack as a punch and driving through it. That is against the principles of mantis. Why drive through hand use all that energy, strength, and danger when you can collapse, redirect and attack using their own force? You may start out with really basic attacks and escalate as needed, but if I'm attacked, I'm not limiting myself to basic, advanced, intermediate, or "gentlemanly" attacks. Its whatever their body allows mine to do. No thinking about it, what is in my "muscle memory" if you will. "

No it’s not. You learn that a lot in Zhao Yao. Because at that level you should be able to envisage slight changes in momentum and capitalise on it.

Quote: "Now you say you use the full grab! Before it was to slow and committed, and left you in a disadvantageous position. Now its ok and you use it? You just repeated back to me what I wrote several posts back. Maybe we are having trouble communicating."

Yes it’s slow and committed. It may not be a disadvantage if speed is not paramount at that point of the engagement. Definitely I use the 5-finger grab sometimes.

Quote: "No its not, again something I said before as well. If you want to face someone determined to kill you with "likely zones", be my guest. I prefer to guard all areas regardless of whether or not I'll actually be successful in defending 100% of the time. Your actually hybridizing (is that a word) mantis, which is ok and fine with me, but its not pure mantis principles. The idea is to defend against the initial attack, steal the attack, and attack back until you needent attack any longer. You lost me with the f-16 analogy, and exactly what move are you referring to? And what does it have to do with your mentioning the insect again? The visual resemblance to the insect is only a minute portion of why the system is called mantis."

Why not do the 1) defend, 2) steal and counter simultanously? What’s to stop an opponent from attacking again after you’d defended the first attack. In terms of the F-16 scenario, it refers to moving your body as a package. There isn’t a clear distinction any more between defend, steal or attack. The likely danger zones are avoided or covered as you deploy your strategy. Upon meeting the opponent, the strategy evolves through feel. I’m not referring to any moves in particular, it’s a philosophy of doing things.

Quote: "A chance for what? A chance of attacking or a chance of being attacked or what? Here’s the thing about missing attacks, you shouldn't really miss, but rather change. Isn't that what 7 star means, continually changing to break down your opponent? If you miss, move to something else, again, and again, and again, and again... Wait, I'm confused about your question. How precise can I get from my precise training? Well the goal would be exactly precise. If you're aiming at the elbow and hit the knee there is a problem, no? If you going for an elbow break and you miss and hit the forearm, you may still get a lock, but isn't that just a miss and a move to something else? The elbow break was a failure. Its like a victorious failure. What do I consider precision training? Drills that focus on hitting precise areas. Chin na, locks, sweeps, throws, pretty much all my mantis training is about precision in one way or another."

I agree there are targets you aim for, but as you said, you still miss and have to move on to something else. Like I said before, that’s also what I do. The fact that you miss some, shows that what you do comes down to chance.


Quote: "I disagree about the keeping attacking point. Sure you may make a hit on the 13th attack, but what if you go 34 attacks with no damage or contact? Are you conditioned enough to still have full speed and power on your 35th attack as you were on your 1st attack? How about the 65th attack? There is a line somewhere that will cause you to loose if you cannot do some type of damage quickly. Even if its that you run out of "seam", thats bad."

The person defending would also be expanding energy defending don’t you think. It comes down to who has put in the hours into training. Strength, stamina comes into it. There’s always a danger of running out of steam, but you can’t worry about that in a real fight, this is something that should be addressed in your cardio training.



Quote: " I'm not disputing counter force, but only how much force is used. About emptying, its not just moving out of the path of the attack. If your opponent anticipates your move and changes, then you change as well, I dont see the issue. Emptying isn't something the opponent can anticipate, its not an attack or pressure, its something they are doing. Your simply allowing their attack to reach its end point, thats being empty. If they change their attack, then you let that attack empty, its really quite simple in theory."

How much force you need is dictated by the situation at hand.

Quote: "Ok, I se your logic in the needing more than one person, but I was really asking if you had a set instructor or if you were learning as you go, sort of bouncing ideas off of each other as you go. Not necessarily having prior knowledge of mantis for either of you. Is that how you train?"

Definitely I have an instructor.

Quote: "Wow, something else I said as well. Experimentation is fine, but what is to say that I can experiment with one technique and really understand it on my own?"

There’re no guarantees, that’s why through more experimentations we hope to build a better engine.

Quote: "No, it shows I'm going on someone’s proven track record. Reputation and proven track record are two separate things. I've seen my sifu fight; I've even fought him quite a bit. If I'm fighting someone else and he says I should do a certain thing, you don’t think I'm going to do it? I know where his skill level is at, why wouldn't I do it? Ignoring it would be arrogance in my opinion. Of course I would take Mr. Trumps advice, you wouldn’t? Not even for an "experiment"? Thats ignorant in my opinion. Learning from others and from mistakes is what makes humans different from animals. Ok, lets get to some meat here, I feel we are running out of things to discuss. I don’t see how we can continue to discuss mantis since we are obviously not both training in the same thing. You wont divulge who your teacher is for reasons unknown (but speculative) and I can't discuss principles with you since you don’t know any of them. What about my question about the 12 soft and 8 hard principles of the mantis system? Do you guys train them? What explanation would you accept about that form being taught at the "level" you don’t like? What are you looking for as explanation? I'd love to discuss it with you. What is it about where you learn a form that is so important? Or in what order you learn them? I don’t know how to explain it to you, so give me a place to start and I'll do my best. What kind of examples are you wanting to try, I'll give you as many as I can think of. Examples for what? Techniques, principles, forms, what?"

Definitely we learn from others. But simply taking what someone says without understanding is not learning. Lets say you go by LKW’s track record, how do you explain Zhao Yao being taught at Bung Bu level? I’ve heard about the 12 soft and 8 hard. The instructor had mentioned that in class sometime back. Don’t ask me what it is, I can’t remember off hand. We use them in our application. Definitely, the order of form learning is important.

 

[7starmantis]

You can apply different training methods and still achieve the same result. The difference in training methods can come from the same set of principals. Not sure what you mean by end justifies the means, but what I can say is one’s competency reflects the effectiveness of the training program.

There we go, ok so your competency reflects the effectiveness of your training? If that is correct, how do you judge your competency? If I judge my competency from only interacting with one of my fellow students, then I'm not getting a true picture of what my competency is, correct? I've always said, we must each stand on our own skill, but how do we do that? How do we judge our skill or our competency? It’s a skewed version of our training to judge it by our competency which we measured through something incorrectly. That’s what my point is. You said earlier we have to take each conversation as a clean slate, right? And I have to read what you write and apply it to logic and physics right? So how do I judge you on my own logic since you obviously do not know any of the principles, drills, concepts, or even methods I'm referring to or use myself? What’s the universal standard? Answer: There isn't one. And if that is true than your lineage, instructor, training methods, intent, training time, logic, knowledge, etc must all be taken into account to accurately get a glimpse of your competency, no?

How can you move without force? Your arm has mass and your accelerating it towards an incoming object with your muscles. Sure redirect the opponent’s force upon contact, sometimes you have to ride with it longer other times you don’t. It all depends on the situation at hand. I don’t see how it violates mantis principals. Maybe we’re using different words to describe the same thing. I don’t use the term "emptying", I just do when the opportunity feels right. I don’t see how you can do this without pressure. There will always be some pressure and this is something you and your opponent would turn up or turn down.

What are you talking about? Who said anything about moving without force? I said its a question of how much force, not whether or not force is present. It is against mantis principles, because mantis principles teach not to meet force with force. Its not a yes or no answer, we are talking principles here, not hard coded do or don't do. However the underlying core of most mantis principles is "softness" or "feel". If I'm tense and pushing against your force with my own force, its impossible for me to be "feeling", "listening", or "measuring" your force. I guess here is another example of why I got the assumption you trained alone, you only use the words, "I" when talking about your training. You said you do not use the word emptying, does your instructor? Does his instructor? Do you know? My point is that the principles behind emptying are core to mantis and especially 7 star mantis, but then so are many forms that you choose to ignore. To allow an attack to empty is to let a punch reach its furthest reach, to allow the arm to reach its maximum extension, to allow their energy to reach its farthest point, and then give it a little help at continuing in that same direction. That’s what the pluck is used for. The pluck really shouldn't be used with much force at all, just a continuance of their own force. If the timing is correct, you don’t have to use much muscle strength at all, and shouldn't.

Yes you could, but you might not be able to. It come down to who’s the more competent player. You might realise something later than your opponent. It comes down to skill. I had already mentioned in the earlier post about assimilating information.

Your right, but in my opinion saying that is a cop-out. Everything comes down to who is the more skilled fighter, everything. You might realize something later than your opponent, you might be slower, heavier, or whatever. My point was that riding an attack and using the proper timing really cuts down on their ability to defend against your attack, cuts it down quite profusely. Lets take an example. If you punch at my chest and I make contact with your hand before it hits my chest. I then move my center backwards in the same direction your punch is going and allow your punch to reach its end and it still hasn't made contact with my chest, I can then apply an attack, lock, break, chin na of my own. At the point of your punch's full extension you are very vulnerable and its hard to defend, that’s my point and that’s the principle behind mantis' yielding, riding, feeling, plucking, and attacking.

If the opponent is trying to hit you, it’ll be very hard to gauge a 1-inch miss all the time. In fact most times, you’ll have to make contact at some stage. Again as I said earlier, it comes down to the differences in the level of skill between the 2 partners.

I don’t really know what to say anymore. I'm not talking about gauging a 1 inch miss, I said the miss may only be 1 inch, but it may be 9 inches, or 1/34 of an inch, or it may actually make contact, you can still yield to the energy or pressure. You keep saying \things like I've said contact is bad, I said contact is made early, contact is the heart of mantis fighting.

I had already said earlier that many times we go by feel. It was a response of you talking about yielding and missing by an inch without making contact. About stopping momentum and using the momentum against your opponent, think about it this way. You have a race car on a circuit that is travelling at a given speed and it approaches wide turn, if you want to maintain the same speed you would need less force to turn the car if it approaches a tight corner. The amount of force or pressure is related to 1) speed of the incoming object, 2) it’s mass, 3) your speed, 4) your mass and the tightness of the turn. It’s physics. In Laan dzeet, you would learn how to turn objects through tight corners.

Yielding can be done without contact, it can also be done with contact, why is that so hard to understand? Here is my problem with people who take this in way to far to physics; many of them rule out something without having even tried it. Remember biology makes up part of the equation, not just physics. Sure, mass + speed + my speed + my mass + tightness of curve = redirecting a punch. What about doing a redirect drill 25000 times and learning how it feels? Which is the better way? Who knows, I guess skill is the answer to that. Your muscle should know how all that feels without you having to even ponder any of that. I'm not even really sure what your explaining. Your basically backing up my statement that trying to stop someone momentum is incorrect and even dangerous.

This is what you said "For me to knock you off balance doesn't require me to have any type of control over you whatsoever.", I never said that you need to stay in contact all time to have control.

Would you mind explaining to me how you could not be in contact with me and still have control over my center of balance or gravity or control at all over me?

You seem to be using different definations of explaining things when they are the same thing along a continuum. Sometimes you have to break away. In bung bu we learn concepts of sticking and breaking away. Riding someone’s attack doesn’t mean you’re losing initiative. Sucking an opposing army into a killing zone is not losing initiative. You may not see the term initiative as I do. Yes of course you can collapse into a lower attack or some other attack, but an equally skilled player would be able to modify the direction of the pressure. Hence it comes down to skill rather than a do and don’t.

No, I'm using the same definitions. Would you also mind explaining to me why you would purposefully break contact with you opponent? Breaking contact because they are gaining control over you is pointless. Its just a lack of skill, you should be able to feel where their control is coming from and yield, or drop or move your center. Why break contact and give up any weapon you may still have to steal their attack or do any type of damage to them? Bung Bo contains nothing about breaking away from your opponent. What part of bung bo are you translating as this? Um, I'm the one who said riding an attack doesn't mean loosing initiative, your the one who said it did. I think your getting confused. Yes, an equally skilled fighter would, but isn't that the key?

No it’s not. You learn that a lot in Zhao Yao. Because at that level you should be able to envisage slight changes in momentum and capitalise on it.

OK, explain where in any mantis form you learn to overpower your opponent? What is "envisage"? Capitalizing on changes in momentum is one thing, you said driving through their momentum, different things my friend.

Yes it’s slow and committed. It may not be a disadvantage if speed is not paramount at that point of the engagement. Definitely I use the 5-finger grab sometimes. [/QUOT}E]

When in a real life or death fighting scenario is speed not paramount to your success or living? Now you definitely sometimes you the 5 finger grab even though its terribly slower and less functional? Why may I ask?

Why not do the 1) defend, 2) steal and counter simultanously? What’s to stop an opponent from attacking again after you’d defended the first attack. In terms of the F-16 scenario, it refers to moving your body as a package. There isn’t a clear distinction any more between defend, steal or attack. The likely danger zones are avoided or covered as you deploy your strategy. Upon meeting the opponent, the strategy evolves through feel. I’m not referring to any moves in particular, it’s a philosophy of doing things.

Nothing, who said anything about the attacker not attacking again after the first attack? Yes, that I agree with, its a philosophy of doing things, not hard coded facts, but why only guard likely zones? So would you let an attack make contact and not defend against it if it wasn't at one of these likely zones?

I agree there are targets you aim for, but as you said, you still miss and have to move on to something else. Like I said before, that’s also what I do. The fact that you miss some, shows that what you do comes down to chance.

The fact of missing shows that you lack the skill you desire, not that all of your training comes down to chance. If that’s the case, why train hard? Playing the chance game is ok for gambling, but for me, my fighting doesn't rely or rest on chance at all. If I miss, its my fault, not chance. If I get hit, its my fault not chance. I'm sorry I couldn't disagree with you more than right here. Chance is what the lazy people use to ignore having to train hard. Sorry, I'm not saying this is you, but that’s been my experiences with it.

The person defending would also be expanding energy defending don’t you think. It comes down to who has put in the hours into training. Strength, stamina comes into it. There’s always a danger of running out of steam, but you can’t worry about that in a real fight, this is something that should be addressed in your cardio training.

Well, if you are sticking with mantis principles only, than no. Defending shouldn't exert or expend energy. That’s what I've been saying, if you meet force with force and all contact using force, then yes, you expend energy while defending, but if you ride their attacks, stay connected and yield, then no you shouldn't expend even half of the energy they do, not even a third. You honestly believe you shouldn't concern yourself with running out of steam in a real fight? Now I'm not saying pull your punches, but you have to understand your limitations and not just blow by them with nothing to show for it.

There’re no guarantees, that’s why through more experimentations we hope to build a better engine.

Wha??

Definitely we learn from others. But simply taking what someone says without understanding is not learning. Lets say you go by LKW’s track record, how do you explain Zhao Yao being taught at Bung Bu level? I’ve heard about the 12 soft and 8 hard. The instructor had mentioned that in class sometime back. Don’t ask me what it is, I can’t remember off hand. We use them in our application. Definitely, the order of form learning is important.

Well I guess it comes down to how you define learning. Is learning simply from words, or does it involve action as well? If it involves action then you would have to put into motion the advice you took in order to truly learn.

Going by LKW's track record? I would explain the position of the form by the skill of his students. Simply put. Now explaining it from my point of view, how would you like me to do that? I don’t understand what you are looking for as explanation. How can I explain it? Why does it matter? You said it certainly matters the "position" of the form being taught, why? Do you continue learning things about a form indefinitely? If so, then it truly doesn't matter when its taught. You only have 4 forms correct? How far can Zhao Yao be from bung bo in your curriculum? 3 forms at most right? I don’t understand your concern. Seek out some of LKW's top students and learn their skill level, see the competency that reflects the honesty of their training methods.

If you can't remember off hand 20 core principles of the mantis system, how do you use them when fighting?

7sm

 

[Fumanchu]

Quote:"There we go, ok so your competency reflects the effectiveness of your training? If that is correct, how do you judge your competency? If I judge my competency from only interacting with one of my fellow students, then I'm not getting a true picture of what my competency is, correct? I've always said, we must each stand on our own skill, but how do we do that? How do we judge our skill or our competency? It’s a skewed version of our training to judge it by our competency which we measured through something incorrectly. That’s what my point is. You said earlier we have to take each conversation as a clean slate, right? And I have to read what you write and apply it to logic and physics right? So how do I judge you on my own logic since you obviously do not know any of the principles, drills, concepts, or even methods I'm referring to or use myself? What’s the universal standard? Answer: There isn't one. And if that is true than your lineage, instructor, training methods, intent, training time, logic, knowledge, etc must all be taken into account to accurately get a glimpse of your competency, no?"

Assessing your effectiveness against other students and friends who do kung fu is a good way to go about it. Especailly when a lot of students from the class are competent at other arts before starting up mantis. Why I relate it to physics is because the definations are universal as opposed to the terms that may e specific to what you or I use. We also know that every physical action has to be consistent with physics. therefore it is a common language we can use.

Quote: "What are you talking about? Who said anything about moving without force? I said its a question of how much force, not whether or not force is present. It is against mantis principles, because mantis principles teach not to meet force with force. Its not a yes or no answer, we are talking principles here, not hard coded do or don't do. However the underlying core of most mantis principles is "softness" or "feel". If I'm tense and pushing against your force with my own force, its impossible for me to be "feeling", "listening", or "measuring" your force. I guess here is another example of why I got the assumption you trained alone, you only use the words, "I" when talking about your training. You said you do not use the word emptying, does your instructor? Does his instructor? Do you know? My point is that the principles behind emptying are core to mantis and especially 7 star mantis, but then so are many forms that you choose to ignore. To allow an attack to empty is to let a punch reach its furthest reach, to allow the arm to reach its maximum extension, to allow their energy to reach its farthest point, and then give it a little help at continuing in that same direction. That’s what the pluck is used for. The pluck really shouldn't be used with much force at all, just a continuance of their own force. If the timing is correct, you don’t have to use much muscle strength at all, and shouldn't."

You don't have to be tense to be forceful. If you're tense you're probably not using your muscles efficiently. You can be forceful and listen (or as I say - assimilate information) at the same time. I don't recall my instructor using the word empty. When ever I have questions I ask him until I understand. In laan dzeet, you're not allowing the opponent's attack to reach the furthest - as an example. I agree the pluck is more about timing then brute force. However, the little force that you use should be enough to shake the opponent.

Quote: "Your right, but in my opinion saying that is a cop-out. Everything comes down to who is the more skilled fighter, everything. You might realize something later than your opponent, you might be slower, heavier, or whatever. My point was that riding an attack and using the proper timing really cuts down on their ability to defend against your attack, cuts it down quite profusely. Lets take an example. If you punch at my chest and I make contact with your hand before it hits my chest. I then move my center backwards in the same direction your punch is going and allow your punch to reach its end and it still hasn't made contact with my chest, I can then apply an attack, lock, break, chin na of my own. At the point of your punch's full extension you are very vulnerable and its hard to defend, that’s my point and that’s the principle behind mantis' yielding, riding, feeling, plucking, and attacking."

Assuming the opponent is less skilled to know that the punch has missed. Like you had also agreed, it comes down to skill. Your example is one way of dealing with it, distance, time in which you perceived the punch etc are also factors.

Quote:"I don’t really know what to say anymore. I'm not talking about gauging a 1 inch miss, I said the miss may only be 1 inch, but it may be 9 inches, or 1/34 of an inch, or it may actually make contact, you can still yield to the energy or pressure. You keep saying \things like I've said contact is bad, I said contact is made early, contact is the heart of mantis fighting."

So did I, I also said contact should be made early. If there is no need to yield you go right through the target. Otherwise, what are you yielding to?

Quote:"Yielding can be done without contact, it can also be done with contact, why is that so hard to understand? Here is my problem with people who take this in way to far to physics; many of them rule out something without having even tried it. Remember biology makes up part of the equation, not just physics. Sure, mass + speed + my speed + my mass + tightness of curve = redirecting a punch. What about doing a redirect drill 25000 times and learning how it feels? Which is the better way? Who knows, I guess skill is the answer to that. Your muscle should know how all that feels without you having to even ponder any of that. I'm not even really sure what your explaining. Your basically backing up my statement that trying to stop someone momentum is incorrect and even dangerous."

You can't compare the effectiveness of your training regime to physics. You training helps you learn how people move and how you move. it does not violate physical laws.

Quote"Would you mind explaining to me how you could not be in contact with me and still have control over my center of balance or gravity or control at all over me?"

The stuff in "....." in the last post is what YOU said. I was quoting what you said back to you, because it doesn't make sense, does it?

Quote:"No, I'm using the same definitions. Would you also mind explaining to me why you would purposefully break contact with you opponent? Breaking contact because they are gaining control over you is pointless. Its just a lack of skill, you should be able to feel where their control is coming from and yield, or drop or move your center. Why break contact and give up any weapon you may still have to steal their attack or do any type of damage to them? Bung Bo contains nothing about breaking away from your opponent. What part of bung bo are you translating as this? Um, I'm the one who said riding an attack doesn't mean loosing initiative, your the one who said it did. I think your getting confused. Yes, an equally skilled fighter would, but isn't that the key?"

That's right, you realise that you are less skillful than your opponent. Why maintain contact when you know you are being dominated. So you make tactical retreat and make it hard for your opponent to chase you down. Lots of Bung Bu contains going in and breaking away. First line of Bung Bu!

Quote:"OK, explain where in any mantis form you learn to overpower your opponent? What is "envisage"? Capitalizing on changes in momentum is one thing, you said driving through their momentum, different things my friend."

Pretty much all of Zhao Yao is about cutting through your opponent.

Quote:"Nothing, who said anything about the attacker not attacking again after the first attack? Yes, that I agree with, its a philosophy of doing things, not hard coded facts, but why only guard likely zones? So would you let an attack make contact and not defend against it if it wasn't at one of these likely zones?"

We guard likely zones because a human body moves in finite ways, so for a given opponent there are limits as to where their limbs can be. If we were fighting against an octopus with flexible tenticles then we'll be in trouble. If something does come into a zone outside my expectations, that's were the laan dzeet training comes in.

Quote:"The fact of missing shows that you lack the skill you desire, not that all of your training comes down to chance. If that’s the case, why train hard? Playing the chance game is ok for gambling, but for me, my fighting doesn't rely or rest on chance at all. If I miss, its my fault, not chance. If I get hit, its my fault not chance. I'm sorry I couldn't disagree with you more than right here. Chance is what the lazy people use to ignore having to train hard. Sorry, I'm not saying this is you, but that’s been my experiences with it."

I wish I could hit an opponent's eye 100% of the time with my finger, that should stop a fight - but you're right, I lack the skill I desire. But if I don't train hard, then I probably miss even more times. Chance is not about laziness, it's about probability. For example you toss a fair coin, you get Heads 50% of the time, it doesn't mean you're a lazy tosser does it.

Quote:"Well, if you are sticking with mantis principles only, than no. Defending shouldn't exert or expend energy. That’s what I've been saying, if you meet force with force and all contact using force, then yes, you expend energy while defending, but if you ride their attacks, stay connected and yield, then no you shouldn't expend even half of the energy they do, not even a third. You honestly believe you shouldn't concern yourself with running out of steam in a real fight? Now I'm not saying pull your punches, but you have to understand your limitations and not just blow by them with nothing to show for it."

Depends on what you're defending against and your skill level. If defending doesn't take energy, then I would question why qren't you attacking. When you're in a fight, you're going at 100% because that's what your opponent is doing. No point worrying about whether you can last 20mins when you know if you don't work to the max now, you might not survive the next min.

Quote:"Well I guess it comes down to how you define learning. Is learning simply from words, or does it involve action as well? If it involves action then you would have to put into motion the advice you took in order to truly learn. Going by LKW's track record? I would explain the position of the form by the skill of his students. Simply put. Now explaining it from my point of view, how would you like me to do that? I don’t understand what you are looking for as explanation. How can I explain it? Why does it matter? You said it certainly matters the "position" of the form being taught, why? Do you continue learning things about a form indefinitely? If so, then it truly doesn't matter when its taught. You only have 4 forms correct? How far can Zhao Yao be from bung bo in your curriculum? 3 forms at most right? I don’t understand your concern. Seek out some of LKW's top students and learn their skill level, see the competency that reflects the honesty of their training methods."

Yes you do learn more about the form as you progress. Nevertheless order of learning does matter. Unless you have accomplished the basics, you can't get the advance stuff. Zhao Yao is very very very very far from Bung Bu. It contains 8 elbows which contains bung bu and laan dzeet. Each form is a huge progression in skill level.

Quote: "If you can't remember off hand 20 core principles of the mantis system, how do you use them when fighting?"

I guess I just do. I had a look at the 12 principals - I though what are they, then I read about what they are and I though to myself, ohhhh that's what they are - I do them already. Just like when you play tennis, you don't think about forehand, back hand and what type of volley your doing. You just do.

 

[7starmantis]

Assessing your effectiveness against other students and friends who do kung fu is a good way to go about it. Especailly when a lot of students from the class are competent at other arts before starting up mantis. Why I relate it to physics is because the definations are universal as opposed to the terms that may e specific to what you or I use. We also know that every physical action has to be consistent with physics. therefore it is a common language we can use.

Using students from your own school who practice what you do is one way, but is it a true test? Don’t they train the same way you do? Don’t they judge themselves against you as well? Why not judge your skill against a person who trained differently than yourself? Now, put yourself in my shoes, how do I judge your competency or skill via the internet? How could I do that? I can't fight you to see or feel your skill level. I guess maybe lineage, instructor, training time, and all the things I mentioned earlier must come into play, no? How else do you propose I judge your skill or competency? I can't do it by knowledge of forms or principles since we obviously differ on those things. Physics is fine, but that doesn't tell me your skill level. I might have a PhD in physics, you don’t really know, would that increase my kung fu skill level? Not at all.

You don't have to be tense to be forceful. If you're tense you're probably not using your muscles efficiently. You can be forceful and listen (or as I say - assimilate information) at the same time. I don't recall my instructor using the word empty. When ever I have questions I ask him until I understand. In laan dzeet, you're not allowing the opponent's attack to reach the furthest - as an example. I agree the pluck is more about timing then brute force. However, the little force that you use should be enough to shake the opponent.

Actually, at some point in your body, some muscle must tense in order to exert pressure or force. How do you use your muscle more efficiently by not tensing them? I know you like to use physics terms, but let me give you some insight into the biology of the human body, that’s not possible. The muscle must fire in order to be used. Now, your right about being forceful and still listening, I'm glad you said that, because that is very important, however being forceful while "listening" is not the same as driving your force through your opponents with overpowering strength; which is not conducive to "listening". Also, in your pluck, you are not relying on your own strength or force but the opponents own force. If you’re trying to pluck and use enough of your own force to "shake your opponent" you’re doing it incorrectly.

Assuming the opponent is less skilled to know that the punch has missed. Like you had also agreed, it comes down to skill. Your example is one way of dealing with it, distance, time in which you perceived the punch etc are also factors.

The skill of the opponent is really coming into play here. Them knowing the punch has missed isn't the point, because at that point in time you should have already attacked. Plus, like I said several time, the punch may not miss, it may actually make contact, therefore they don’t realize its "missed". Yes, what I'm explaining is only one way of dealing with the attack, but in all yielding or plucking situations this principle is still core.

So did I, I also said contact should be made early. If there is no need to yield you go right through the target. Otherwise, what are you yielding to?

What? Yielding is done when your opponent attacks you, not when you attack your opponent. To yield is by definition, "To give way to pressure or force". I'm not sure what your post here meant. Maybe you didn't understand what I said about yielding without contact? It’s simple, still giving way to pressure or force, just before that pressure or force makes contact with you. Imagine punching at my head (I'm sure you have already in this post ) and I twist at my waist allowing my shoulders to turn and my head slips to one side, your punch goes right by my head missing it. That is still a yield.

You can't compare the effectiveness of your training regime to physics. You training helps you learn how people move and how you move. it does not violate physical laws.

What, I thought you said you must compare it all to physics? When do you draw the line to compare or not compare? Also, who said anything about training violating physical laws? I said sitting and pondering the physics behind something and getting out there and experiencing it 500 times is very different. That’s all.

The stuff in "....." in the last post is what YOU said. I was quoting what you said back to you, because it doesn't make sense, does it?

Actually it does, see I know what I said because I was there when I wrote it. Let’s clear this up here....

For me to knock you off balance doesn't require me to have any type of control over you whatsoever.

This makes sense.

I never said that you need to stay in contact all time to have control.

Now, this is what I was responding to. I was asking how you can have control over me without being in contact with me. Could you explain that to me?

That's right, you realise that you are less skillful than your opponent. Why maintain contact when you know you are being dominated. So you make tactical retreat and make it hard for your opponent to chase you down. Lots of Bung Bu contains going in and breaking away. First line of Bung Bu!

Why maintain contact? Because it’s your main and really only line of defense if they are better than you. You may be faster than me, but if I'm in contact with your arm and I feel it begin to move I can defend against your punch even if you’re still faster than me. Does that not make sense to you? Being dominated is part of the fight, if that’s happening you need to stay in contact and ride their attack out and find the right place to steal it and attack yourself. That’s where the skill of yielding and riding comes into play, that’s why it’s so important. A skilled mantis practitioner will have no problem chasing you down if you break contact, all your doing is giving them an advantage of hitting you with an attack because you lost your ability to feel or "listen" or "assimilate information". If they are beating you with your contact and feel, what makes you think they won’t pummel you without it?

I think you are mistaking the "riding" and yielding principles in bung bo for breaking away. The first line of bung bo is straight attacking and sticking. I can't even imagine what part of it your saying is breaking away. One of the things that makes mantis what it is (mantis) is the sticking. This is another way it’s related to the insect.

Quote:"OK, explain where in any mantis form you learn to overpower your opponent? What is "envisage"? Capitalizing on changes in momentum is one thing, you said driving through their momentum, different things my friend."

Pretty much all of Zhao Yao is about cutting through your opponent.

Like I said, cutting through, changing momentum, and redirecting are all different from overpowering and driving through force with force. It seems you are not grasping some of the very core principles that have to do with yielding and "feel".

We guard likely zones because a human body moves in finite ways, so for a given opponent there are limits as to where their limbs can be. If we were fighting against an octopus with flexible tenticles then we'll be in trouble. If something does come into a zone outside my expectations, that's were the laan dzeet training comes in.

There are limits to where their limbs can be in correlation to the rest of their body, but there really isn't a limit on where they can attack. There are techniques for attacks in advanced mantis forms that come from some pretty "unlikely" places. In mantis the limbs and arms are trained to be more flexible than most systems. We train to break down the arm into sections, and you can attack from the fingers, then the hand, then the wrist, then the elbow, each joint can bend and change your attack. So explain what you mean by if the attack comes form out of your expectations that’s where laan dzeet comes in? If it comes form out of your expectation area, its probably going to hit you, no?

I wish I could hit an opponent's eye 100% of the time with my finger, that should stop a fight - but you're right, I lack the skill I desire. But if I don't train hard, then I probably miss even more times. Chance is not about laziness, it's about probability. For example you toss a fair coin, you get Heads 50% of the time, it doesn't mean you're a lazy tosser does it.

That wish should fuel your training. Fighting is not about chance, laziness, or probability. Let’s take your coin tossing example. I can train on how hard to spin it, how high to toss it, and etc which can increase my ability to get heads on every toss even up to 90% or so. In fact, I've done it with coins, so my point is that chance and probability don’t have much of a place in fighting. Its not a straight 50-50 chance, training and learning make that ability stronger. See sometimes a person can out-do the odds or the chances. You may refrain from a certain technique or strike because the chances of it landing are small, but it may just be the technique that saves your life.

Depends on what you're defending against and your skill level. If defending doesn't take energy, then I would question why qren't you attacking. When you're in a fight, you're going at 100% because that's what your opponent is doing. No point worrying about whether you can last 20mins when you know if you don't work to the max now, you might not survive the next min.

True, once again doesn't it all depend on your skill level? We talked about the possibility of being outdone or out-fought didn't we? In that case you must ride and defend until the situation presents itself that you can attack. If you’re fighting a really skilled mantis person and they are attacking its going to be hard to defend all their attacks and still attack yourself. In this scenario, if defended expelled as much energy as attacking, you would be out of "juice" pretty dang quick. That’s the point in defending and "riding" their attack. Sometimes you have to just defend for a bit until you can get a step ahead of them or steal their attack. Sure you going at 100% in a fight and sure you shouldn't be too worried about minute 21 when you on minute 1, but if you get to minute 20 and you know you will run out of juice at minute 21, you need to understand that and take that into consideration. Don’t get me wrong, I believe in using your most "dangerous" or "quickest" techniques first anyway, but if its still gone that long and you’re not making any contact or damage, you might need to start praying for an act of God. This is something you need to take into consideration within the fight.

Yes you do learn more about the form as you progress. Nevertheless order of learning does matter. Unless you have accomplished the basics, you can't get the advance stuff. Zhao Yao is very very very very far from Bung Bu. It contains 8 elbows which contains bung bu and laan dzeet. Each form is a huge progression in skill level.

Ok, here is our problem. From your perspective Zhao Yao is one of the most advanced forms and thus must be very far from bung bo. In my perspective we have many much more advanced sets than zhao yao and therefore it is ok being at a more intermediate level. Each form is a huge progression in skill level, but in our view, that skill level doesn't stop at zhao yao. Also remember we split your zhao yao up into several sets which are taught at different levels. Yut lo, yee lo, sum lo, and sei lo respectively. Also each of these are quite a bit longer than your zhao yao so there are different principles and techniques taught in them.

I guess I just do. I had a look at the 12 principals - I though what are they, then I read about what they are and I though to myself, ohhhh that's what they are - I do them already. Just like when you play tennis, you don't think about forehand, back hand and what type of volley your doing. You just do.

Would you mind posting a few of them here? See, I can't believe that we have 3 or 4 principles the same let alone 12 or 20, so I would be interested in seeing what your 12 soft principles are. Do you also have 8 hard principles? Playing tennis is a good example, but without knowledge of what a backhand is, or how to do a backhand, or that a backhand is even advantageous in tennis, wouldn't it make it hard to use it in a match?

7sm

 

[Fumanchu]

Quote: "Using students from your own school who practice what you do is one way, but is it a true test? Don’t they train the same way you do? Don’t they judge themselves against you as well? Why not judge your skill against a person who trained differently than yourself? Now, put yourself in my shoes, how do I judge your competency or skill via the internet? How could I do that? I can't fight you to see or feel your skill level. I guess maybe lineage, instructor, training time, and all the things I mentioned earlier must come into play, no? How else do you propose I judge your skill or competency? I can't do it by knowledge of forms or principles since we obviously differ on those things. Physics is fine, but that doesn't tell me your skill level. I might have a PhD in physics, you don’t really know, would that increase my kung fu skill level? Not at all."

Other friends of mine also do martial arts but from different schools and we exchange notes as well. Other students from the class remain in contact with students from their pervious schools so they have a good idea of their progression. More senior students from the current school can provide feedback on my progress. You’re right you can’t really tell by words (on the internet). Lineage is also not that reliable, in any class there are those who train harder / smarter and those who don’t. Students may also have different objectives, some might be happy to do this as an exercise without the fighting. So I hope to express some of the concepts through examples you raised. I was using physics as a common base for relating physical interaction – not going into PhD material.


Quote: "Actually, at some point in your body, some muscle must tense in order to exert pressure or force. How do you use your muscle more efficiently by not tensing them? I know you like to use physics terms, but let me give you some insight into the biology of the human body, that’s not possible. The muscle must fire in order to be used. Now, your right about being forceful and still listening, I'm glad you said that, because that is very important, however being forceful while "listening" is not the same as driving your force through your opponents with overpowering strength; which is not conducive to "listening". Also, in your pluck, you are not relying on your own strength or force but the opponents own force. If you’re trying to pluck and use enough of your own force to "shake your opponent" you’re doing it incorrectly. "

Yes you’re right, some muscles are tense – say the firing sequence from the leg up through your upper back which shoot the arm forward. No need to fire off the arm muscles until much later. The "engine" so to speak is some where back there. So my shoulders are not tense, neither is the forearm, neither is my fist – which I hold in a Baji type format until contact. If I encounter objects the arm can still assimilate information – which might include cutting straight through the defences. Yes timing is also very important, not just in king fu, but say sports like tennis etc or even golf. You still need muscles to deliver force – it’s how you deliver that counts. As for "shaking" the opponent through a hook, we use the coordination of the pulse of the 2 fingers with the rest of the body movement. It actually feels like a "bounce" within the body, contraction and relaxation in a very short time.


Quote: "The skill of the opponent is really coming into play here. Them knowing the punch has missed isn't the point, because at that point in time you should have already attacked. Plus, like I said several time, the punch may not miss, it may actually make contact, therefore they don’t realize its "missed". Yes, what I'm explaining is only one way of dealing with the attack, but in all yielding or plucking situations this principle is still c"

It also depends on when you perceive the attack. You might attack their forearm or just manage to safe yourself. To say that you should already attack is well and good, but there are occasions where you could be blind sided or surprised.

Quote: "What? Yielding is done when your opponent attacks you, not when you attack your opponent. To yield is by definition, "To give way to pressure or force". I'm not sure what your post here meant. Maybe you didn't understand what I said about yielding without contact? It’s simple, still giving way to pressure or force, just before that pressure or force makes contact with you. Imagine punching at my head (I'm sure you have already in this post ) and I twist at my waist allowing my shoulders to turn and my head slips to one side, your punch goes right by my head missing it. That is still a yield."

Yes I see your point. My point is as you throw something out, I do likewise to engage it, upon making contact I felt that I have gained sufficient control not having to yield but being able to take out the balance. Why not?

Quote: "What, I thought you said you must compare it all to physics? When do you draw the line to compare or not compare? Also, who said anything about training violating physical laws? I said sitting and pondering the physics behind something and getting out there and experiencing it 500 times is very different. That’s all."

Do both. Training is as much doing as it is making sure what you’re doing makes sense. It’s also about recognising the muscle groups that you use and build them up as well. You mentioned about running out of steam in your earlier post. That’s where cardio work comes in – you address that in the training level. It’s both physics and biology.


Quote: "Now, this is what I was responding to. I was asking how you can have control over me without being in contact with me. Could you explain that to me?"

You need contact to have control. You cannot knock someone over without contact therefore you cannot knock someone over without control.


Quote: "Why maintain contact? Because it’s your main and really only line of defense if they are better than you. You may be faster than me, but if I'm in contact with your arm and I feel it begin to move I can defend against your punch even if you’re still faster than me. Does that not make sense to you? Being dominated is part of the fight, if that’s happening you need to stay in contact and ride their attack out and find the right place to steal it and attack yourself. That’s where the skill of yielding and riding comes into play, that’s why it’s so important. A skilled mantis practitioner will have no problem chasing you down if you break contact, all your doing is giving them an advantage of hitting you with an attack because you lost your ability to feel or "listen" or "assimilate information". If they are beating you with your contact and feel, what makes you think they won’t pummel you without it?"

Because your opponent is using contact to open up your soft parts to deliver decisive blows. If you’re moving at least they have to chase you down. As a mantis practitioner, you are hitting while sticking at the same time.

Quote: "I think you are mistaking the "riding" and yielding principles in bung bo for breaking away. The first line of bung bo is straight attacking and sticking. I can't even imagine what part of it your saying is breaking away. One of the things that makes mantis what it is (mantis) is the sticking. This is another way it’s related to the insect. "

Bung Bu is about making insertions and pulling out if necessary. OK first few movements of the form, you side step palm and punch. You’ve just broken away from your original position – having to palm given that your punch has failed, thereby side stepping and trying out a new angle of approach. The forearm roll down / double hooks that follow signifies that you’re moving away from their line of attack. But in any retreat, you don’t turn tail and run. You throw stuff into the region, which is being contested to regain the advantage. Increasing distance from you opponent is also a strategy to bait a more aggressive person to over reach.


Quote: "Like I said, cutting through, changing momentum, and redirecting are all different from overpowering and driving through force with force. It seems you are not grasping some of the very core principles that have to do with yielding and "feel"."

Redirection requires the application of force. What do you mean by driving through force with force?

Quote: "There are limits to where their limbs can be in correlation to the rest of their body, but there really isn't a limit on where they can attack. There are techniques for attacks in advanced mantis forms that come from some pretty "unlikely" places. In mantis the limbs and arms are trained to be more flexible than most systems. We train to break down the arm into sections, and you can attack from the fingers, then the hand, then the wrist, then the elbow, each joint can bend and change your attack. So explain what you mean by if the attack comes form out of your expectations that’s where laan dzeet comes in? If it comes form out of your expectation area, its probably going to hit you, no?"

Laan dzeet deals with point blank situations when you need to react. You’ve been caught in a bad situation for what ever reason and need to respond. Have you done Laan dzeet? Yes, likely to get clipped but hopefully the full force of the blow will be deflected and the remaining force hits your hard regions at a tangent. You’re right mantis attacks can be very flexible, but if we’re trained the same way, we are already taking this into account. So we’re dealing with the ‘worst scenario’ when we practice with people in class. Having said that, there are still limitations as to where hands, arms and elbow can be.

Quote: "That wish should fuel your training. Fighting is not about chance, laziness, or probability. Let’s take your coin tossing example. I can train on how hard to spin it, how high to toss it, and etc which can increase my ability to get heads on every toss even up to 90% or so. In fact, I've done it with coins, so my point is that chance and probability don’t have much of a place in fighting. Its not a straight 50-50 chance, training and learning make that ability stronger. See sometimes a person can out-do the odds or the chances. You may refrain from a certain technique or strike because the chances of it landing are small, but it may just be the technique that saves your life."

No, tossing a fair coin the outcome is random – nothing you can do to change the odds (unless you change the coin). No matter how hard you train, the outcome of a fight cannot be guaranteed. Actually, I don’t think about technique or types of strikes. If the zones appear for what ever reason, good strategy on my part or mistakes made by the opponent then I hope to capitalise on that.


Quote: "True, once again doesn't it all depend on your skill level? We talked about the possibility of being outdone or out-fought didn't we? In that case you must ride and defend until the situation presents itself that you can attack. If you’re fighting a really skilled mantis person and they are attacking its going to be hard to defend all their attacks and still attack yourself. In this scenario, if defended expelled as much energy as attacking, you would be out of "juice" pretty dang quick. That’s the point in defending and "riding" their attack. Sometimes you have to just defend for a bit until you can get a step ahead of them or steal their attack. Sure you going at 100% in a fight and sure you shouldn't be too worried about minute 21 when you on minute 1, but if you get to minute 20 and you know you will run out of juice at minute 21, you need to understand that and take that into consideration. Don’t get me wrong, I believe in using your most "dangerous" or "quickest" techniques first anyway, but if its still gone that long and you’re not making any contact or damage, you might need to start praying for an act of God. This is something you need to take into consideration within the fight."

Should be trying to turn the tables at any time instead of defending first and then trying to attack later.

Quote: "Ok, here is our problem. From your perspective Zhao Yao is one of the most advanced forms and thus must be very far from bung bo. In my perspective we have many much more advanced sets than zhao yao and therefore it is ok being at a more intermediate level. Each form is a huge progression in skill level, but in our view, that skill level doesn't stop at zhao yao. Also remember we split your zhao yao up into several sets which are taught at different levels. Yut lo, yee lo, sum lo, and sei lo respectively. Also each of these are quite a bit longer than your zhao yao so there are different principles and techniques taught in them."

In your class, what does Laan Dzeet, 8-elbows and Zhao Yao teach you – in each of these forms?

Quote: "Would you mind posting a few of them here? See, I can't believe that we have 3 or 4 principles the same let alone 12 or 20, so I would be interested in seeing what your 12 soft principles are. Do you also have 8 hard principles? Playing tennis is a good example, but without knowledge of what a backhand is, or how to do a backhand, or that a backhand is even advantageous in tennis, wouldn't it make it hard to use it in a match?"

As for the 12 characters, well you have diu, kua, lean, stick, pluck. I have the 8 hard and 12 softs somewhere. The instructor has mentioned about them before, but I don’t remember. We just do, say you learned a backhand, you don’t need to call it a backhand to be able to use it.

 

[7starmantis]

Other friends of mine also do martial arts but from different schools and we exchange notes as well. Other students from the class remain in contact with students from their pervious schools so they have a good idea of their progression. More senior students from the current school can provide feedback on my progress. You’re right you can’t really tell by words (on the internet). Lineage is also not that reliable, in any class there are those who train harder / smarter and those who don’t. Students may also have different objectives, some might be happy to do this as an exercise without the fighting. So I hope to express some of the concepts through examples you raised. I was using physics as a common base for relating physical interaction – not going into PhD material.

Exchanging notes is simply not what I'm talking about. I think we are at a stand still. There isn't much I can say, you feel your way is superior and I feel your missing many core principles of the mantis system. Lineage isn't completely reliable, no your right, but combined with all the other things I mentioned that you chose to ignore, it helps. I didn't say anything about getting into PhD level physics; I said it wouldn't really matter if I had a PhD in physics, that wouldn't increase my kung fu skill. You seem to enjoy twisting what I say around to fit your points.

Yes you’re right, some muscles are tense – say the firing sequence from the leg up through your upper back which shoot the arm forward. No need to fire off the arm muscles until much later. The "engine" so to speak is some where back there. So my shoulders are not tense, neither is the forearm, neither is my fist – which I hold in a Baji type format until contact. If I encounter objects the arm can still assimilate information – which might include cutting straight through the defences. Yes timing is also very important, not just in king fu, but say sports like tennis etc or even golf. You still need muscles to deliver force – it’s how you deliver that counts. As for "shaking" the opponent through a hook, we use the coordination of the pulse of the 2 fingers with the rest of the body movement. It actually feels like a "bounce" within the body, contraction and relaxation in a very short time.

It also depends on when you perceive the attack. You might attack their forearm or just manage to safe yourself. To say that you should already attack is well and good, but there are occasions where you could be blind sided or surprised.

Perceiving the attack could be mistaken. You can perceive things wrong you know. I'm not talking about being blind sided or surprised, we weren't even discussing that, your straying off topic as well.

Yes I see your point. My point is as you throw something out, I do likewise to engage it, upon making contact I felt that I have gained sufficient control not having to yield but being able to take out the balance. Why not?

No reason why not, I never said you had to yield all the time, what I said was you dont use force to overcome their force. To take out their balance your going to have to yield to some point and move and use their energy against them, you cant just overpower them into taking out their balance, that wont work against skilled mantis fighters.

You mentioned about running out of steam in your earlier post. That’s where cardio work comes in – you address that in the training level. It’s both physics and biology.

Yes, cardio comes in there, but you can't get infinite cardio, you will run out of steam at some point. I mean I train harder than most in cardio and I can still run out of speed pretty quickly if I'm not following the mantis principles. Addressing something in your training doesn't remove it from the fight.

You need contact to have control. You cannot knock someone over without contact therefore you cannot knock someone over without control.

Um, now you agree with me? You said you didn't need to have contact to have control over me here....

I never said that you need to stay in contact all time to have control.

Now your saying different, its hard to discuss this with you while you flip flop around. I can't really honestly believe that you think contact and control are one and the same. Control has nothing to do with a kick that knocks you off balance. I dont even know what to say to this.

Because your opponent is using contact to open up your soft parts to deliver decisive blows. If you’re moving at least they have to chase you down. As a mantis practitioner, you are hitting while sticking at the same time.

Ok, so because your opponent is winning using mantis principles you are going to abandon them? Your grabbing at straws to say "at least they have to chase you". Chase you a skilled mantis fighter will do and catch you too, we train quite hard in that aspect. Yes, you can attack while sticking, but not always, there are no 100% hard coded statements here.

Bung Bu is about making insertions and pulling out if necessary. OK first few movements of the form, you side step palm and punch. You’ve just broken away from your original position – having to palm given that your punch has failed, thereby side stepping and trying out a new angle of approach. The forearm roll down / double hooks that follow signifies that you’re moving away from their line of attack. But in any retreat, you don’t turn tail and run. You throw stuff into the region, which is being contested to regain the advantage. Increasing distance from you opponent is also a strategy to bait a more aggressive person to over reach.

Bung Bo contains no "pulling out if necessary" principles. I think we are going to have to stop this discussion, its turning into just a "yes", "no", "yes" argument. Breaking away from your original position and breaking away from your opponents contact are two completely separate things and I think you know that. The first move in BB is side step and pak sau, but that palm stays in contact with their arm after you strike, then the arm that punched comes up to replace that hand and makes contact and then rolls back into the break. You think the "double hooks" or "mantis catches cicada" position is just a "showy" "taunting" move? Thats ridiculous, its a arm break that comes from maintaining contact even after that first strike in bung bo. It signifies nothing except that you stayed in contact, they attacked, and you yielded to their energy and broke their elbow or at least performed a lock. Do you practice your forms in fighting? In bung bo after that palm and strike why would you just all of the sudden jump back and away from them into a "double hook" position? I can't even imagine why anyone would see that in bung bo. Increasing "false" distance such as using 7 star stance is great, but really moving your whole body completely away from your opponent is a big "no-no" in mantis fighting.

Redirection requires the application of force. What do you mean by driving through force with force?

Yes, the right amount of force at the right time. Driving through force with force would be like you said about using your own muscle and strength to apply force against their force and overpowering them. Thats against mantis principles.

No, tossing a fair coin the outcome is random – nothing you can do to change the odds (unless you change the coin). No matter how hard you train, the outcome of a fight cannot be guaranteed. Actually, I don’t think about technique or types of strikes. If the zones appear for what ever reason, good strategy on my part or mistakes made by the opponent then I hope to capitalise on that.

Actually, I just did it right here wit ha quarter, dime, and penny. If you flip it starting on the same side, get the same amount of rotation, and the same height, it comes out the same almost every time. I'm doing it right now, so I'm sorry, but your incorrect. I'm not talking about a guarantee, just better skill.

Should be trying to turn the tables at any time instead of defending first and then trying to attack later.

Again, grasping at straws. There are times where you can't attack back, there are times when fighting a skilled mantis fighter that three or four, or 5, or 6, or 17 attacks will come at you almost simultaneously, its near impossible to attack on everyone of their attacks, sometimes you have to ride out their attack and wait for the right moment, you can't force something to happen, you'll get beat that way. This all comes with fighting experience.

In your class, what does Laan Dzeet, 8-elbows and Zhao Yao teach you – in each of these forms?

I would find it near impossible to list off everything even one of those forms teaches, mainly because I dont know it all yet.

I think I'm going to have to pull out of this debate, I dont see anything going anywhere, we obviously disagree and neither one of us is really going to change the others mind. If you decide to answer my questions, and maybe reveal some of your lineage, I'll be glad to continue discussing, but right now its a blind discussion that is heading nowhere. To continue the discussion I would need to be getting something out of it, there is nothing for me here in this guised debate.

7sm

 

[Fumanchu]

Quote:"Exchanging notes is simply not what I'm talking about. I think we are at a stand still. There isn't much I can say, you feel your way is superior and I feel your missing many core principles of the mantis system. Lineage isn't completely reliable, no your right, but combined with all the other things I mentioned that you chose to ignore, it helps. I didn't say anything about getting into PhD level physics; I said it wouldn't really matter if I had a PhD in physics, that wouldn't increase my kung fu skill. You seem to enjoy twisting what I say around to fit your points."

Then how do you assess your own skill if its not with your peers? Reason I brought in physics is because the definations are universal so that our conversation can aviod ambiguity. You don't seem to understand that.

Quote: "Perceiving the attack could be mistaken. You can perceive things wrong you know. I'm not talking about being blind sided or surprised, we weren't even discussing that, your straying off topic as well."

Yes your perception could be mistaken. If you only come across the attack moments away, it limits what you can do. You'll learn this when you get up to laan dzeet.

quote:"No reason why not, I never said you had to yield all the time, what I said was you dont use force to overcome their force. To take out their balance your going to have to yield to some point and move and use their energy against them, you cant just overpower them into taking out their balance, that wont work against skilled mantis fighters."

What I think you're saying is that force should be applied in a way such that leverage is in your favour. If that's what you're trying to say, I would agree as it is what I do.

Quote: "Yes, cardio comes in there, but you can't get infinite cardio, you will run out of steam at some point. I mean I train harder than most in cardio and I can still run out of speed pretty quickly if I'm not following the mantis principles. Addressing something in your training doesn't remove it from the fight."

Mantis is actually very demanding on your body because you're really putting in the work. Hopefully you can put in more in a shorter space of time than your opponent, hence you have the initiative and out maneuvour your opponent if you have to.

Quote:"Now your saying different, its hard to discuss this with you while you flip flop around. I can't really honestly believe that you think contact and control are one and the same. Control has nothing to do with a kick that knocks you off balance. I dont even know what to say to this."

No I'm not saying something different. read what I said earlier and trace through the logic.

Quote:"Ok, so because your opponent is winning using mantis principles you are going to abandon them? Your grabbing at straws to say "at least they have to chase you". Chase you a skilled mantis fighter will do and catch you too, we train quite hard in that aspect. Yes, you can attack while sticking, but not always, there are no 100% hard coded statements here."

You're attacking most of the time while sticking, if not the legs then with the arms. Otherwise, why stick if it is not to slow the target down and open up the targets that you want. The reason why the stronger player wants to stick to you is because he can get an advantage compared to the situation when he is not sticking to you. Logically how would you respond? Putting this another way, if a mantis player can more easily plummel you without sticking, why then would he want to stick. Then logically you should stick - correct?

Quote:" Bung Bo contains no "pulling out if necessary" principles. I think we are going to have to stop this discussion, its turning into just a "yes", "no", "yes" argument. Breaking away from your original position and breaking away from your opponents contact are two completely separate things and I think you know that. The first move in BB is side step and pak sau, but that palm stays in contact with their arm after you strike, then the arm that punched comes up to replace that hand and makes contact and then rolls back into the break. You think the "double hooks" or "mantis catches cicada" position is just a "showy" "taunting" move? Thats ridiculous, its a arm break that comes from maintaining contact even after that first strike in bung bo. It signifies nothing except that you stayed in contact, they attacked, and you yielded to their energy and broke their elbow or at least performed a lock. Do you practice your forms in fighting? In bung bo after that palm and strike why would you just all of the sudden jump back and away from them into a "double hook" position? I can't even imagine why anyone would see that in bung bo. Increasing "false" distance such as using 7 star stance is great, but really moving your whole body completely away from your opponent is a big "no-no" in mantis fighting."

No the double hooks are not a taunting move. They occur as a result of failed punches that possibly result in failed 2 finger grabs. The hand position becomes the dil sau. Why 2 hooks - it is to cover the option of being able to hook with either hand. I don't think there is enough there to do an elbow break. It is moving away from a failed incursion and you having to fill in the space to cover your retreat. The reason why you jump away is to cover the option of a failed punch or that an opponent's punch is reaching you faster than your punch. Hence the arm roll down to cover your lower abdoment as you move away from that line of attack. But at this point you don't think of doing the double hook, you are trying to do a back fist attack on your oppoent from the roll down cover position. However if that option fails, you may have to hook. The simplest application in bung bu is not a palm side step etc.... you have launched a punch towards an opponent's face - you knock him down end of story, no need for the palms, hop etc. Now do you see what I mean when I say mantis is built on top of basic punches and kicks you leanr in long fist?

Quote:"Actually, I just did it right here wit ha quarter, dime, and penny. If you flip it starting on the same side, get the same amount of rotation, and the same height, it comes out the same almost every time. I'm doing it right now, so I'm sorry, but your incorrect. I'm not talking about a guarantee, just better skill."

The coin lands and it rolls around. You can't control that irrespective of controlling the height of the toss.

Quote:"Again, grasping at straws. There are times where you can't attack back, there are times when fighting a skilled mantis fighter that three or four, or 5, or 6, or 17 attacks will come at you almost simultaneously, its near impossible to attack on everyone of their attacks, sometimes you have to ride out their attack and wait for the right moment, you can't force something to happen, you'll get beat that way. This all comes with fighting experience."

The longer you wait, the less chance you would have. In mantis you have to be offensive in your retreat to stop the opponent from building up momentum on you.

Quote:"I would find it near impossible to list off everything even one of those forms teaches, mainly because I dont know it all yet.

I think I'm going to have to pull out of this debate, I dont see anything going anywhere, we obviously disagree and neither one of us is really going to change the others mind. If you decide to answer my questions, and maybe reveal some of your lineage, I'll be glad to continue discussing, but right now its a blind discussion that is heading nowhere. To continue the discussion I would need to be getting something out of it, there is nothing for me here in this guised debate."

You don't have to recite each individual move, just the theme of what each form is teaching you. Like bung bu is about tactics and strategy...... have you not learned laan dzeet yet?

 

[7starmantis]

Then how do you assess your own skill if its not with your peers? Reason I brought in physics is because the definations are universal so that our conversation can aviod ambiguity. You don't seem to understand that.

Read what I say carefully, I didn't say not to use your peers in assessing your skills, I said "exchanging notes" is not what I'm talking about. Its good to assess your skill in accordance with your peers, but remember that’s not the true test, your peers fight the same way as you, no? They learn the same things you do, no? Fighting with someone outside your "peer group" is a good test as well. I completely understand why you use physics terms, and I have a good understanding of physics; my point (if you took the time to read what I wrote) is that physics is not the key to good kung fu skill. You can know everything about physics and still have no kung fu skill. You can also know nothing of physics and have great kung fu skill. I was making the point to not just take everything back to physics, you have to get out there and actually experience these things to really have skill in doing them.

Yes your perception could be mistaken. If you only come across the attack moments away, it limits what you can do. You'll learn this when you get up to laan dzeet.

This is what I'm talking about, your not making much sense. Here you make a statement about me learning a form that I learn quite a long time ago, and I posted that in one of my first posts, you really need to read what I'm posting better. My point is that you shouldn't "only come across the attack moments away". If you have good feel and are in good contact with your opponent, there shouldn't ever be a "sneak attack" or an attack that you only "come across" moments away. Now I know your going to post that no one is ever 100% correct, and people make mistakes and there could be a punch that sneaks up on you...Yes, your right. Let me make a blanket statement regarding my posts, which I've already done twice. I'm not saying that each technique or principle that I mention is 100% across the board what going to happen, a fight has millions of variables, I do not however believing in training with a handicap. I don’t train by missing a punch and then trying to deal with it on purpose, I train to defend against every punch, if I miss one then I deal with it, but I don’t train to make mistakes. The drills I do with feel and yielding are what are used for those instances. It’s like killing someone. It’s against the law right? You shouldn't kill a human being right? That’s a correct statement isn't it? Well, aren't there certain circumstances where it’s acceptable? Same thing with what I'm saying.

What I think you're saying is that force should be applied in a way such that leverage is in your favour. If that's what you're trying to say, I would agree as it is what I do.

No, no no. Don’t read what I post and then try to find what it "really" means. I mean what I said. You shouldn’t use force against force, period. If I'm using leverage, it’s to break or lock or throw; in which case, yes I agree with you. But, this is why I said do not relate everything back to physics. Its not leverage you’re seeking, but only feeling their center. Once you truly have found their center you don’t need much force at all, I'll go back to the 4oz of pressure statement. Now for a strike or kick yes, you need much more pressure or force, but that’s a straight attack, its not applying the force head-to-head against an opposing force.

Mantis is actually very demanding on your body because you're really putting in the work. Hopefully you can put in more in a shorter space of time than your opponent, hence you have the initiative and out maneuvour your opponent if you have to.[/QUOT}E]

Mantis is demanding, but not as much as you make it out to be. See at the beginning of our posts you were relating mantis to tai chi so often, but here you would be loosing that "connection" by saying this. It’s not about "putting in more in a shorter period of time". You’re missing the true principle there. If that were the case you would just jump all out as fast as you can with as much power as you could muster. That doesn't lend itself to "feel", stealing their center, or even the "breaking away" you claim. Out maneuvering is only one little facet of the mantis principles. Getting further than this I can't go with words, I wish we lived close enough to do some training, I could show you what I'm talking about. You have a good understanding of the mantis principles, but it’s a surface understanding, your missing some of the much deeper more advanced principles. I would say from reading your posts that I fought like you for my first several years in mantis, but upon really grasping some of the deeper principles it changed my fighting almost 100%.

No I'm not saying something different. read what I said earlier and trace through the logic.

I can't, the logic is faulty. Me knocking you off balance with a kick or something while moving away from you does not give me control over you what so ever. I'm also still waiting for the explanation of how you could have control of someone without being in contact with them at all.

You're attacking most of the time while sticking, if not the legs then with the arms. Otherwise, why stick if it is not to slow the target down and open up the targets that you want. The reason why the stronger player wants to stick to you is because he can get an advantage compared to the situation when he is not sticking to you. Logically how would you respond? Putting this another way, if a mantis player can more easily plummel you without sticking, why then would he want to stick. Then logically you should stick - correct?

Yes, your attacking most of the time while sticking, not all of the time. Again, slowing the target down and opening up targets is just one small facet to sticking. Sure the end result of sticking may be slowing the opponent down, or opening up the target, but it also may be feeling the opponent’s center, defending our yielding to an attack, getting to close for the opponent to attack, etc. The list goes on.

You think a skilled mantis fighter who is beating you pretty badly while your staying "stuck" will have a problem beating you if you try and break contact? Who says you can even get away from them? We practice drills on how to stay stuck even if someone is trying to break contact. Plus, what do you do after breaking contact? Unless you run away, you’re going to be right back in contact again within seconds either from your opponent initiating the contact or if you attack. Where does that leave you? Right back at the beginning. You’re getting mixed up, sticking isn't done because the other opponent doesn't want you to, it’s done to help you win. If they can beat you without sticking they will stick because that’s where their principles are at. What I meant was after breaking contact, if you try to attack again, they will be stuck to you again, what then? You can't make them not connect with you unless you run away, that’s just how it is.

No the double hooks are not a taunting move. They occur as a result of failed punches that possibly result in failed 2 finger grabs. The hand position becomes the dil sau. Why 2 hooks - it is to cover the option of being able to hook with either hand. I don't think there is enough there to do an elbow break. It is moving away from a failed incursion and you having to fill in the space to cover your retreat. The reason why you jump away is to cover the option of a failed punch or that an opponent's punch is reaching you faster than your punch. Hence the arm roll down to cover your lower abdoment as you move away from that line of attack.

What failed punches? Where are those punches that failed? They aren't there; you can't just add something that’s not in the form to give a reason to go to the next move! I don’t think whoever is teaching you this form has a clear understanding of it. You’re saying that whole second part of Bung Bo is (first) about two failed punches that aren't in the form, (second) possibly two failed grabs which aren't in the form. Is that correct? The mantis system isn't about throwing up something to "cover the option of being able to do something". After the pak sau and strike, there is no reason to move to the second move unless they attack, then you ride their attack (energy) back while maintaining contact with their punching (right) hand. At the "bottom" of that second move is where you allowed their attack to "empty" (hence the riding back) and grabbed with the right hand while breaking the elbow with the left forearm. That’s what the "mantis catches cicada" position is all about! It’s not about making two dil sau in order to cover your options of maybe grabbing if you would like to. That’s ridiculous. There is plenty there to do an elbow break. Here, allow me to demonstrate...

That’s the second position of bung bo, the two dil sau. Imagine someone is standing facing me. They have thrown a right punch. My right hand (closest to my chest) has grabbed their wrist and is still holding it while my left arm has made contact to their elbow with the forearm. This is where your leverage comes into play. By pulling in towards my chest with my right hand (still holding their wrist) and pushing out with the forearm of my left hand on their elbow = elbow break. If you can't see it, I'll doctor up that picture and draw in an arm to show more precisely.

Also, your saying something about if their punch is reaching you faster than your punch is reaching them? How in the world are you going to realize that, and then withdraw your punch and move into a different position before their punch hits you? That’s completely unrealistic.

The longer you wait, the less chance you would have. In mantis you have to be offensive in your retreat to stop the opponent from building up momentum on you.

What? Who told you that? Can you explain why? Why would you have less chance if you waited? Have you ever read "The Art of War"? If not, you should read it, its a great book, and it definitely goes against your waiting = less chance theory. You speak of strategy and then say you shouldn’t wait at all, how can that go together? When fighting I don’t care how much "momentum" my opponent builds up, in fact the more momentum they have, the harder they will get hit from a yield, or throw, or lock, or break, etc.

You don't have to recite each individual move, just the theme of what each form is teaching you. Like bung bu is about tactics and strategy...... have you not learned laan dzeet yet?

The theme of what the form is teaching me? How about fighting and survival. That’s what most of my forms teach me. I don’t see how bung bo is about strategy, the whole system is about strategy to a degree. I don’t see one overlying theme of a form, there are many lessons and techniques and principles to be learned from just one form or set. We talked about laan dzeet already, remember. The only form I know that would probably be what you’re talking about is one called lun jeet. And yes, I know it.

7sm

 

[Fumanchu]

Quote:" Read what I say carefully, I didn't say not to use your peers in assessing your skills, I said "exchanging notes" is not what I'm talking about. Its good to assess your skill in accordance with your peers, but remember that’s not the true test, your peers fight the same way as you, no? They learn the same things you do, no? Fighting with someone outside your "peer group" is a good test as well. I completely understand why you use physics terms, and I have a good understanding of physics; my point (if you took the time to read what I wrote) is that physics is not the key to good kung fu skill. You can know everything about physics and still have no kung fu skill. You can also know nothing of physics and have great kung fu skill. I was making the point to not just take everything back to physics, you have to get out there and actually experience these things to really have skill in doing them."

Not all of my peers do mantis. Even within mantis, we don’t all fight the same way. As for physics, yes you can know physics without knowing kung fu. Given the fact that we can only communicate across the net, physics allows us to use a consistent language. That’s the point I’m making.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fumanchu

Yes your perception could be mistaken. If you only come across the attack moments away, it limits what you can do. You'll learn this when you get up to laan dzeet.

Quote: "This is what I'm talking about, your not making much sense. Here you make a statement about me learning a form that I learn quite a long time ago, and I posted that in one of my first posts, you really need to read what I'm posting better. My point is that you shouldn't "only come across the attack moments away". If you have good feel and are in good contact with your opponent, there shouldn't ever be a "sneak attack" or an attack that you only "come across" moments away. Now I know your going to post that no one is ever 100% correct, and people make mistakes and there could be a punch that sneaks up on you...Yes, your right. Let me make a blanket statement regarding my posts, which I've already done twice. I'm not saying that each technique or principle that I mention is 100% across the board what going to happen, a fight has millions of variables, I do not however believing in training with a handicap. I don’t train by missing a punch and then trying to deal with it on purpose, I train to defend against every punch, if I miss one then I deal with it, but I don’t train to make mistakes. The drills I do with feel and yielding are what are used for those instances. It’s like killing someone. It’s against the law right? You shouldn't kill a human being right? That’s a correct statement isn't it? Well, aren't there certain circumstances where it’s acceptable? Same thing with what I'm saying."

I don’t think either of us train to miss. But we have to accept in reality we do.

Quote: "No, no no. Don’t read what I post and then try to find what it "really" means. I mean what I said. You shouldn’t use force against force, period. If I'm using leverage, it’s to break or lock or throw; in which case, yes I agree with you. But, this is why I said do not relate everything back to physics. Its not leverage you’re seeking, but only feeling their center. Once you truly have found their center you don’t need much force at all, I'll go back to the 4oz of pressure statement. Now for a strike or kick yes, you need much more pressure or force, but that’s a straight attack, its not applying the force head-to-head against an opposing force."

Finding the centre and moving the opponent is an application of leverage. You exert a small force and you move a much heavier object, therefore you must be using a longer lever.

Quote: "Mantis is demanding, but not as much as you make it out to be. See at the beginning of our posts you were relating mantis to tai chi so often, but here you would be loosing that "connection" by saying this. It’s not about "putting in more in a shorter period of time". You’re missing the true principle there. If that were the case you would just jump all out as fast as you can with as much power as you could muster. That doesn't lend itself to "feel", stealing their center, or even the "breaking away" you claim. Out maneuvering is only one little facet of the mantis principles. Getting further than this I can't go with words, I wish we lived close enough to do some training, I could show you what I'm talking about. You have a good understanding of the mantis principles, but it’s a surface understanding, your missing some of the much deeper more advanced principles. I would say from reading your posts that I fought like you for my first several years in mantis, but upon really grasping some of the deeper principles it changed my fighting almost 100%."

You can put a lot out with full power output and continue to feel and adapt. Putting in more in a shjort period of time also does not mean you jump out as fast as you can. You’re also processing information as fast as you can - hopefully faster than your opponent which allows you to realise strategies and openings before he does.

Quote:" I can't, the logic is faulty. Me knocking you off balance with a kick or something while moving away from you does not give me control over you what so ever. I'm also still waiting for the explanation of how you could have control of someone without being in contact with them at all."

You can’t control someone without being in contact with them at all. That’s what I’ve been trying to tell you. At some point in time you would have made contact which causes them to lose balance, double over etc.

Quote:" Yes, your attacking most of the time while sticking, not all of the time. Again, slowing the target down and opening up targets is just one small facet to sticking. Sure the end result of sticking may be slowing the opponent down, or opening up the target, but it also may be feeling the opponent’s center, defending our yielding to an attack, getting to close for the opponent to attack, etc. The list goes on."

Basically, mantis is a martial art. The objective is to take out the target. Sticking is a means to an end. After hitting the target a few times, it slows down even further and makes it easier in your sticking game. Don’t you think?

Quote: "You think a skilled mantis fighter who is beating you pretty badly while your staying "stuck" will have a problem beating you if you try and break contact? Who says you can even get away from them? We practice drills on how to stay stuck even if someone is trying to break contact. Plus, what do you do after breaking contact? Unless you run away, you’re going to be right back in contact again within seconds either from your opponent initiating the contact or if you attack. Where does that leave you? Right back at the beginning. You’re getting mixed up, sticking isn't done because the other opponent doesn't want you to, it’s done to help you win. If they can beat you without sticking they will stick because that’s where their principles are at. What I meant was after breaking contact, if you try to attack again, they will be stuck to you again, what then? You can't make them not connect with you unless you run away, that’s just how it is."

Well if they can’t touch you they can harm you. Who says you can’t get away. If they can beat you without sticking, then they will just beat you - it’s consistent with mantis principals. Yes, if you attack again you might end up sticking, but hopefully the circumstances would be more favourable because the specific circumstances might be different.

Quote:" What failed punches? Where are those punches that failed? They aren't there; you can't just add something that’s not in the form to give a reason to go to the next move! I don’t think whoever is teaching you this form has a clear understanding of it. You’re saying that whole second part of Bung Bo is (first) about two failed punches that aren't in the form, (second) possibly two failed grabs which aren't in the form. Is that correct? The mantis system isn't about throwing up something to "cover the option of being able to do something". After the pak sau and strike, there is no reason to move to the second move unless they attack, then you ride their attack (energy) back while maintaining contact with their punching (right) hand. At the "bottom" of that second move is where you allowed their attack to "empty" (hence the riding back) and grabbed with the right hand while breaking the elbow with the left forearm. That’s what the "mantis catches cicada" position is all about! It’s not about making two dil sau in order to cover your options of maybe grabbing if you would like to. That’s ridiculous. There is plenty there to do an elbow break. Here, allow me to demonstrate..."

Mantis doesn’t address basic kicks and punches because they are taught in beginner level kung fu. This doesn’t mean they aren’t there. In fact bung bu helps you get in place to use basic punches. That second part of bung bu is about failure of trying to make contact with basic hits. I agree if upon the pak sau and strike you hit the opponent and he falls back, then you go in and continue hitting. You wouldn’t spring back. But say as you’re striking at the opponent low but he is punching towards you and his punch is going to reach you before you reach him then you would have to move out of the line of attack - having to spring back. Again it’s about failure of your initial strike. No it’s not an elbow break, there isn’t enough leverage, you’re in mid distance to your opponent.

Quote:" That’s the second position of bung bo, the two dil sau. Imagine someone is standing facing me. They have thrown a right punch. My right hand (closest to my chest) has grabbed their wrist and is still holding it while my left arm has made contact to their elbow with the forearm. This is where your leverage comes into play. By pulling in towards my chest with my right hand (still holding their wrist) and pushing out with the forearm of my left hand on their elbow = elbow break. If you can't see it, I'll doctor up that picture and draw in an arm to show more precisely."

Unless the opponent is over committed to the punch, you can’t pull him off balance. This action is dealt with later in the form. You only drag down to elbow break position if the force is bearing down upon you then you side step - as opposed to pulling the opponent’s arm towards your chest.

Quote:" Also, your saying something about if their punch is reaching you faster than your punch is reaching them? How in the world are you going to realize that, and then withdraw your punch and move into a different position before their punch hits you? That’s completely unrealistic."

It’s only unrealistic if you’re trying to reverse the action of you muscle. We move with other parts of our body such that the path of our punches can change.

Quote:" What? Who told you that? Can you explain why? Why would you have less chance if you waited? Have you ever read "The Art of War"? If not, you should read it, its a great book, and it definitely goes against your waiting = less chance theory. You speak of strategy and then say you shouldn’t wait at all, how can that go together? When fighting I don’t care how much "momentum" my opponent builds up, in fact the more momentum they have, the harder they will get hit from a yield, or throw, or lock, or break, etc."

It’s important not to let your opponent build up momentum. Rather than to have them build up momentum and you have to yield.

Quote: "The theme of what the form is teaching me? How about fighting and survival. That’s what most of my forms teach me. I don’t see how bung bo is about strategy, the whole system is about strategy to a degree. I don’t see one overlying theme of a form, there are many lessons and techniques and principles to be learned from just one form or set. We talked about laan dzeet already, remember. The only form I know that would probably be what you’re talking about is one called lun jeet. And yes, I know it"

Ok to be more precise, how is Bung Bu different from Laan Dzeet?

 

[7starmantis]

Finding the centre and moving the opponent is an application of leverage. You exert a small force and you move a much heavier object, therefore you must be using a longer lever.

Finding your opponents center is an application of leverage? How is that exactly? Finding your center is only about my skill and "feel". Could you explain that to me? Also, you dont understand what I'm talking about with moving someone’s center with little force. It’s not about leverage. What exactly is your longer lever? Are you using your arm as a lever? What is the lever may I ask?

You can’t control someone without being in contact with them at all. That’s what I’ve been trying to tell you. At some point in time you would have made contact which causes them to lose balance, double over etc.

You dont have to tell me, read your own posts...

I never said that you need to stay in contact all time to have control.

Yes, you would have to make contact, but contact does not = control, sorry.

Basically, mantis is a martial art. The objective is to take out the target. Sticking is a means to an end. After hitting the target a few times, it slows down even further and makes it easier in your sticking game. Don’t you think?

I'm not really sure what your asking. No I dont think it slows down after a while, you shouldn't slow down at all.

Well if they can’t touch you they can harm you. Who says you can’t get away. If they can beat you without sticking, then they will just beat you - it’s consistent with mantis principals. Yes, if you attack again you might end up sticking, but hopefully the circumstances would be more favourable because the specific circumstances might be different.

I'll assume you meant, "they can't harm you". I've been saying that the whole time. Thats what yielding does for you. Um, if you are being beat by them while sticking and using your best skill, how are you going to break contact when they want to stay in contact? If they are better than you, your out of your league. Wait, your saying "if they are better than you then they will beat you" is a mantis principle? Why would the circumstances be better for you? And fighting isn't about chance and circumstances, sorry with real fighting experience you will see that.

Mantis doesn’t address basic kicks and punches because they are taught in beginner level kung fu. This doesn’t mean they aren’t there. In fact bung bu helps you get in place to use basic punches. That second part of bung bu is about failure of trying to make contact with basic hits. I agree if upon the pak sau and strike you hit the opponent and he falls back, then you go in and continue hitting. You wouldn’t spring back.

Would you mind answering my questions?

What failed punches? Where are those punches that failed?

There are no failed punches in the form. You can't just say, "oh those are imaginary punches", that’s just incorrect. Its clear you dont have a complete understanding of bung bo, nor does the person "teaching" you. Your saying that the form gets you in place to do things not in the form? Yes, it gets you in great positions, but the form itself contains none of those "failed attacks" your so fond of.

But say as you’re striking at the opponent low but he is punching towards you and his punch is going to reach you before you reach him then you would have to move out of the line of attack - having to spring back. Again it’s about failure of your initial strike. No it’s not an elbow break, there isn’t enough leverage, you’re in mid distance to your opponent.

Ok, let me say this again. If your already in the middle of a punch and realize their punch is going to reach you first, you can't decide to change, make all the changes, and move your body fast enough to not get hit....sorry not possible. The forms in mantis aren't about failing. Where are the failing punches? You are leaving a huge gaping whole in the form. Oh, and yes it is an elbow break, I'll see if I can't take a picture of that application and post it for you, there are no other explanations of it. Its most certainly not just "taking up space" like you said. There is PLENTY of "leverage" to break, dont forget your waist.

Unless the opponent is over committed to the punch, you can’t pull him off balance. This action is dealt with later in the form. You only drag down to elbow break position if the force is bearing down upon you then you side step - as opposed to pulling the opponent’s arm towards your chest.

Actually they dont need to over commit, just let the attack empty, then you can steal their balance easy. Your only thinking in one little box. An elbow break doesn't have to be a downward movement, you can break horizontally as well. Thats what the "mantis catches cicada" position is, bottom line.

Quote:" What? Who told you that? Can you explain why? Why would you have less chance if you waited? Have you ever read "The Art of War"? If not, you should read it, its a great book, and it definitely goes against your waiting = less chance theory. You speak of strategy and then say you shouldn’t wait at all, how can that go together? When fighting I don’t care how much "momentum" my opponent builds up, in fact the more momentum they have, the harder they will get hit from a yield, or throw, or lock, or break, etc."

It’s important not to let your opponent build up momentum. Rather than to have them build up momentum and you have to yield.

Again, would you answer my questions?...

What? Who told you that? Can you explain why? Why would you have less chance if you waited? Have you ever read "The Art of War"? You speak of strategy and then say you shouldn’t wait at all, how can that go together?

"Have" to yield? Yielding is a core principles of the mantis system, it requires very little energy and is just simply a very basic core principle in mantis, sorry you dont understand that.

Ok to be more precise, how is Bung Bu different from Laan Dzeet?

For one bung bo is more linear. Lun jeet has more "emptying with redirecting" principles in it. Lun jeet is more advanced and uses more yielding principles than bung bo. However, I wonder if I should write all this since we obviously dont have the same understanding of even bung bo.
If your willing to answer some of those questions, I'm willing to continue discussing, otherwise this is turning ugly and we'll need to stop.

7sm

 

[Fumanchu]

Quote:"Finding your opponents center is an application of leverage? How is that exactly? Finding your center is only about my skill and "feel". Could you explain that to me? Also, you dont understand what I'm talking about with moving someone’s center with little force. It’s not about leverage. What exactly is your longer lever? Are you using your arm as a lever? What is the lever may I ask?"

Yes. By defination. Yes, it takes skill to create the lever. If you're using a little force to move something heavy, then there must be a lever that you're using. Your arm is not the lever. You are say pressing down against the opponent's centre, your leg might be behind the the opponent's leg. The lever would be say the length of the opponent's thighs as you get him to sit into empty space. He natually falls.

Quote: "I'll assume you meant, "they can't harm you". I've been saying that the whole time. Thats what yielding does for you. Um, if you are being beat by them while sticking and using your best skill, how are you going to break contact when they want to stay in contact? If they are better than you, your out of your league. Wait, your saying "if they are better than you then they will beat you" is a mantis principle? Why would the circumstances be better for you? And fighting isn't about chance and circumstances, sorry with real fighting experience you will see that."

You break contact by using footwork, changing your angle of approach. It takes time for someone to respond. A good player can respond fast, but not instantanously. Not everyone is equally strong in each catagory. They might be sticky, but not as fast, some are right / left handed or favour certain approaches to others. A new approach allows you to sample a new set of circumstance and probe for possible weaknesses you can exploit. I'm sure sending a scouting team infront of your main force is covered somewhere in the Art of War.

Quote: "Would you mind answering my questions?"

The punches are not taught in the form. They are basic techniques behind mantis. Bung Bu is about getting in place to use those basic techniques. Bung Bu does not just focus on the failures. Like I said earlier the first line especially deals with you making incursions into the opponent and tactical retreats with the aim of making new incursions. You need to focus on failed techniques. There's nothing more to worry about if you knock someone out with the first punch, it is when the punch fails then you need to stick, hook, side step etc. etc. see my point?

Quote:"There are no failed punches in the form. You can't just say, "oh those are imaginary punches", that’s just incorrect. Its clear you dont have a complete understanding of bung bo, nor does the person "teaching" you. Your saying that the form gets you in place to do things not in the form? Yes, it gets you in great positions, but the form itself contains none of those "failed attacks" your so fond of."

Definately the form is teaching you strategy. You're not practicing basic kicks and punches anymore in bung bu form. With bung bu you'll be a much better fighter because you can better direct your attacks through these strategies.

Quote:"Ok, let me say this again. If your already in the middle of a punch and realize their punch is going to reach you first, you can't decide to change, make all the changes, and move your body fast enough to not get hit....sorry not possible. The forms in mantis aren't about failing. Where are the failing punches? You are leaving a huge gaping whole in the form. Oh, and yes it is an elbow break, I'll see if I can't take a picture of that application and post it for you, there are no other explanations of it. Its most certainly not just "taking up space" like you said. There is PLENTY of "leverage" to break, dont forget your waist."

It's not possible if your using the same muscles that drive the punch to steer its direction. The arm is still relaxed in a fully commited punch because the power source is driven up from the legs through the back. eg. you have a car, you drive at 40mph and you steer, your drive at 80mph, does the steering lock up - if it does its a pretty bad car. As for changing the directions of a fully committed attack mid stream - we do that all the time!

Quote:"Actually they dont need to over commit, just let the attack empty, then you can steal their balance easy. Your only thinking in one little box. An elbow break doesn't have to be a downward movement, you can break horizontally as well. Thats what the "mantis catches cicada" position is, bottom line."

If you pull the arm towards your chest, the arm could easily fold and elbow you instead, then you have to deal with an incoming elbow. Maybe it's different if you're dealing with peers that can't change their attack mid stream. In my class what you suggested wouldn't work.

Quote:"Again, would you answer my questions?..."

To answer your question, it is because if you don't stop your opponent attacking you they will keep hitting you and you'll be hurt and over time you won't be able to fight back. As I said before, even if you retreat, you have to throw stuff into the region of conflict to stop them advancing into you. It's called covering fire. Strategy is not waiting around, even in retreat you are attacking likely zones to reclaim the initative.

Quote:""Have" to yield? Yielding is a core principles of the mantis system, it requires very little energy and is just simply a very basic core principle in mantis, sorry you dont understand that."

One of the characters in mantis is to attack first. If you can hit with the first punch what would you be yielding to?

Quote:"For one bung bo is more linear. Lun jeet has more "emptying with redirecting" principles in it. Lun jeet is more advanced and uses more yielding principles than bung bo. However, I wonder if I should write all this since we obviously dont have the same understanding of even bung bo.
If your willing to answer some of those questions, I'm willing to continue discussing, otherwise this is turning ugly and we'll need to stop."

In laan dzeet, both sides of your body are hard at the same time. this is to wedge off your opponent that has already closed in upon you. The opponent is in contact, toe to toe. In Bung Bu, the opponent is in mid distance away. Laan dzeet deals with failure of Bung Bu. It is to save yourself in critical moments. In application, it is inserted into Bung Bu as Bung Bu is inserted into long fist.

I agree, we don't have the same understanding of Bung Bu. We don't compromise any of our hitting ability because it contains long fist plus all the palming, hooking, footwork etc and we can also modify the path of our attracks mid stream. what advantages does your understanding have over mine? I'm interested to know.

 

[7starmantis]

Yes. By defination. Yes, it takes skill to create the lever. If you're using a little force to move something heavy, then there must be a lever that you're using. Your arm is not the lever. You are say pressing down against the opponent's centre, your leg might be behind the the opponent's leg. The lever would be say the length of the opponent's thighs as you get him to sit into empty space. He natually falls.

I see where your going with the lever idea, however you don’t have to have your leg behind them in order to catch their center and even throw them, in fact you can throw them backwards with no contact except at the point of the throw with your hands or arms. In that case there would be no lever, you simply need to find their center and get under it. Your not so much putting pressure against their center as you are underneath it, or from either side of it.

You break contact by using footwork, changing your angle of approach. It takes time for someone to respond. A good player can respond fast, but not instantanously. Not everyone is equally strong in each catagory. They might be sticky, but not as fast, some are right / left handed or favour certain approaches to others. A new approach allows you to sample a new set of circumstance and probe for possible weaknesses you can exploit. I'm sure sending a scouting team infront of your main force is covered somewhere in the Art of War.

Ok you may use your footwork to try and break contact, but what I'm saying is that a skilled fighter who trains hard on "feel" and staying in contact or "stuck" regardless of your direction will move with you, they will stay in contact even when you try and break contact. That’s a major principles that’s trained with sticking is how to move with them and stay connected. I'm not saying you will never be able to get away but you can't just decide to break contact and step away, just like you can't decide they aren't going to hit you and stop every attack they throw. You don’t have to be instantaneous, someone with good feel will feel your center or energy moving back sometimes even before your body makes its first moves. You don’t need a new approach to see a new "set of circumstances" you make your own new set of circumstances will maintaining contact. Its simply something you don’t understand.

So will you answer my question? You said, "If they are better than you, they will beat you". You said that was a mantis principle. Is that one of you guy’s principles?

The punches are not taught in the form. They are basic techniques behind mantis. Bung Bu is about getting in place to use those basic techniques. Bung Bu does not just focus on the failures. Like I said earlier the first line especially deals with you making incursions into the opponent and tactical retreats with the aim of making new incursions. You need to focus on failed techniques. There's nothing more to worry about if you knock someone out with the first punch, it is when the punch fails then you need to stick, hook, side step etc. etc. see my point?

That’s what I thought. Mantis forms deal with whats in the form. You are creating big holes in the form saying the next move requires something thats not in the form at all. Thats ridiculous. There are no "tactical retreats" in the first line of bung bo, sorry its simply not so. Yes, you need to focus on failed or missed techniques, and bung bo does that, but not on the failed techniques of things that aren't in the form. If the very first strike in bung bo misses or is blocked the next move is still correct, but not if they don’t attack or move forward, if they don’t then you can deviate from the form in a fighting situation and move forward, or move to another attack, but the form deals with whats in the form, you can't add imaginary technique to the form and say they are needed to complete the form.

True, there isn't anything else to worry about if you knock them out with the first punch, but mantis isn't simply about failing, even if that first punch lands you still follow-up and move in and stick. If they block the first punch you move in and stick as well. You simply don’t stop at one punch regardless of the outcome of it. You should already have made your second or third attack before you even realize if the first punch knocked them out or not.

It's not possible if your using the same muscles that drive the punch to steer its direction. The arm is still relaxed in a fully commited punch because the power source is driven up from the legs through the back. eg. you have a car, you drive at 40mph and you steer, your drive at 80mph, does the steering lock up - if it does its a pretty bad car. As for changing the directions of a fully committed attack mid stream - we do that all the time!

Its not possible at all, not if your moving back or against your energy. Sure moving to the side or yielding or something is very plausible, but moving forward an then in the middle of that move change and move backwards all in the time it takes their punch to reach you, or actually half the time because they already started it when you decided to move backwards. Thats simply not going to happen, if you think it does, you will be in for a rude awakening. Changing direction is one thing, but your talking about reversing direction, different thing.

If you pull the arm towards your chest, the arm could easily fold and elbow you instead, then you have to deal with an incoming elbow. Maybe it's different if you're dealing with peers that can't change their attack mid stream. In my class what you suggested wouldn't work.

Yes, the defense to an elbow break like that is yielding at the elbow and using it for a strike, thats why you have to practice that break and understand how to position the arm and apply the pressure and leverage onto the elbow. Your only pulling the wrist towards your chest, the elbow is being pushed outwards. See, this creates an unnatural movement in the elbow joint and with enough pressure or "force" will break. If you seriously think that in your amazingly skilled class the elbow break from that position wouldn't work then your fooling yourself. To say any given technique wont work "in my class" is not only arrogant, but naive. I know your afraid to let anyone know where your located, but if you guys ever invite others to your classes, I would love to come and show you what I mean, its really some great techniques and principles that your missing out on.

To answer your question, it is because if you don't stop your opponent attacking you they will keep hitting you and you'll be hurt and over time you won't be able to fight back. As I said before, even if you retreat, you have to throw stuff into the region of conflict to stop them advancing into you. It's called covering fire. Strategy is not waiting around, even in retreat you are attacking likely zones to reclaim the initative.

Simply not true again. You don’t have to stop their attack to avoid getting hit. I don’t know what else to say, thats just incorrect.

Now strategy is not waiting around? What is strategy then? Why is waiting a bad thing? Waiting for a precise moment is wrong, why?

One of the characters in mantis is to attack first. If you can hit with the first punch what would you be yielding to?

Are you saying one of the principles in mantis is to throw the first punch?

In laan dzeet, both sides of your body are hard at the same time. this is to wedge off your opponent that has already closed in upon you. The opponent is in contact, toe to toe. In Bung Bu, the opponent is in mid distance away. Laan dzeet deals with failure of Bung Bu. It is to save yourself in critical moments. In application, it is inserted into Bung Bu as Bung Bu is inserted into long fist.

Wrong, the techniques of bung bo are no limited to a specific range or distance. Almost every mantis techniques require closing the gap and sticking. There are closer techniques than others, but bung bo contains some very close techniques. However, lun jeet does have some very close techniques, your right, but its most definitely not dealing with the failure of bung bo! In application every technique is inserted into another technique, every form is inserted into every other form.

I agree, we don't have the same understanding of Bung Bu. We don't compromise any of our hitting ability because it contains long fist plus all the palming, hooking, footwork etc and we can also modify the path of our attracks mid stream. what advantages does your understanding have over mine? I'm interested to know.

Anyone can modify the path of their attack in mid stream, but not reverse that path with enough time to avoid a punch that is already halfway to your body. Sorry, thats a matrix move and we aren't living in the matrix.

The first advantage I see if we are going to play "mine" against "yours" is that mine allows for a much deeper and more applicable fighting techniques. Your relies on failed punches while mine continues regardless of contact or failed punches. Your relies on your own force, while mine relies on the movement of my opponents force or energy. Yours rules out valid mantis techniques because "they wont work in your amazing skilled class". Yours deals with impossible body movement while mine stays in line with human biology. We could do this all day, but this isn't a "me against you" thread. WE are discussing mantis principles, lets not get caught up in being against each other, we should work together as we are both mantis practitioners, correct?

7sm