Why I decided to come up with my own martial arts concept...

[fenglong]

I agree it is invaluable to preserve your beginner spirit.
I also think someone who decides to go their own way with martial arts because they decided there is nothing more they could learn from existing arts is doomed to fail, although I supposed there are people with such ego and still successful? I am not one of them anyway.

There was a slight misunderstanding I think? I stated straight attacks are inefficient, and I was especially talking about strong attacks, I never said they are ineffective.
In my opinion, WC straight attacks do so well is because part of the force put into the move is continued in a curve, from what I have seen their force rarely ends up in a dead end.

 

[fenglong]

After all, I am nowhere attempting to create an insanely effective combat art or self-defense style, I put way more emphasis on efficiency than effectiveness and on the certain kind of flow I got in mind.
In the end, if it ever happens, my MA will be in a drawer somewhere with Taijiquan or Taekgyeon when someone tries to classify it, but lacking the historical and cultural background and the decades or hundreds of years of developing and evolving, which does frustrate me a lot, because these are invaluable criteria.
Nevertheless I hope people will look at it as a spiritual art, inspired by nature forces like wind, which has impressed and inspirated me since I was a little kid and in my eyes is kind of an essence of life, just like breathing.

 

[Gnarlie]

Fenglong, it's difficult to determine who you're replying to here without a quote.

I respectfully disagree that straight attacks are inefficient. What criteria are you using to assess efficiency? I would use:

Ease of learning / use - straight strikes are relatively easy to learn and aim compared to curved strikes. One doesn't have to be able to judge distance so accurately as the main power area is along a straight line towards the opponent.

Time taken to reach target - the quickest and therefore most efficient path to a target is a straight line. Any other path leads to wasted time.

How hard it is for the opponent to stop / avoid - with a straight strike, the opponent could parry, could step to either side, slip the strike and come forward, or move out of range. They can't however, come forward along the line between you, as that's where the power is. Curved strikes are less likely to stop the opponent moving forward as there's less risk to them if they move along the line between you; the power is delivered perpendicular to that line. There's also a perception thing - in order to block or avoid a straight strike coming at you, you have to rely on your depth perception to judge it's speed and position at any given time. With a curved strike, you don't rely on depth perception in the same way, therefore it's easier to see and react to. It's much easier to judge the speed and position of a train watching from the side than it is when the train is coming straight at you. Curved strikes are therefore easier to block or avoid, and allow the opponent to move forward, increasing your vulnerability.

Successful hit rate - in my experience, I can successfully make straight line strikes successfully more than curved ones. This is partly due to their speed, ease of delivery and difficulty to detect / avoid. Your experience may differ.

Damage - depends on where and how you hit - both forms of strike have great potential. That said, my most damaging strikes in terms of measured power generated to target are (in order of potency) back kick, front kick, side kick, forward elbow strike and palm heel strike. All linear, transferring the full bodyweight.

Transfer of power - with a straight strike, it is very easy to transfer the full bodyweight into the strike using appropriate power source e.g. forward step and waist twist. This is not so with curved strikes. Only a percentage of bodyweight can be transferred without the addition of an extra movement before the strike e.g. stepping (which turns the strike more linear)

Ease of recovery - balance and composure are quickly recoved post strike by quickly returning the striking limb to its normal position, ready to immediately strike again. The rotational forces generated during a curved strike require greater control of balance and are therefore more likely to leave a vulnerable position post-strike, especially if the strike is unsuccessful.

I'd be interested to hear more on why you view straight strikes as inefficient, and how your experience has led you to that conclusion.

Cheers
Gnarlie

 

[mook jong man]

In my opinion, WC straight attacks do so well is because part of the force put into the move is continued in a curve, from what I have seen their force rarely ends up in a dead end.

It is true that the motions of Tan sau , Fook Sau and Bong sau do form the shape of a rotating sphere when they are used to redirect incoming force.

But that is because the angles of the arms remain fixed in order to turn away heavy force , but when you attack the angles of the arms expand .
With a single punch it does go out to a dead end as you put it , and retracts back into the fixed angle of the guard.

But if I am doing continuous punch or what's more commonly known as chain punch then the striking hand will take a slightly elliptical path in order to make space for the next strike coming down the centerline.

A bit like the action of the teeth of a chain saw , a side benefit of this is that the bottom of the forearms act like wedges on the arms of the opponent as he tries to block the strikes.

It has a built in trapping effect and helps to keep the opponent off balance as the outgoing arm pushes him forward and as it retracts it draws him back in , this effect of course depends on how tense or relaxed the opponents arms are , the more tense he is the worse it will be for him.

This is one of the primary reasons we punch like we do.

 

[oaktree]

After all, I am nowhere attempting to create an insanely effective combat art or self-defense style, I put way more emphasis on efficiency than effectiveness and on the certain kind of flow I got in mind.
In the end, if it ever happens, my MA will be in a drawer somewhere with Taijiquan or Taekgyeon when someone tries to classify it, but lacking the historical and cultural background and the decades or hundreds of years of developing and evolving, which does frustrate me a lot, because these are invaluable criteria.
Nevertheless I hope people will look at it as a spiritual art, inspired by nature forces like wind, which has impressed and inspirated me since I was a little kid and in my eyes is kind of an essence of life, just like breathing.

Why would people classify it as Taijiquan? Do you mean it will resemble an internal martial art? Training in internal arts takes alot of time and work under
a qualified teacher it is very difficult to get the correct feeling without one. Alot of people learn a Taijiquan form in maybe 3-9 months but that is only the surface level
to really get to the internal part takes alot longer, to be able to understand it and use it in a combat sequence longer and then do use it in a free open spar longer
and we have not even reached the theory of using Taijiquan for spiritual development. Maybe if you create something YOU WILL THINK you are practicing internal arts
but the rest of us who practices internal arts will think differently.

 

[Josh Oakley]

I think my biggest issue with what you are doing, fenglong, relates to the fact I had a friend develop an art for himself that he called "The Way of Flowing Water". He combined what he knew of jungyaemoosul(sp), kung-fu, yoga, anatomy, kinesiology, and a couple of other things into his own style.

But he has no intention of teaching it to anyone else, he rarely brings the concept up, if ever, he doesn't make sweeping statements, and the core of what he developed was based on SCIENCE, not speculation.

You can't navel-gaze your way into a new art. Not one that is nearly as effective or efficient as you would like it to be. Instead of coming on a martial arts board and making broad generalizations to incite debate, go study kinesiology. In depth. In COLLEGE, even. Same thing for anatomy. If you don't have a deep understanding of how the body works, how can you possibly know enough to make the claims you have made. You have no scientific, empirical basis for your arguments. Your art would be therefore similarly lacking.



Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

 

[Aiki Lee]

After all, I am nowhere attempting to create an insanely effective combat art or self-defense style, I put way more emphasis on efficiency than effectiveness and on the certain kind of flow I got in mind.

I don't understand. You are not looking for effectiveness in your martial art? What do you mean you are focusing on efficiency rather than effectiveness? How can something be efficient if it is not effective? What is the purpose of your endeavor?

It sounds to me that you have no interest in creating a martial art at all as all martial arts aim to be effective at what they were created for. It sounds more like you are developing a form of interpretive dance.

 

[Josh Oakley]

What do you mean you are focusing on efficiency rather than effectiveness? How can something be efficient if it is not effective?.

Oh you can very efficiently do ineffective things, like accidentally going to Phoenix instead of LA (LA being your destination), but getting phenomenal gas mileage. And you can very ineficiently do the effective things, like making it to LA, but on a unicycle.

Granted, in the context of martial arts, maximizing efficiency while neglecting effectiveness is... stupid... but I just wanted to clarify what those two terms signify.

 

[geezer]

Oh you can very efficiently do ineffective things, like accidentally going to Phoenix instead of LA (LA being your destination), but getting phenomenal gas mileage....

LOL. Thanks for that Josh. But seriously, efficiency means achieving your stated objective with the least effort, or output. Some very effective approaches to fighting do not put as high a priority on efficiency as others. They may put a higher emphasis on reliability. Maybe this is what Feng meant by effectiveness? Imagine comparing a Prius to a heavy duty 4X4 Pick-up. If you are on the Interstate, the Prius' efficiency will serve you well. On rough back roads or in heavy snow, the reliability of the 4X4 would win out. In martial arts, something like Wing Chun strives for absolute efficiency, whereas Muay Thai/MMA with a heavy dose of conditioning might be a better example of reliability?

Either way, when I read this drivel about an average Joe who thinks he can invent the successor to TaiChi, I have to shake my head. I mean seriously now, guys!

http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2011/039/f/3/house_face_palm_by_michael_j_caboose-d392y5h.jpg

 

[fenglong]

You could avoid a lot of confusion and spam if you would carefully read what I write, and entire page of posts was kind of wasted because you mixed effectiveness with efficiency, now you say I neglect effectiveness although I stated that I put efficiency above effectiveness, which clearly is a difference. Of course there is no point developing something insanely efficient, yet not effective enough.
Also, my MA is not Taijiquan, it may be classified as internal MA once I got it more complete and solid, but I do NOT compare it with something with thousands of years of development.
Sorry if I don't comment and answer everything, some things are just common sense.

Anyway.... @Josh
I do not enjoy public attention and I do agree with the way your mate goes about his development, yet, from my experience I go better with collecting as much opinion and advices as possible and see how useful each of them can be for me.

 

[oaktree]

What makes it internal? How do you know you have
The internal components that you find in internal
arts?

 

[fenglong]

What makes it internal? How do you know you have
The internal components that you find in internal
arts?

The reasons I consider it internal is because it is based on the idea of qi flowing through the body by a certain breathing and visualization method and movements relying on this reflecting this certain flow.
Before I strayed through Germany and China for a few years to learn new stuff I would stick to the Qigong methods we were taught in our Hung Gar training and yin-yang theory based on the Xingyi, later I picked up some Taijiquan, mostly just Yang style, but it would give me some insight on different qi control methods..
Before I actually started working on the physical part of my MA I spent several months with trying to get a grip on my "Wind Qigong" which at first was just a silly idea until I noticed it does work out similar to the other Qigong methods I learned.

So in short, my MA is based on a certain kind of energy flow, which I know is often dissed as Air Bender or X-Men fantasy, which shows how retarded and narcissistic most "martial artists" are, not knowing about the ancient training methods based on similar elemental concepts; famous arts like some Taijiquan and Jiequandao are based on the idea of water and others even on animals.
So, sorry to disappoint some people now but no, I can't fly and no, I cant call storms either, =( what a shame.
But I am working on it already, I will find a radioactive bird to bite me.


...ah one more thing, in case someone may really be interested in detailed info on my ideas or even suspicious critics, I'd appreciate messenger contact. It is just easier and more natural to personally discuss than spreading attention in a forum.

 

[Chris Parker]

The reasons I consider it internal is because it is based on the idea of qi flowing through the body by a certain breathing and visualization method and movements relying on this reflecting this certain flow.
Before I strayed through Germany and China for a few years to learn new stuff I would stick to the Qigong methods we were taught in our Hung Gar training and yin-yang theory based on the Xingyi, later I picked up some Taijiquan, mostly just Yang style, but it would give me some insight on different qi control methods..
Before I actually started working on the physical part of my MA I spent several months with trying to get a grip on my "Wind Qigong" which at first was just a silly idea until I noticed it does work out similar to the other Qigong methods I learned.

So in short, my MA is based on a certain kind of energy flow, which I know is often dissed as Air Bender or X-Men fantasy, which shows how retarded and narcissistic most "martial artists" are, not knowing about the ancient training methods based on similar elemental concepts; famous arts like some Taijiquan and Jiequandao are based on the idea of water and others even on animals.
So, sorry to disappoint some people now but no, I can't fly and no, I cant call storms either, =( what a shame.
But I am working on it already, I will find a radioactive bird to bite me.


...ah one more thing, in case someone may really be interested in detailed info on my ideas or even suspicious critics, I'd appreciate messenger contact. It is just easier and more natural to personally discuss than spreading attention in a forum.

Careful, son, you haven't really shown any indication that you have a clue what you're talking about, ancient training methods or not. And such language isn't really desired here.

 

[Cyriacus]

The reasons I consider it internal is because it is based on the idea of qi flowing through the body by a certain breathing and visualization method and movements relying on this reflecting this certain flow.

Alot of MA use this concept.

Before I strayed through Germany and China for a few years to learn new stuff I would stick to the Qigong methods we were taught in our Hung Gar training and yin-yang theory based on the Xingyi, later I picked up some Taijiquan, mostly just Yang style, but it would give me some insight on different qi control methods..

Of course.

Before I actually started working on the physical part of my MA I spent several months with trying to get a grip on my "Wind Qigong" which at first was just a silly idea until I noticed it does work out similar to the other Qigong methods I learned.

Aha.

So in short, my MA is based on a certain kind of energy flow, which I know is often dissed as Air Bender or X-Men fantasy, which shows how retarded and narcissistic most "martial artists" are, not knowing about the ancient training methods based on similar elemental concepts;

Most non MAists tend to see MA as being just Energy and Glamor themes. MAists tend to live and let live with Energy Based MA. And theres lots of them.

famous arts like some Taijiquan and Jiequandao are based on the idea of water and others even on animals.

Just as a fun snippet: I have no idea what Taikiquan is, despite quite alot of Research into any MA I can get My eyes on. Or Jiequandao. I hold them in a Neutral Position. On topic though, "Even on other Animals". I can name a denizen Arts based on Animals.

So, sorry to disappoint some people now but no, I can't fly and no, I cant call storms either, =( what a shame.

Irrelevant.

But I am working on it already, I will find a radioactive bird to bite me.

Radiation merges and seperates - Mutagens are what Youre after.

...ah one more thing, in case someone may really be interested in detailed info on my ideas or even suspicious critics, I'd appreciate messenger contact. It is just easier and more natural to personally discuss than spreading attention in a forum.

Now to why I replied: You made the Thread mate. On a Public Forum. For whatever reason. We didnt ask You to spread attention on here. You decided to. If you dont like the feedback, thats the risk you took. It isnt a bad thing though.

Just My Contribution.

 

[fenglong]

It was supposed to be "spreading my attention" opposed to personal contact, 1on1... makes sense, right? meh..

 

[Cyriacus]

]It was supposed to be "spreading my attention"[/I] ([opposed to personal contact], [1on1])... makes sense, right? meh..

Would you kindly rephrase that?
Because Im unsure if You just said You were trying to spread Yourself around whilst opposing personal contact, but 1 on 1 personal contact makes sense?

 

[fenglong]

Thanks a lot guys, you made me give up!!

I'm doing

from now on...

 

[Sanke]

Thanks a lot guys, you made me give up!!

I'm doing

from now on...

... What on earth was that? I'm honestly not sure what that was, it looked like people doing some kinda two-man interpretive dancing rather than a SD seminar.

Still, if your response to the above questions and (frankly quite gentle) criticisms is to 'give up' (regardless if you're serious or just being tongue-in-cheek), then you probably shouldn't be going on about your 'new MA' here.
You say you're here to get insight and ideas for your system, but when people start asking questions about how and why you're doing what you are, your responses have been frankly rather juvenile. Not the best way to represent yourself, or your new system.


Sanke on the move.

 

[Cyriacus]

Well, this was a weird Thread.
If You actually did give up, then I cant help but see only Pros.

 

[oaktree]

The reasons I consider it internal is because it is based on the idea of qi flowing through the body by a certain breathing and visualization method and movements relying on this reflecting this certain flow.

I don't focus much on the breathing and visualization during Taijiquan, Baguazhang or Xingyiquan. Qigong I can see the breathing and visualization in a health application IMO I don't see that as the requirement for what makes it internal martial arts.
What I think reflects an internal art IMO is the focus more on developing a body,mind connection with proper mechanics allowing jin to be expressed.
I think of coiling as found in chansigong 缠丝功。 But what are we visualizing during Taijiquan? I think we should be sensitive and aware of the body changes during the form.
When we are turning is our nei kua collapsing, is our spine straight and so on. I think if we are aware of this then when we engage in tuishou we can start to be sensitive to anothers li and jin.

Before I actually started working on the physical part of my MA I spent several months with trying to get a grip on my "Wind Qigong" which at first was just a silly idea until I noticed it does work out similar to the other Qigong methods I learned.

I have no idea what wind qigong is or how it is similar to other qigong styles. Would you like to explain more always interesting to hear of new qigong methods and theories.

So in short, my MA is based on a certain kind of energy flow, which I know is often dissed as Air Bender or X-Men fantasy, which shows how retarded and narcissistic most "martial artists" are, not knowing about the ancient training methods based on similar elemental concepts; famous arts like some Taijiquan and Jiequandao are based on the idea of water and others even on animals.

I am unsure what you mean by energy flow. I am guessing you mean qi and how to use it like in fa jin? Or are you speaking about using it to shoot out of your hands like tv shows?

...ah one more thing, in case someone may really be interested in detailed info on my ideas or even suspicious critics, I'd appreciate messenger contact. It is just easier and more natural to personally discuss than spreading attention in a forum.

That's fine but you started a thread titled "why I decided to come up with my own martial art concepts" so of course people are going to ask you more about it here.

Anyway good luck with your ideas.