XMA - your feelings?

[ralphmcpherson]

Olympic taekwondo is a martial art, why not xma?

Probably not the best analogy. An olympic tkdist could kick you twice before you blink with good power and have some of the best reflexes of any martial artists. I could probably go and make a cup of coffee in the time it would take an XMA artist to strike me with some high flying aerial 540.

 

[clfsean]

Implying Wushu isnt a martial art. IIRC wushu literally means martial art. The forms are there to develop muscle memory.

As someone who does both Kung-Fu and Wushu I can tell you it is real martial arts.

Wushu isn't a martial art per se as it's pretty much recognized & as promoted by the PRC. It's a performance sport that is martial based in everything except application of fighting skills & application principles. As Chairman Mao once said "Comrades do not fight comrades" in regards to "creation" of what we call wushu.

In the traditional sense of the term, yes it is martial arts & is all about breaking things & ransacking people. However, those skills were lost in large part to the Cultural Revolution, the lack of interest in the younger generation, the apathy of the older generation, and the AK-47. There's more TCMA outside of China than in China.

Does that mean a modern wushu player couldn't smack you into next week? Sure they could, but the trick is do they "know" how & are their tools conditioned to do that? My guess is not so much as compared to a TCMA practitioner or even modern Sanda fighter.

 

[Steve]

Implying Wushu isnt a martial art. IIRC wushu literally means martial art. The forms are there to develop muscle memory.

As someone who does both Kung-Fu and Wushu I can tell you it is real martial arts.

Let me be more specific. Sanda or San Shou are sports. XMA is like the exhibition side of Wushu. It's largely for show. It's Martial Arts theater, kind of like watching the stage play version of a kung fu movie.

 

[Balrog]

Great responses so far, folks. Thanks and keep 'em coming!

 

[bushidomartialarts]

Let me be more specific. Sanda or San Shou are sports. XMA is like the exhibition side of Wushu. It's largely for show. It's Martial Arts theater, kind of like watching the stage play version of a kung fu movie.

Respectfully, Steve, you seem to have a fairly narrow idea of what does and doesn't constitute a martial art. Is tai chi less of a martial art because it's practiced primarily for healing and meditation? What about pankration? We could just as easily eliminate krav maga and systema, since neither are particularly artistic....

 

[Tez3]

Respectfully, Steve, you seem to have a fairly narrow idea of what does and doesn't constitute a martial art. Is tai chi less of a martial art because it's practiced primarily for healing and meditation? What about pankration? We could just as easily eliminate krav maga and systema, since neither are particularly artistic....

Well, if practised for healing and meditation it does seem to eliminate the 'martial' part of the martial arts description. Krav Maga is usually described as a 'self defence system' not a martial art.

 

[bushidomartialarts]

Well, if practised for healing and meditation it does seem to eliminate the 'martial' part of the martial arts description. Krav Maga is usually described as a 'self defence system' not a martial art.

That's one way to look at it, but I don't see the point in excluding our equally dedicated brothers and sisters. Way I see it, we're all climbing the same mountain. There's different paths up it. Some of us climb for the view, others because it feels good, others for the bragging rights. But I'm unwilling to tell somebody who took a different path, or climbed for a different reason, that she's somehow not worthy to stand next to me on my little ledge of the cliff.

I'm willing to stipulate that some of the paths are more direct than others. And the gods know it's easier if you have a qualified guide.

 

[Steve]

Respectfully, Steve, you seem to have a fairly narrow idea of what does and doesn't constitute a martial art. Is tai chi less of a martial art because it's practiced primarily for healing and meditation? What about pankration? We could just as easily eliminate krav maga and systema, since neither are particularly artistic....

Ah. There's the source of the conflict here. You believe my definition of "martial art" is wrong. That could explain why your comments regarding MMA strike me as very odd.

In the interest of keeping it simple, I'll say that my definition of martial art involves only a couple of things. Demonstrable martial skill learned as a part of a coherent fighting system. Really, that's it in a nutshell. If you are learning something that can be summed up with one name, and you are learning martial ability that you can reliably replicate, you're learning a martial art. Whether you're learning an effective art or not is beside the point. So, as far as I'm concerned, Western Boxing is a martial art. Krav Maga is also a martial art, as is Muay Thai, Wing Chun or Kyokushin Karate. Fencing is also a martial art, and we can also include Arnis/Kali/Escrima, too.

Tai Chi is, at best, debatable. If someone could demonstrate martial ability strictly from having trained Tai Chi, I'd buy it. If you allege that someone can, I won't call you a liar, but I've never had that happen. If you want to believe that Tai Chi teaches demonstrable martial skill, I won't stop you.

That's one way to look at it, but I don't see the point in excluding our equally dedicated brothers and sisters.

There's a problem with being too inclusive. All of the same qualities are present in someone who becomes an expert at playing the piano. Dexterity, dedication, technique, art, and all through years of applying oneself to the development of expertise. What's the one difference between a musician and a martial artist? The specific skill set learned in martial arts is combative. The skill set learned on a piano is musical.

Honestly, budomartialarts, I'm having a hard time tracking the conversation. On the one hand, you make some sweeping generalizations about various styles. I believe that your rock, paper, scissors analogy is grossly oversimplified. On the other, you're chastising me for being too exclusive.

For what it's worth, I stand by my statement that XMA (and Wushu) are more performance art than martial art. Often, the practitioners of XMA or Wushu also study a martial form, and I've already said that the skills can be adapted.

 

[clfsean]

In the interest of keeping it simple, I'll say that my definition of martial art involves only a couple of things. Demonstrable martial skill learned as a part of a coherent fighting system. Really, that's it in a nutshell. If you are learning something that can be summed up with one name, and you are learning martial ability that you can reliably replicate, you're learning a martial art. Whether you're learning an effective art or not is beside the point. So, as far as I'm concerned, Western Boxing is a martial art. Krav Maga is also a martial art, as is Muay Thai, Wing Chun or Kyokushin Karate. Fencing is also a martial art, and we can also include Arnis/Kali/Escrima, too.

We could include most anything that isn't demonstrative in nature & is tried to fit into a combative application.

Tai Chi is, at best, debatable. If someone could demonstrate martial ability strictly from having trained Tai Chi, I'd buy it. If you allege that someone can, I won't call you a liar, but I've never had that happen. If you want to believe that Tai Chi teaches demonstrable martial skill, I won't stop you.

Here's "an example" in a demo/seminar setting, but it kinda goes along with your request...

There's a problem with being too inclusive. All of the same qualities are present in someone who becomes an expert at playing the piano. Dexterity, dedication, technique, art, and all through years of applying oneself to the development of expertise. What's the one difference between a musician and a martial artist? The specific skill set learned in martial arts is combative. The skill set learned on a piano is musical.

Yep... just because you're a chef & good with a kitchen knife doesn't make you a knife fighter.

For what it's worth, I stand by my statement that XMA (and Wushu) are more performance art than martial art. Often, the practitioners of XMA or Wushu also study a martial form, and I've already said that the skills can be adapted.

I'll go along with that one.

 

[bushidomartialarts]

Steve,

To me the most interesting part of debate is finding the root disagreement. It's not as though either of us will convince one another.

It seem from your last post that your definition should probably be spelled martial art. Your examples seem to exclude those that might be spelled martial art. To me, both are valid.

If you insist on martial, then krav maga is in, bjj is in, tai chi is out.
If you insist on art, tai chi is in, xma is in, bjj is out
I prefer to include both.

But that's me. Of course I think my opinion's the superior one (after all, it's mine) -- but I don't think I'm superior to you for having it.

 

[Steve]

We could include most anything that isn't demonstrative in nature & is tried to fit into a combative application.

My goal wasn't to be overly exclusive. As I said, the question of whether or not something is an effective martial art is another conversation entirely.

Here's "an example" in a demo/seminar setting, but it kinda goes along with your request...

That's actually pretty cool. The uke needs to learn the ancient technique we like to call a whizzer. Seriously, though, is that tai chi? It looks markedly different from what my mom and dad are taking down in AZ. They love it, and believe me, I'd never say anything bad about it. They're strong and for their age, they move very, very well. But they're realistic about what they're learning. It's like Zumba but instead of latin dancing, it's a martial arts-like activity.

 

[elder999]

I personally think that, regardless of the name, XMA is not martial arts. At best, it's dance routines, bad gymnastics combines with bad techniques that look kinda sorta like martial arts techniques. Sure, it's flashy, movie-fu stuff, but it ain't martial arts.

To be considered as a martial art, a discipline should have a grounding in self-defense. XMA has none. I have heard of schools offering rank in XMA and I consider them to be like the schools that offered rank in Tae Bo.

That's my opinion. What's yours?

There's a company called n2a, for "no two alike," that makes custom cars. They have something called a 789, that has a '57 Chevy grille, a 58 Impala midsection and a '59 finned rear, all on a Corvette C6 chassis.

Sacrilege. I'm moved to vomit-though I have to admit it looks cool. :barf:

And that's about how I feel about XMA. Have to admit it looks cool, and it makes me want to vomit. :barf: :barf:

 

[clfsean]

My goal wasn't to be overly exclusive. As I said, the question of whether or not something is an effective martial art is another conversation entirely.

Agreed.

That's actually pretty cool. The uke needs to learn the ancient technique we like to call a whizzer. Seriously, though, is that tai chi? It looks markedly different from what my mom and dad are taking down in AZ. They love it, and believe me, I'd never say anything bad about it. They're strong and for their age, they move very, very well. But they're realistic about what they're learning. It's like Zumba but instead of latin dancing, it's a martial arts-like activity.

Seriously... that's Chen Taiji Quan. It's all about tossing people about & breaking stuff. It's not a fluff & dry "tie cheeeeese" that has killed taiji.

 

[bushidomartialarts]

Another way to frame it. I think the primary objection to XMA is that it's not viable self defense (if we're not counting the cheesy buck rogers uniforms and gratuitous abuse of the word "extreeeeeem"). That lack of realistic fighting ability disqualifies the practice.

On the other hand...

• In 2007, there were 22,631 deaths from accidental falls. 2009 saw 8,756,597 hospital-level injuries from falls.
• That same year, there were 4,265 murders and 1,419,728 assaults.

Seems like XMA is as or more effective for defending against what's clearly a more realistic threat.

Just a thought.

 

[Flying Crane]

Implying Wushu isnt a martial art. IIRC wushu literally means martial art. The forms are there to develop muscle memory.

As someone who does both Kung-Fu and Wushu I can tell you it is real martial arts.

Modern Wushu was developed by the Communist Chinese Government in the 1950s, specifically as a performance and competition art and as a cultural expression. It was based on traditional Chinese fighting arts, but Modern Wushu was not intended to be a fighting art.

In the early days it was much more closely akin to the fighting arts, and the Modern Wushu-ists of the early eras could certainly fight with it. But over the decades Modern Wushu has drifted farther from the traditional arts and has heavily embraced the competition and performance aspects that it was originally intended for. Modern Wushu now is very different from what it was in the early days of the 1950s to even the 1980s. As a fighting method, modern wushu has become less and less reliable, with heavy emphasis placed on asthetics and performance, and almost completely ignoring useful and solid fighting methods. Modern wushu is an athletic performance method that is based on and inspired by traditional martial arts. It's movements, techniques, and forms resemble those found in Traditional Wushu (Chinese Kung Fu) but lack solid foundation and understanding that makes it useful, and are often altered for asthetic reasons that look better to an audience but undermine any martial viability. But it is no longer a viable fighting art and it is not intended to be.

This is largely, to my understanding, what XMA is as well. It was inspired by traditional fighting methods, it's movements resemble, to some degree, traditional fighting arts, but it was intended for performance and was not intended for fighting, and was designed accordingly.

For these reasons XMA (and Modern Wushu) is not a fighting art, is not a true martial art.

 

[Steve]

Another way to frame it. I think the primary objection to XMA is that it's not viable self defense (if we're not counting the cheesy buck rogers uniforms and gratuitous abuse of the word "extreeeeeem"). That lack of realistic fighting ability disqualifies the practice.

On the other hand...

• In 2007, there were 22,631 deaths from accidental falls. 2009 saw 8,756,597 hospital-level injuries from falls.
• That same year, there were 4,265 murders and 1,419,728 assaults.

Seems like XMA is as or more effective for defending against what's clearly a more realistic threat.

Just a thought.

Just for clarification, it's nothing to do with self defense for me. XMA isn't purporting to teach a fighting system. Whether or not it's good for self defense is another issue entirely.

It might be about self defense for you, although it seems that you have some pretty inconsistent ideas about what is and isn't good self defense. Is self defense about learning the fine art of the prat fall?

Would you consider a management course on effective communication and teambuilding to be self defense? What about mediation? I would consider neither a martial art, but both would, in my opinion, offer more practical self defense skills than most styles of martial art.

 

[Steve]

Seriously... that's Chen Taiji Quan. It's all about tossing people about & breaking stuff. It's not a fluff & dry "tie cheeeeese" that has killed taiji.

Interesting stuff. I'll still contend that his uke should look into the whizzer/overhook position to counter, but that's neither here nor there.

 

[fangjian]

Interesting stuff. I'll still contend that his uke should look into the whizzer/overhook position to counter, but that's neither here nor there.

I think the uke was somewhat letting Chen Bing 'demo' on him to show people the combat applications of Chen Tajiquan. So uke wouldn't be a jerk and continuously counter.

Most of the Taijiquan excel in the clinch range like Judo, Greco etc.

 

[Tez3]

That's one way to look at it, but I don't see the point in excluding our equally dedicated brothers and sisters. Way I see it, we're all climbing the same mountain. There's different paths up it. Some of us climb for the view, others because it feels good, others for the bragging rights. But I'm unwilling to tell somebody who took a different path, or climbed for a different reason, that she's somehow not worthy to stand next to me on my little ledge of the cliff.

I'm willing to stipulate that some of the paths are more direct than others. And the gods know it's easier if you have a qualified guide.

Who's climbing a mountain? At my age I'm taking the cable car!
I don't label anything in particular, my post was just in answer to yours. I think no one should mislead anyone as to what they do and tell people they can defend/fight if the style they are teaching or the way they are teaching it means it's not hard contact.

 

[bushidomartialarts]

It might be about self defense for you, although it seems that you have some pretty inconsistent ideas about what is and isn't good self defense. Is self defense about learning the fine art of the prat fall?

Would you consider a management course on effective communication and teambuilding to be self defense? What about mediation? I would consider neither a martial art, but both would, in my opinion, offer more practical self defense skills than most styles of martial art.

Agreed that all of those things -- taught by a qualified person with the right emphasis are very effective self defense. They even have a place in a comprehensive martial arts curriculum -- just like you'll find healing and meditation in many arts.

Plz help me understand just where you're coming from. It's not about self-defense/combat application. It's not about the difference between sport and street. What is the dividing line for you? It's probably my fault, but I seem to be missing your point.