Martial arts discussion thread

[GoktimusPrime]

With the increasing decline of traditional martial arts, it's not surprising that traditional values are dying off too. I personally feel that martial arts has been going backwards in evolution since the end of WWII where people have stopped using melee techniques in modern warfare. Unless you're heaps pro at Hadoukens.

But this is a big pet peeve of mine: teachers who continue to train students who are obviously just jerks (and thus potentially thugs). Practising a martial art is a privileged responsibility, and you don't just teach your techniques to any Tom, Dick or Harry that walks off the street. If a person is a dodgy character - and as a teacher you do get to know your students' personality traits - then don't just keep training them as you would any other student!!! If the student is clearly just a thuggish jerk and refuses to change their attitude, then either:
+ Modify their training so that they're not learning any new techniques from you, or only teach them purely defensive techniques and no attacks
+ Expel them from your school. Otherwise they're going to bring your school to disrepute, your style to disrepute and the martial arts community to disrepute.

And both traditional and non-traditional schools are guilty of doing this. e.g. Bruce Lee; a thug taught by a bigger thug (Wong Shun Leung) taught by a drug addict (Yip Man). I share your frustration. Learning a martial art is a big responsibility, and people who learn it should behave in a more responsible and respectful manner and not behave like surly punks. We want to learn to defend ourselves from thugs but not become thugs! The martial arts world would be a better place if some teachers were more discerning about who they teach over just teaching as many students as possible to make money.

Thats a bit overly critical Gok. Read the description of the thread. It was a bit of fun after class after 30 minutes total practice time. From what I've seen of KalEl and his martial arts ability if he wanted to perform a proper weapons kata I'm sure he wouldn't have any problems.

Fair point, I hadn't read the description - I just hit the "maximise screen" icon so I could see KalEl's glorious full visage before my eyes.

[Sam]

With the increasing decline of traditional martial arts, it's not surprising that traditional values are dying off too. I personally feel that martial arts has been going backwards in evolution since the end of WWII where people have stopped using melee techniques in modern warfare. Unless you're heaps pro at Hadoukens.

But this is a big pet peeve of mine: teachers who continue to train students who are obviously just jerks (and thus potentially thugs). Practising a martial art is a privileged responsibility, and you don't just teach your techniques to any Tom, Dick or Harry that walks off the street. If a person is a dodgy character - and as a teacher you do get to know your students' personality traits - then don't just keep training them as you would any other student!!! If the student is clearly just a thuggish jerk and refuses to change their attitude, then either:
+ Modify their training so that they're not learning any new techniques from you, or only teach them purely defensive techniques and no attacks
+ Expel them from your school. Otherwise they're going to bring your school to disrepute, your style to disrepute and the martial arts community to disrepute.

And both traditional and non-traditional schools are guilty of doing this. e.g. Bruce Lee; a thug taught by a bigger thug (Wong Shun Leung) taught by a drug addict (Yip Man). I share your frustration. Learning a martial art is a big responsibility, and people who learn it should behave in a more responsible and respectful manner and not behave like surly punks. We want to learn to defend ourselves from thugs but not become thugs! The martial arts world would be a better place if some teachers were more discerning about who they teach over just teaching as many students as possible to make money.

I think becoming strong can sometimes lead us to become arrogant and overconfident, so practising humility and being responsible is something of a constant reminder.

Your point reminds me of one of my friends whose grandfather knew kung fu (in my friend's words, "he could hold off 18 unarmed men with a staff"), but always refused to teach one of his nephews because he knew his nephew was the kind of person who'd go out and pick fights with people...

[GoktimusPrime]

I think becoming strong can sometimes lead us to become arrogant and overconfident, so practising humility and being responsible is something of a constant reminder.

One thing I'm not fond of schools where students are strictly confined to train within only people of the same 'category,' whether that be skill level, size, strength, speed etc. I prefer classes where students are often just randomly mixed together so it's very much possible for a raw beginner to be paired up against one of the most senior students in the school. Cos I find that when you're only allowed to train with people of the same level as you, you're not used to fighting against someone who's vastly superior than you, and most importantly, learning how to defend yourself against a superior opponent which is the core of learning self defence anyway. I find direct training with someone who's bigger, stronger, faster and better trained than you is often a good way to learn humility.

Your point reminds me of one of my friends whose grandfather knew kung fu (in my friend's words, "he could hold off 18 unarmed men with a staff"), but always refused to teach one of his nephews because he knew his nephew was the kind of person who'd go out and pick fights with people...

Your friend's grandfather sounds like a wise dude. I wish more martial arts teachers were like him... student quality over quantity. Then we'd have less thugs learning martial arts.

I stumbled upon this interesting video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...6eglkLa8#t=60s
^It's a demonstration of Chi Na grappling by Taiwanese Police, and it looks similar to the kind of grappling we do in Tai Chi; note that the grappler is always upright and never goes to the ground with the attacker. Grappling is a good form of passive self defence as you don't actually strike the attacker -- from a police POV they would have to learn a lot of passive submission techniques. I particularly found this part of the video interesting where he's showing counter-techniques to an assailant attempting to grab an officer's holstered firearm, and the golden rule of counter-grappling, don't resist and pull away, rather give in and go into the attacker.

*sigh* Watching this really makes me miss my old training... wish I could find a proper school.

[Sam]

One thing I'm not fond of schools where students are strictly confined to train within only people of the same 'category,' whether that be skill level, size, strength, speed etc. I prefer classes where students are often just randomly mixed together so it's very much possible for a raw beginner to be paired up against one of the most senior students in the school. Cos I find that when you're only allowed to train with people of the same level as you, you're not used to fighting against someone who's vastly superior than you, and most importantly, learning how to defend yourself against a superior opponent which is the core of learning self defence anyway. I find direct training with someone who's bigger, stronger, faster and better trained than you is often a good way to learn humility.

And it's also a more accurate reflection of real life - it's more often the case that you'd be outnumbered and outmatched. It sounds stupid to say this, but learning to be able to take a thorough beating is actually a survival skill.

[GoktimusPrime]

And it's also a more accurate reflection of real life - it's more often the case that you'd be outnumbered and outmatched. It sounds stupid to say this, but learning to be able to take a thorough beating is actually a survival skill.

I don't think that sounds stupid at all -- just realistic. If you're gonna get into a real fight, odds are you are gonna get hit. That's why we have endurance and body conditioning training - though not all schools do this... but many should. Some schools don't need to do it because of the nature of their fighting style; like styles that focus on grappling, wrestling and throwing don't have endurance training routines, but then they're constantly being thrown about which naturally builds endurance (much like say a footy player who's used to being tackled).

[Sam]

I don't think that sounds stupid at all -- just realistic. If you're gonna get into a real fight, odds are you are gonna get hit. That's why we have endurance and body conditioning training - though not all schools do this... but many should. Some schools don't need to do it because of the nature of their fighting style; like styles that focus on grappling, wrestling and throwing don't have endurance training routines, but then they're constantly being thrown about which naturally builds endurance (much like say a footy player who's used to being tackled).

I am reminded all those years ago when I learned a bit of Tae Kwon Do. I felt there was not enough time spent on body conditioning, and there were techniques we were taught but never expected to use (e.g. sweep kicks). It made me wonder why - surely in a real fight it would be gloves off and whatever goes, and though I understand the rough 80/20 ratio between kicks and punches in TKD, I felt there should have been at least some emphasis on close range defensive techniques, because there are many tough guys (and gals) who can probably take lots of kicks to the head and face and still come charging. Or it could be just that since I only learned for a year I did not get to learn any "elite" techniques (but the stuff I am talking about feels like basic training, at least to me).

[GoktimusPrime]

A lot of Taekwondo schools in Australia (and the world) teach the Sport version of Taekwondo, not the original/traditional version. The sport version is what you see in the Olympics -- it's all about point scoring and not at all about fighting. I did Sport Taekwondo for a while (thankfully the lessons were free); they don't do any endurance conditioning because they don't expect to be hit. During a free sparring session I charged into my opponent and kneed him in the thigh. He _literally_ started crying (I kid you not). And you're right, there's also no emphasis on close range fighting either, because in comps they just use telescoping long range hits to score points. They don't even do mid-range techniques either -- everything's long distance. I once had lunch with some friends, and a friend of a friend was boasting about how being a champion Taekwondo fighter and all the trophies won and having just come back from overseas and smashing the competition etc. I tried to ignore it, but our lunch conversation just became dominated by this person's boasting. So I offered a friendly challenge -- we went back to our mutual's friend's house, in the garage... as soon as the fight started, I just waltzed right in, grabbed the throat and dropped my opponent to the ground. Fight was over in one move. And even after being dropped, I kept gripping the throat and continued squeezing -- my opponent got so desperate the counter technique was to dig finger nails into the back of my hands to try and scratch me off. It didn't work. Silly bugger wouldn't tap out or anything either... so I eventually let go. I don't necessarily mind arrogant fighters, so long as they have the skill to back their arrogance! (like say Mohammed Ali!)

But yeah, in this increasing age of commercialised martial arts, stuff like Sports Taekwondo is becoming ever more popular than any traditional martial art. Fighting at punching and kicking range is basic level fighting. Beginners are taught to fight at that long range because they lack the skills to get any closer. Intermediate level fighting is more like elbowing and kneeing mid-distance range, and advanced level fighting is just getting right up body to body and just penetrating or piercing their centre of mass.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2ETiQZzw6w

There's nothing wrong with long and mid range fighting per se... they have their place. Which range you choose to fight at will depend on the context of the fight, particularly in regard to the nature of your opponent. If your opponent's defence is too formidable, then you need to drop back to longer range techniques. I used to spar with a guy who would explain fighting ranges with the "castle" analogy:
* fighting at long range is like attacking the outer moat or walls of a castle
* fighting at mid range is like attacking the draw bridge and main entrance to the castle
* fighting at close range is when you've penetrated the outer defences and you're laying siege to the actual castle itself

Another one is the "Chess" analogy:
* long range fighting = attacking Pawns
* mid range fighting = attacking the Rooks, Bishops, Knights and Queen
* close range fighting = attacking the King

I agree that the training in a lot of schools, especially the sport oriented ones, does feel incredibly basic. And I think it's because the more advanced techniques just aren't used in competitions... they're either non-advantageous (i.e. it doesn't earn you any extra points), or just illegal (as you can see in that video link, some of that guy's closing moves are preludes to groin strikes (or very easily can lead to one)).

But look, to Taekwondo's credit I have noticed that recently TKD schools no longer use the words "Self Defence" in their marketing any more. Check out the official web site for Taekwondo World <---that's their page about "Benefits" of learning TKD. They list them as: Confidence, Endurance (in the context of fitness, not taking hits), Focus, Leadership, Respect and Sociability. It does _NOT_ mention "Self Defence" at all, and I can respect that.

I don't mind if people want to practice a martial art for reasons other than self defence... what irks me more is when a school teaches a martial art for non-self defensive purposes, but claim that they do. That's just dangerously dishonest, as evidenced by Bartrim's story here.

[Bartrim]

And both traditional and non-traditional schools are guilty of doing this. e.g. Bruce Lee; a thug taught by a bigger thug (Wong Shun Leung) taught by a drug addict (Yip Man).

Just out of curiousity do you have any evidence of Bruce Lee being a thug? Not disputing just once I read this I went on a hunt to find some info and everything i can find is positive about him.

[GoktimusPrime]

According to the 1993 issue of Black Belt magazine, "Bruce Lee Collector's Edition," Lee began training in Wing Chun under Yip Man in 1954 after losing a fight with rival gang members at the age of 13. So this means that as a young adolescent, Lee was already:
+ A member of a street gang
+ Getting into fights with rival street gang members
+ Reason for learning Wing Chun was to make him a better street fighter

"I was a punk and went out looking for fights. We used chains and pens with knives hidden inside them." - Bruce Lee (Black Belt Magazine, Oct 1967).

Although Yip Man is credited with being Lee's teacher, most of his teaching was done by one of Man's most senior students, Wong Shun Leung ("Remembering the Master", Sid Campbell 2006), who himself was a thug -- before Wing Chun, Wong had practised either Boxing or Kickboxing, but he quit that after a violent incident with his teacher where he knocked his teacher out (Inside Kung Fu, Vol.18, #2, 1980 / Ving Tsun Update: Wong Shun Leung, Phillip Bayer). After he started learning Wing Chun, he went back to his (Kick)boxing teacher and ended up using his Wing Chun training to beat him into a bloody pulp (Ving Tsun Update: Interview with Wong Shun Leung). Wong also became an active participant in illegal underground street fights in Hong Kong --- a lot of people I've met from Hong Kong associate Kung Fu with thugs, street fighting, triads etc. (Qi magazine interview with Wong Shun Leung, D. Poon). I find quite a few people in the Chinese community here are reluctant to let their kids learn a Chinese martial art and are more likely to let them learn a non-Chinese arts because of the negative stigma attached to Chinese arts (another reason why I'm bitter against thugs being taught martial arts). When I went to China, I met more kids who did Taekwondo or Karate and knew next to nothing about actual Kung Fu or Tai Chi etc. Wong eventually quit street fighting after an incident where he intentionally provoked another martial artist to get into a fight with him, and during that fight he blinded his opponent in one eye! (G.E. LeBlanc).

Bruce Lee's family said that "if Bruce didn't like someone, he told him straight to his face, which meant he had no trouble finding trouble. He was known to the Hong Kong police." He was a known troublemaker and fighter the English speaking Catholic School (La Salle College) that he ended, from which he was eventually expelled. It was in 1958 (or 1959) that Lee got into a fight with a member from another Kung Fu school/style which resulted in him knocking out his opponent's tooth. Lee was then arrested by police. After his mother retrieved him, she advised Bruce to exercise his rights as an American citizen and migrate to the United States where he was born. His father reluctantly agreed since Lee's school grades were terrible.
(reference).

In the U.S. Lee became even more unpopular and made even more enemies just by relentlessly peeing people off wherever he went, although part of that reason was because there were a lot of racists in the American Chinese Community at the time (somewhat understandable considering that America was still racially segregated) who objected to Lee teaching martial arts to non-Chinese students. In 1964 this resulted in leaders from the Chinese community issuing a challenge from Kung Fu master Wong Jack Man. Wong recalls that in that fight, he had attempted to shake Lee's hand and Lee pretended to accept it, but turned it into an attempt to eye-gouge Wong, "He really wanted to kill me!" ("Remembering Bruce Lee," James Bishop).

If Lee hadn't become a famous TV and movie star, I wonder if people would still idolise him. There have been far greater Kung Fu fighters than him. Even as the founder of Jeet Kune Do... this style has never been battle-tested (it never will be), and of course, Lee never finished developing Jeet Kune Do because he died before he could. So it was up to students like Dan Inosanto to finish the style, so the Jeet Kune Do that's taught today is a hybrid of what Lee developed and what Inosanto finished (therefore it's not purely Bruce's fighting style, unless you can somehow strip away Inosanto's influence). If you look at a lot of his techniques, it's predominantly that "tit-for-tat" ranged fighting that wouldn't stand against more advanced fighters who'll just close in on you.

IMHO Lee's greatest legacy was that he broke down racial barriers by openly teaching non-Chinese students (and he was willing to fight to defend his right to do so). Beyond that there's nothing he's really done that impresses me from a martial arts perspective. A lot of stuff that's published and said about Bruce Lee is positive, or presented with a positive spin. But sometimes you need to try and look past the glamour of his idol-worship in order to seek the truth. What I find ironic is how some Wing Chun Kung Fu schools hang up massive posters of Bruce Lee; possibly as a marketing gimmick to attract new students... but the irony is that Lee rejected his traditional/classical Wing Chun training when he made Jeet Kune Do! But I suppose the fact is that until Wong Shun Leung, Wing Chun was a rather obscure martial art in Hong Kong -- and even more obscure in Western countries until Bruce Lee came along (heck, Kung Fu itself was obscure until Lee, since the Chinese community were so secretive and closed about it -- the culture of secrecy is, IMO, makes Kung Fu it's own worst enemy, especially in this day and age where traditional martial arts is ever on the decline ).

[Sam]

I once had lunch with some friends, and a friend of a friend was boasting about how being a champion Taekwondo fighter and all the trophies won and having just come back from overseas and smashing the competition etc. I tried to ignore it, but our lunch conversation just became dominated by this person's boasting. So I offered a friendly challenge -- we went back to our mutual's friend's house, in the garage... as soon as the fight started, I just waltzed right in, grabbed the throat and dropped my opponent to the ground. Fight was over in one move. And even after being dropped, I kept gripping the throat and continued squeezing -- my opponent got so desperate the counter technique was to dig finger nails into the back of my hands to try and scratch me off. It didn't work. Silly bugger wouldn't tap out or anything either... so I eventually let go. I don't necessarily mind arrogant fighters, so long as they have the skill to back their arrogance! (like say Mohammed Ali!)

Your story reminds me of one a friend once told me. His friend was the senior student at a place that taught Wing Chun. At times when the instructor was away he'd fill in and teach the class (because he was also the oldest student). One day a young man in full Tae Kwon Do uniform turns up.

My friend said his friend knew it the guy was here to cause trouble, but decided to ignore him to see if he'd lose interest and leave. But the guy kept trying to "spar" with the other students, so eventually my friend's friend told him he could spar with him.

Almost as soon as it started, this guy he his nose broken by the Wing Chun student.

I've found that most of the time, the people that are arrogant and go looking for fights are the ones with all style and no substance.

A lot of stuff that's published and said about Bruce Lee is positive, or presented with a positive spin. But sometimes you need to try and look past the glamour of his idol-worship in order to seek the truth. What I find ironic is how some Wing Chun Kung Fu schools hang up massive posters of Bruce Lee; possibly as a marketing gimmick to attract new students... but the irony is that Lee rejected his traditional/classical Wing Chun training when he made Jeet Kune Do!

It may also be the case that those who promote Wing Chun via Bruce Lee posters were actually ignorant of his less-than-noble past.

From what little I read, Donnie Yen originally had a slightly similar background to Bruce, but perhaps not to the extent that Bruce was (and certainly didn't go around trying to tick people off).