Martial arts discussion thread

[GoktimusPrime]

Gah, unfortunately YouTube's taken those videos down now and I can't find them on another site. I hope folks were able to watch them before they were removed.

Edit: For those who didn't see the videos, here's a brief summary on a few of the highlights from the show. Penn and Teller's BS! is of course about skeptics debunking myths, in this case, the myths of martial arts as a means of self defence. This isn't to say that martial arts are inherently useless for self defence, but unfortunately the way that martial arts are often taught in many schools today - they have become ineffectual. In short, a lot of people don't know how to teach martial arts properly as a means of self defence, and thus they often become rather useless. Those of us who've been in the game long enough know that it's actually hard to find a good martial arts school.

Anyway, the show looks at three different kinds of martial arts:
1: traditional martial arts
2: mystical martial arts
3: beat the living excrement out of you martial arts
The found three rather dodgy instructors to prove their point - and they also found one competent instructor who acted as the martial arts skeptic (i.e. voice of reason ).

The traditionalist was a Karate teacher who held some world record for board breaking, which he claimed came from his Chi power. They debunked that and explained the science behind board breaking and demonstrated how simple it was to do it. The MA skeptic had his wife break a board with the palm of her hand and Teller easily broke a board too. The Karate teacher also admitted that a lot of the techniques he teaches is "fantasy fighting" -- i.e. impractical for self defence, but he teaches them to build confidence. Penn and Teller said that this is dangerous bulldust, and I agree... because you're giving students false confidence. Yes, having confidence is really important and a good thing to teach... but you should teach it by actually making your students competent rather than letting them pretend that they can fight and letting them believe in a fantasy. Cos that fantasy belief can get them hurt or killed in a fight. As I've often said, in our training we should _always_ assume that our attacker(s) is/are stronger, faster and better than we are. It is pointless to assume anything else.

The mystic was a Chi Kung teacher - and you can see that part of the video here. Now I like internal martial arts, I like Chi Kung... I'd _like_ to say that what this lady is teaching is fake bollocks, but unfortunately the reality is:
a/ There are a LOT of internal martial arts school like this. Many who believe they can fight without making physical contact. These people _literally_ believe in using something like the Force from Star Wars. And it's pointless trying to argue and rationalise with these people because it's like trying to argue with some really deeply fundamentally religious person -- they always have some pseudo-logical excuse that makes perfect sense to them but you can't argue against. The excuses are of course, complete bollocks, but they just present it in a way where you can't counter them. e.g. "I couldn't possibly show you my power because then I'd kill you." <--I kid you not, I've had people say this to me! Unless I'm willing to actually try and seriously injure him or kill him (in which case I'd be arrested for assault or murder) then I can't argue against these people!
b/ This hippie style of Chi Kung is actually nothing new, and are probably as old as the more practical schools of Chi Kung and Tai Chi. A lot these Chi Kung and Tai Chi schools were formed by rich aristocrats in ancient China who marveled at the power of martial arts practised by warriors, monks and even commoners - and wanted to have this power too. But they didn't want to... ya know, break a sweat or damage a fingernail. So they pretty much created this fantastic idea of "Chi Kung" where they would shove each other about with their imaginary Force Powers, then link it with Chinese medicine (trying to use science to explain the supernatural).

I divide internal martial arts into 3 different categories:
1/ Fighting styles: e.g. Yang Tai chi, Baguazhang, Jujutsu, Hapkido etc.
2/ Holistic health styles: e.g. Tai Chi - some styles of Tai Chi are only practised for health, like Yoga, and don't have practical fight apps.
3/ Mystical styles: like the stuff shown in Penn and Teller. And Star Wars. But ya know, Star Wars is cool (cos Jedi are able to back up their weird beliefs with this thing called a lightsabre!).

This lady believes that she can actually talk to her organs, and that her organs actually use language to communicate with her. Wow... her kidneys speak English! Or maybe they speak Rygidian, which coincidentally is exactly the same as English.

The beat the living f*** out of you guy is someone who teaches their own modern form of martial arts. This guy loves teaching students LETHAL moves and advocates the use of lethal unarmed force as a means of self defence! Penn asked the teacher how he'd feel if any of his students killed someone with the techniques he's taught them, and he said, "I'd feel pretty good," because he believes that you should do ANYTHING to defend yourself. The show then pointed out that in the United States (as in Australia), you're only allowed to use reasonable force in self defence, in the context of the assault. Teaching his students such excessively lethal force can get them charged with manslaughter (the skeptic pointed out that he's seen some martial arts schools which teach their students to break an attacker's neck _after_ they've been subdued, which is murder). The skeptic pointed out that the problem with people who teach lethal moves is that they automatically assume that their students are always the victims and are innocent... never perpetrators.

This goes back to what I was talking about before about teachers needing to exercise discretion in whom they choose as students, and that there are certain members of society who should _never_ be taught martial arts. But unfortunately a lot of schools don't discern... as long as you pay your membership and lesson fees, they'll teach you.

Penn then said that if you're going to have this attitude that lethal force is perfectly acceptable for self defence, then there's a far easier and cheaper alternative to learning martial arts -- buy a gun! Morally and legally it equates to nearly the same thing (i.e. you are defending yourself with lethal force, and you will be arrested!)

So of course, this goes into a point that when learning self defence, you need to be able to apply it in a legally acceptable way - i.e. that you are only using enough force to defend yourself.

[Tabias Prime]

The traditionalist was a Karate teacher who held some world record for board breaking, which he claimed came from his Chi power. They debunked that and explained the science behind board breaking and demonstrated how simple it was to do it. The MA skeptic had his wife break a board with the palm of her hand and Teller easily broke a board too. The Karate teacher also admitted that a lot of the techniques he teaches is "fantasy fighting" -- i.e. impractical for self defence, but he teaches them to build confidence. Penn and Teller said that this is dangerous bulldust, and I agree... because you're giving students false confidence. Yes, having confidence is really important and a good thing to teach... but you should teach it by actually making your students competent rather than letting them pretend that they can fight and letting them believe in a fantasy. Cos that fantasy belief can get them hurt or killed in a fight. As I've often said, in our training we should _always_ assume that our attacker(s) is/are stronger, faster and better than we are. It is pointless to assume anything else.

I never understood the whole breaking wood thing, I have never heard of a piece of wood attacking someone and what did the piece of wood ever do to anyone....

My brother taught the GKR form of karate and the way general get people in is cold canvas an any until they meet their quota, Its kind of like J.Ws of the martial arts....

With the whole Karate Kid issue, Could they not of used the same story but set it in Japan instead of china, that way there would be no confusion
in regards to the whole karate/kung fu issue...

[GoktimusPrime]

I never understood the whole breaking wood thing, I have never heard of a piece of wood attacking someone and what did the piece of wood ever do to anyone....

Heh, yeah. My favourite line from Karate Kid II is:
Daniel: "Do you think you could break a log like that?"
Miyagi: "Don't know. Never been attacked by tree."

I also once saw a newspaper cartoon where there's a Dojo full of Karate students, and outside the window is a UFO that's landed and the aliens coming out to attack are made of planks of wood. ;D

With the whole Karate Kid issue, Could they not of used the same story but set it in Japan instead of china, that way there would be no confusion
in regards to the whole karate/kung fu issue...

I don't mind the story being set in China, cos:
a) The original Karate Kid wasn't set in Japan, it was set in America.
b) Karate originated from Okinawa, not Japan. And in the original Karate Kid movies, Miyagi was an American of Okinawan (not Japanese) descent and instructed Daniel in Okinawan (not Japanese) Karate. There is a subtle but distinct differnce between Okinawan and Japanese Karate (e.g. Okinawan Karate has tighter blocks and isn't as rigid and jarring as Japanese Karate -- it's more similar to Fujian Kung Fu from which Karate was originally derived from).

I'm just unhappy that a movie called "Karate Kid" is completely devoid of any Karate.

[Tabias Prime]

I don't mind the story being set in China, cos:
a) The original Karate Kid wasn't set in Japan, it was set in America.
b) Karate originated from Okinawa, not Japan. And in the original Karate Kid movies, Miyagi was an American of Okinawan (not Japanese) descent and instructed Daniel in Okinawan (not Japanese) Karate. There is a subtle but distinct differnce between Okinawan and Japanese Karate (e.g. Okinawan Karate has tighter blocks and isn't as rigid and jarring as Japanese Karate -- it's more similar to Fujian Kung Fu from which Karate was originally derived from).

I'm just unhappy that a movie called "Karate Kid" is completely devoid of any Karate.

Agreed

Sorry my bad its been a while since I've seen any of the K.K movies...

[GoktimusPrime]

Getting back to the board-breaking thing... while I agree with you Tabias - IMO it's effectively a parlour trick that doesn't seem to bear much relevance to fighting application. It's also a waste of trees which impacts on the environment (although they do have reusable plastic boards now, but still a lot of demos I see use still use wooden boards).

But for the sake of discussion, let's look at some possible arguments supporting board breaking:

1/ A method of conditioning. It toughens up your hands cos hitting things like people's skulls with your bare fists really hurts! Japanese martial arts have this thing called "Tameshiwari" and the Chinese call it "Iron Hand" or "Iron Palm" training. However, the traditional form of Iron Hand training does NOT involve breaking objects. It involves striking a hard padded object, such as a Makiwara (padded striking post) or a canvas bag filled with gravel. But in this day and age there are other less archaic methods. I personally own a pair of focus pads which I call "sting pads." The contact surface is intentionally hardened with toughened materials. Well, I don't feel it anymore... Other devices like the Wing Chun Dummy allow for some hardening of the fists, forearms and feet - and again, doesn't involve breaking (although those dummies are prohibitively expensive).

2/ A method of teaching striking technique. One mistake that all beginners make is that they strike at targets rather than through them. Proponents for board breaking might argue that this exercise demonstrates the value of striking through a target. The problem with this argument is that, as debunked by Penn and Teller, the exercise doesn't necessarily require you to strike through the target per se. As long as you're striking at the correct angle to the board and aligned properly with the grain of the wood, breaking the board doesn't take as much force as one might think (as demonstrated in the video by the skeptic's wife and by Teller. From wikipedia:
"The practice of breaking is controversial within the martial arts community. It is common for public demonstrations to use specially prepared materials that break more easily, without informing their audience of this fact. Thus, the audience is given an impression that the performers are more powerful than they actually are." Penn and Teller also debunked breaking multiple boards at the same time, explaining how once the first board is broken, gravity pretty much does the rest of the work.

3/ Building self-confidence. I once spoke to a practitioner of Kyokushinryu Karate who told me that when he first started as a boy, he was really timid and lacked confidence. When his Sensei told him to break a board, he thought there was no way he could possibly do that. But Sensei snapped at him and insisted that he could do it and told him to believe it. He then went for it, and successfully broke the board. He told me that it felt so good and gave him the most incredible boost of confidence he'd ever felt. He knew it wasn't a practical technique for self-defence... but once he realised that he could break that board, he realised that he could accomplish anything so long as he put his mind to it. It reminded me of The Empire Strikes Back when Yoda told Luke, "Do or do not. There is no try." But having said that, there are obviously other ways to build confidence... like ya know, making your students competent fighters. IMO one of the more uplifting moments in martial arts training is realising that your techniques can work and that you can actually execute them... much like in the famous wax on wax off scene from the original Karate Kid.