Page 87 of 93 FirstFirst ... 67778283848586878889909192 ... LastLast
Results 861 to 870 of 925

Thread: Martial arts discussion thread

  1. #861
    Join Date
    27th Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney NSW
    Posts
    37,637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime View Post
    Interesting 16 min video:
    Why Wing Chun Cannot Handle Boxers or Wrestlers (warning: contains some coarse language)
    *sigh* reading a lot of the comments on that video reminds me why I never frequent martial arts boards -- because they're full of idiots. But different from most other online communities, they're testosterone pumped aggressive idiots.

    To make a long story short, it went something like this...
    Person A> "Didn't Yip Man defeat a boxer?"
    Me> "Nope."
    Person B> "Yes he did."
    Me> "Show me your evidence."
    Person B> "I like trees."
    Me> "Good for you. Evidence?"
    Person B> "That was a joke, duh."
    Me> "Okay. Here are 5 independent sources, none of which state that Yip Man ever fought a Western boxer. Evidence?"
    Person B> "I know, damn it. That's why I didn't give any evidence."

    I'm tempted to reply with, "So you knowingly lied?" ... but I've had enough of engaging with this dimwit. This is like saying, "The Earth is flat," and when someone else says, "prove it," I just say, "I know it's round, that's why I never gave any evidence, duh!" And martial arts forums are often full of people like this or worse (much worse). I don't know which one I find more frightening, the fact that stupid people like this exist, or the fact that stupid like this exist and are being trained in martial arts. One of my bug bear with many martial arts schools is how they don't seem to care about screening their students and either rejecting or modifying the teaching of students who demonstrate an aggressive or even violent aptitude. When you teach someone a martial art you're effectively weaponising their body. You better be damn sure that you're not weaponising the wrong kind of person. #moralresponsibility

    Megatron: "You're either lying or you're stupid!"
    Starscream: "I'm stupid, I'm stupid!"
    (Triple Takeover)

  2. #862
    Join Date
    27th Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney NSW
    Posts
    37,637

    Default

    Warning: rant ahead.
    ------------------------------

    practical
    /ˈpraktɪk(ə)l/
    adjective
    1. of or concerned with the actual doing or use of something rather than with theory and ideas.
    2. (of an idea, plan, or method) likely to succeed or be effective in real circumstances; feasible.


    This is how some people view and practise Tai Chi...


    This is how I view and (try to) practise Tai Chi...


    And this is how Tai Chi was created...

    No, not the dude on the left. He's a soldier. The guy in the middle is an Imperial Palace Guard. The techniques practised by these guards, combined with influences from Taoist and Buddhist warrior monks, evolved into what we know as Tai Chi.

    I have a colleague who also practises Tai Chi and now we are practising in the same school, but in separate parallel classes. Her class only practises forms whereas the class that I attend is called "Practical" Tai Chi and is explicitly meant for teaching Tai Chi as a martial art. I understand that different people practise Tai Chi (and martial arts in general) for different reasons, and not everyone learns it as a practical fighting form. That's fine. However, to put things in context, this colleague (let's call him "Bill" which is not his actual name) has always told me that he believes that Tai Chi is a martial art. As recently as just last week he was basically telling me that he thinks it's a mistake to divorce the martial art aspect of Tai Chi. Bill and I train in separate groups on opposite ends of the hall. We also do different styles of Tai Chi/internal Kung Fu.

    In this week's class I was training with a partner and we were basically mucking around with some techniques. During this time I performed a simple take down and my partner ended up on the floor, similar to this technique. To be clear, I was very careful with the take down because this school has no mats and I didn't want to hurt my partner by throwing him onto the ground. I can't be bothered typing an entire essay describing how someone can safely execute a take down during practise (which I'm sure nobody would be bothered to read), but I'm also sure that anyone else here who's ever done any kind of grappling or wrestling will know what I'm talking about.

    Bill had never seen someone taken down to the ground before. Ever. He thought it was the most brutal thing he had ever seen. He told me that he was shocked and appalled by the level of violence that I had inflicted on my 'poor' partner and could not believe that I was throwing a person onto the ground. One massive argument later, I was finally able to explain to Bill that I had not thrown Bill to the ground, I took him to the ground... there's a difference. I reassured Bill that I am well aware that our school has no mats and that I have no interest in injuring anyone at the school. I know how to take someone down safely!

    Bill then started a new argument, insisting that take downs are not part of Tai Chi. His evidence: because he's never seen it. A lot of people have never seen grappling take downs in Karate either, but they do exist! I wouldn't mind if Bill had just said, "Well I've never seen it," but he kept on insisting that it doesn't exist in Tai Chi, just because he hasn't seen it! It never occurred to him that maaaybe there are things in Tai Chi, particularly other styles/schools of Tai Chi, which he may not have come across yet. It was so insular. The argument was going nowhere, so I told Bill that even if he believed that Tai Chi fighters should never use take downs, the fact is that other people do, and that we need to learn how to defend against take downs!

    It's similar to learning self defence against weapons like knives. It doesn't mean that we want to go around carrying knives, but if someone were to attack us with a knife then we need to consider how to defend ourselves against such a vicious attack. Bill then went on to argue about how Tai Chi is not a martial art. I asked him to explain, and he said that our school isn't a martial arts school, it's a Wushu Association. Even with my limited Chinese, I explained to him that Wushu (武術; "Bujutsu" in Japanese) means "Martial Art."

    At this stage another colleague, let's call her Daisy which is not her actual name and knows nothing about martial arts, jumps on Bill's bandwagon and insists that Tai Chi is not a martial art because I'm the only person in the world who sees it that way. Bill then says, "Actually he's right, it is a martial art," but then explains that it's a martial art that's designed to defend you against push hands attacks and nothing like boxing or karate etc. I begged to differ but in all honesty, the discussion was going nowhere. In the end I just reassured Bill that my partner was never in any actual danger and I would never recklessly endanger anyone at the school during training.

    As much as I really love Tai Chi, I get frustrated by some of the people who practise it. In short, these are martial arts "hippies" who want to learn a martial art and believe that they can defend themselves, but they don't want to get their hands 'dirty.' They might break a fingernail. They love learning the theory of the art but have no real desire to learn the practise. And this is probably why the school that I'm currently training at divides its classes into different groups, and the group that I train with is explicitly called the "Practical" class, while the other groups (including Bill's) can play around with theoretical forms and never make physical contact with other person.

  3. #863
    Join Date
    27th Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney NSW
    Posts
    37,637

  4. #864
    Join Date
    27th Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney NSW
    Posts
    37,637

    Default

    What do you guys think are the most common types of attacks found in realistic street fights? Here's a quick list I've compiled, but please feel free to add your own suggestions!

    * Shoving the chest
    * Swinging punch to the head (roundhouse punch, "wild haymaker" punch)
    * Single handed front grab or choke
    * Double handed front grab or choke
    * Reverse choke hold
    * Lashing kick below the belt (e.g. to the groin, lower legs etc.)
    * Wrist/arm grab
    * Hair pull
    * Charge and tackle
    * Direct/straight knife thrust
    * Overhead knife slash
    * Swinging knife slash

  5. #865
    Join Date
    28th Dec 2007
    Location
    Ulladulla
    Posts
    5,294

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime View Post

    I love that their initials are WTF
    HATRED FOR JAMES VAN DER BEEK RISING!

    Still have some stuff for sale. Free pickup at Parra Fair
    http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=8503

  6. #866
    Join Date
    27th Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney NSW
    Posts
    37,637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bartrim View Post
    I love that their initials are WTF
    And it's real too!
    http://www.worldtaekwondofederation.net/
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_...ndo_Federation

    Although in all fairness, the World Taekwondo Federation was established in 1973 and the first use of "WTF" as "What the Fornication" was in 1985 (Usenet). Still funny but.

  7. #867
    Join Date
    27th Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney NSW
    Posts
    37,637

    Default

    As many of you know, I'm fairly critical when it comes to Bruce Lee and Jeet Kune Do which I've already explained in detail in previous posts so not worth repeating. But tonight at training I heard someone present me with what I've found to be an interesting argument in favour of Bruce Lee and Jeet Kune Do. So it goes like this...

    Jeet Kune Do isn't a martial art style, it's a philosophy. So what this means that it isn't a pre-defined fighting system. What Bruce Lee taught was Kung Fu under his philosophy of Jeet Kune Do. JKD that's taught today comes from Lee's student, Dan Inosanto, who has blended elements of Kung Fu and various Filipino martial arts under the philosophy of JKD. So the idea is that JKD is more of a descriptive rather than prescriptive form of fighting. Rather than telling you what to do, it asks you questions such as:
    * What do you already know?
    * What can you do?
    * What works for you?
    ...etc.
    And thus one's training is adjusted according to the student's individual needs, which is completely different from the "one size fits all" prescriptivism that most martial arts schools blindly follow. The idea is that it customises teaching and learning to individual student needs.

    I must say that it is, in theory at least, an interesting concept. I don't know if I'm fully convinced, but it's at least made me reconsider my stance on JKD at least in terms of what it actually means. Are there people here who've trained in JKD? If so, what do you think about this idea?

  8. #868
    Join Date
    27th Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney NSW
    Posts
    37,637

  9. #869
    Join Date
    27th Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney NSW
    Posts
    37,637

    Default

    This morning someone finally showed me the true power of Wing Chun Kung Fu's chain punching. Every other Wing Chun fighter I've sparred with and every video that I've seen shows them simply "shuffle-stepping" forward as they do their chain punches. Fairly easy to counter with sticking/grappling techniques. But the bloke that I sparred with this morning actually pounced forward as he initiated his chain punches! The sheer ferocity made it impossible for me to do my usual sticking or grappling... even if I managed to get a grip it would only last for a fraction of a second as he would quickly break out of it due to the sheer speed and power of the chain punches. The pouncing is of course what sport science refers to as plyometrics, so I tried to use my own plyometric movement in trying to hop out of his centre line and get around him, but it was too easy for him to simply change angle and realign his centre line towards me. I could advance in on him, I couldn't outflank him, and I couldn't draw him in. All I could do was remain on the defensive and keep my distance from him, blocking his shots and ensuring that he didn't get too close to me.

    Admittedly this did work and my partner did admit that the downside to the chain punching is that it is physically exhaustive. By maintaining my distance I allowed him to simply wear himself down through over exertion of throwing hundreds of punches, none of which actually landed. So ultimately it was a stalemate, but a very interesting one from my POV as I'd never seen Wing Chun used like that before! The sheer fluidity and power of his attacks were impressive. When I told him that it was unlike any other Wing Chun attack that I'd encountered, he told me that a lot of other schools don't do Wing Chun properly. We often see the stiff and rigid forms and practices, but Wing Chun should be smooth and subtle, much like a whip.

    This reminded me of my experience with Gojuryu Karate, where most people were also really stiff and rigid, but one black belt told me that Karate should be smooth and subtle. And both that black belt and my Wing Chun sparring partner used the "whip" analogy: i.e. that your body in a fight should be like a whip. Subtle but with vicious force on the moment of impact, only to immediately soften up again. It's harder to see in Karate because of the baggy long sleeves of the Gi, but the black belt who explained this to me rolled his sleeves up and allowed me to see how his arms moved upon punching. It was a lot more like how traditional Kung Fu operates (not surprisingly since Okinawan Karate is descendant from Fujian Kung Fu).

    But this is really how every fighting form should work. The Yin (hard) and the Yang (soft) working together, or as Muhammed Ali said, "float like a butterfly sting like a bee." So many martial artists fall into the trap of doing one or the other, or switching between one or the other (like a light switch), whereas the reality is that you are both hard and soft at the same time - like a whip cracking. Bruce Lee used the analogy of water, which is a good one too as anyone who's ever belly-flopped into a pool will know how freakin' hard water can be. Another analogy is to imagine being flicked really hard by a wet towel. The towel is soft and subtle but boy does it hurt like buggery! It's just such a shame that so few people who practise martial arts actually understand this concept properly. I can't even find videos online of people doing proper Karate or Wing Chun in this way - they all look like the stereotypical way of being far too rigid and using "shuffle stepping" instead of plyometric pouncing. Imagine if a predatory animal shuffle stepped towards their prey... they'd starve!

  10. #870
    Join Date
    27th Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney NSW
    Posts
    37,637

    Default

    What a difference a change in teacher makes. About 2 weeks ago I missed my Tai Chi training because of work and family commitments. But I was feeling frustrated with my training as I felt that I just wasn't learning anything. Each Saturday when I sparred with my Wing Chun fighting partner, I found that I wasn't getting any better. And if I tried to use the new Tai Chi techniques that I'd learnt I was actually fighting worse. A lot worse. Meaning that the only way I could hold my ground was to revert back to my old Tai Chi training... in which case why was I bother to spend $20 a lesson when, in a fight scenario, I can't use any of the new techniques? But I was subconsciously making excuses. I had only been training for 7 months and it really takes about 1.5~2 years of training before you can become competent in fighting in a particular art. But still, even prior to that surely I should've felt some sense of progress. Like say if you were to start learning a language for 1.5~2 years, okay, you may not be totally fluent but you should be able to see some progress (e.g. able to engage in basic conversations etc.).

    So because I'd skipped training on that evening, I decided to catch up by going to a Bagua class on another day. Huuuge difference. This Bagua teacher is willing to give up his knowledge freely whereas I often feel like I have to beat knowledge out of my Tai Chi teacher and even then he only gives out snippets. The Tai Chi teacher has also told me on a few occasions that it takes 10 years to become combat proficient. WHAT?!? That's longer than it takes to become a freakin' engineer or doctor! Heck, that's a year longer than it took NASA to put freakin' men on the Moon! (1960~1969 = 9 years) It was becoming increasingly apparent to me that I was wasting my time and money with this so-called "Practical" Chen Tai Chi class.

    The funny thing is that the Bagua class doesn't even advertise itself as being for self-defence/combat, but it just so happens to be better at teaching practical techniques for fighting simply because it has a competent teacher. This morning I was sparring with my Wing Chun fighting partner - so with just 2 weeks' worth of Bagua training in a class where fighting isn't even the focus, and there was noticeable improvement in my fighting form. Even my partner remarked that my technique had improved and he was finding it more difficult to attack me. So I had learnt more in just two weeks of Bagua under a competent teacher than I had after 7 months' of Tai Chi with an incompetent teacher.

    My Bagua teacher also knows the Tai Chi teacher - he also started learning the same form of Chen Style Tai Chi and we were actually in the same class together. Last week he asked me why I'd stopped going to the Tai Chi classes and I told him why. He tried to defend the Tai Chi teacher say that his knowledge of Tai Chi and its applications is amazing. His knowledge of Tai Chi is phenomenal. And I said that while this may be true, that teacher is also hopeless at passing on his phenomenal knowledge, which is what teaching is supposed to be. A person can have exceptional knowledge in a given field, but that doesn't automatically mean that they are capable of passing that knowledge onto others. My Bagua teacher then agreed with me.

    This is why I refuse to address martial arts teachers by titles like "Sensei" or "Shifu" etc. These words mean "teacher," and as a teacher myself I feel that it is insulting to refer to someone as "teacher" when they cannot teach. Ironically I find that good martial arts teachers don't care about fancy titles anyway.

    P.S.: A minute after posting this a fly flew past my monitor and I just casually caught it with my fingers! #karatekidmoment

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •