Posted On:1/15/2006 1:34pm
Style: wagamichi shorei kempo
Originally Posted by Virus
Ok, here's the question then, if that was the case where did you get real effective fight training? I imagine that even though it was a time of peace, people still attacked one another and unarmed self defence would have come in handy.
I think that the old sensei still knew it. I just dont think the upper class wanted to learn it.
Here is a story I use in my dojo to illustrate the point:
There once was a young Samurai, a courtier to the emperor and well regarded as the best swordsman in Japan. He could cut a silk scarf five times before the geisha could say his full name and could draw and cut the wings of a butterfly without harming the blossom the insect sat on.
As his grandfather on his mother’s side came from a lesser family he was never at court. The young man wishing to show his respect for the old man decided to visit him in the country at least once before he died.
Upon arriving at his grandfather’s home, he immediately began telling the old man of his prowess with the sword. He told him of his fantastic ability and how much honor his skill had brought to his house. The old man snorted and told him to go outside.
The young man followed after fixing his hair.
The grandfather was holding two bokken and told the boy to put up his sword. The young man did as he was told but acted as if this were n inconvenience.
After handing him a wooden sword, the old man said “We are going to fight. I wish to see these skills.”
“Surly you jest grandfather, you are old and I will not hurt you, let me show you my draw!”
“Silence!” and with that the old man hit the boy in the face.
Taken aback, the young man went into a rage. “Very well” he hissed.
He attacked with the speed of a viper. He saw a bright light and wondered for a moment what it was. The pain in his left eye confirmed that he had bed struck again. He now took this seriously. He attacked…he hit the ground in pain unable to breath and with a broken rib. Again he attacked, this time he thought the old man had cracked his skull, and he saw three of everything.
He slumped to the ground. “Master.” He said.
“Yes I am…but not in your way. You use the sword to woe women. To impress your friends. There was a time when the sword was he key to heaven and hell. Are you not ashamed?”
The boy put away his foolishness that day and learned the real use of the sword.
This is just a story but I think it shows that there were and are still followers of the old ways. I mean really, Are we so arrogant to think that in the past decade, we have discovered the world’s most deadly martial art and it is grappling? The arts are still out there but damn it, some of this **** takes years to learn. Not us! We do MMA we don’t have the staying power to give anything more than a few years before we go running after he next big thing. Remember the last 20 years…Ninjitsu (oh my god that Hayes fella found the worlds deadliest martial art) then Aikido (Steven segal way above the law and this karate fodder) then Muay Thai (they will kick the **** out of you) Then Brazilian jujitsu (they cant be beat…But it take to long to get a black belt) sooooo now it is the MMA we do what is fun and make the worlds most deadly art. Poo.
Remeber back in the day there were still ronnin running around making money with thier fighting ability. There were still guys that "bar fought" and there were familes that had "family" styles that were kept pure.
Posted On:1/15/2006 1:42pm
Originally Posted by Virus
My brother said that the various styles of kung-fu were developed to counter another specific style, and then one was invented to counter that and so on. This leaves the question, why didn't someone just counter them all with the double-leg and ground and pound, such as what was the achilles tendon of kung-fu experts in NHB.
Your talking about competeing. Unarmed combat was allways the last defense. The moveies show all these kungfu guys a kickin and a fightn...they used knives. swords, sticks, spears, rocks...take my leg, heres a knife. The cage is not the street or the battlefeild. cage fighters are gladiators. once in rome the gladiators under sparticus decided "**** we kill for a living, were tough, mad as hell and we are not going to take it any more." They thousand, uprose...the professinal soldeirs killed them and crucified the prisoners. do not confuse a commpetiton fighting sport...even full contact, with battlefeild arts. The gracies defense to a knife is a glock. they have the right idea. when looking at it historicaly you have to keep these things in mind.
Bullshido's Greatest Ninja
Posted On:1/15/2006 2:13pm
Style: JJJ/Judo[Nidan] BJJ[Blue]
Originally Posted by DerAuslander108
Wagamichi is on point.
First, we should get some terminology out of the way.
There's no such thing as a stance.
Say it with me now.
"There's no such thing as a stance."
Stance = stasis = unalive = dead.
Anyone who tells you otherwise only has a limited view of the art they study.
Three main characters are used in the various arts which are mistranlated as "stance".
The Japanese arts most often use the term "構". This is pronounced "kamae". It literally translates as "frame" or "structure". It's how your bones are aligned at a given moment.
The Chinese arts use "步". In Mandarin, this is pronounced "bu". This literally means "step". It is not a stance, it is footwork. You step forward, you step backward, you turn.
The Korean arts use a compound term "姿勢/자세". This is pronounced Jasae. It literally means "a posture of force".
What all of these terms imply is movement. Not stance. Not staticness.
The zenkutsu dachi was brought up earlier. Let me give an example. Take up an average fighting stance, boxing style, Muay Thai, whatever. Just put your dukes up. Now, slowly, throw a cross punch.
At the apex of your punch, you're in "forward stance". It's not perfect, it's not pretty, and it's not gonna win you a medal at a Shotokan kata contest, but that's all it is.
A stance is a snap-shot of motion. You're there one second, and then your footwork and body are into something else.
As JFS said in a different thread, the important thing is not the stance. The important thing is the transition.
Absolutely Correct! How do you teach somone combat. Well the Traditional Way of Thinking was you take "frozen" point in time. That frozen point is a kamae. The Classical Kata and sparring should fill in the gaps on how to move into these kamae and back out to another.
If someone punches you, you step back and block/cover. The point at which you step back is a Kamae as DerAuslander said.
Fucking TKDer who actually knows what he is talking about....
Last edited by Plasma; 1/15/2006 2:17pm at .
Posted On:1/15/2006 2:17pm
Style: Tao Ga
Originally Posted by Virus
So I put it to you, why the stances, the chambered punches and kiai? Why was it there and why did it persist for so long when it is so obviously impractical and our modern counterparts do fine without that stuff?
How long have you been training?
In every martial fighting program, there are basics, and there
advanced techniques. Even as you learn to walk before running,
you learn the proper was to do everthing. Chambered punches
are one example. The footwork, body mechanics, chambering,
and timing of the technique for this type of punch is complex on
initial learning, and does seem to contain extraneous motion(s)
but, is in fact one fluid synergystic motion. The problem with this
is that many karate (TMA) schools continue to practice this punch
in its basic form, and never progress to usefulness.
Boxers and MT fighters punches are chambered. They start and
end at the same position. It's just that the position they start and
end at places the elbow forward of the body, and not behind the
body. Nonetheless, it is still chambered.
Posted On:1/15/2006 4:07pm
Style: BJJ, Sambo
Virus originally stated:
What people used in battle was very different from what was taught in Grandmaster Sifu's Monkey Love House of Kung Fu, and the people that spent their time doing monkey kung fu never really fought.
Kung Fu is a generic name that covers a very wide range of systems so it is probably not fair to paint them all with the same brush. It is true that there appears to be many flowery movement in many of those sets. I think some of this is reflective of the fact that the last dynasty in China persecuted movements which it considered a threat (ie. when the Shaolin temples were burned). In order to stave off persecution, many of these styles either went underground or joined dance troupes (where they preserve their techniques in dance like sets). It is not that different from what happened in Japan after the civil wars except they stopped at confiscating guns.
That said, many of those practicing kung fu today (and karate and tae kwondo) probably don't that much experience fighting. They much rather spend their time doing fancy moves they see in the movies (and being uber deadly) than spend time in all out randoori with different fighters. It is generally these Mc-fighters that people see (rather than the hardcore ones). Not sure if this is reflective of the non-violent (some would say more civilized) culture in the more developed nations.
Posted On:1/15/2006 4:40pm
What has always annoyed me about many Kung Fu styles is the insistance on imitating animals.
A tiger fights the best and most simplistic, aggressive way for a tiger to fight. For a man to attempt to fight like a tiger is plain ridiculous. A man does not have the tools a tiger would use in a fight. He doesn't have the claws or the superior speed and power.
Isn't it far better for a man to fight like a man and not some praying fucking mantis or whatever?? Having said that, the styles, as artistic expression, are beautiful. It would be a shame if nobody trained in such styles. I just wish they'd leave out all the bullshit self-defence claims.
Karate has always been too stiff and rigid for my liking and kata has always irritated me. Even when the top Karate guys try to make sense of their kata through Bunkai, I just think "**** the kata off and just train these 'hidden' techniques within the kata with a resisting training partner".
Valiant Monk of Booze & War
Posted On:1/15/2006 5:04pm
Originally Posted by mattr
Even when the top Karate guys try to make sense of their kata through Bunkai, I just think "**** the kata off and just train these 'hidden' techniques within the kata with a resisting training partner".
BINGO!!! EXACTLY!!! SOMEBODY GETS IT.
You're in England. Look up Iain Abernethy. Tell him DerAuslander sent you.
Posted On:1/15/2006 5:10pm
Take a look at the name of this particular forum.
There's your answer. People get caught up in stupid BS that has absolutely nothing to do with "going at it." Just a bunch of wanks who refuse to leave their egos at the door and learn with no hidden intentions.
I am a Ninja bitches!! Deal with it
Posted On:1/15/2006 7:44pm
Style: Improv comedy
Here's an important story:
"Once there was this guy named Indiana Jones. One day the women he loved was kidnapped in the Casba. Indiana pursued her captors and fought them through out the Casba as he desperatly tried to get his love back. All off a sudden a space appeared in the crowd and a master sword man appeared ready to destroy Indiana. The sword man did many amazing twists and twirls with his sword, clearly showing poor Indiana that he was doomed. So Indiana took out his gun and shot him dead. Then went after his love"
Posted On:1/15/2006 7:47pm
Articles and Reviews
Tools and Info