221323 Bullies, 3946 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 51 to 60 of 722
Page 6 of 73 FirstFirst ... 23456 789101656 ... LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. Royal Dragon is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    205

    Posted On:
    8/14/2002 2:46pm


     

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Yup, It's posted on my site's forum at http://www.anyboard.net/rec/royaldragon/posts/1098.html
  2. Sheol is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    542

    Posted On:
    8/15/2002 5:50am


     

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Royal Dragon:
    Hello,

    here is the curriclulem Some things are planned to be in there when I get good enough at them myself those are marked.

    Level 1 Basics foundation and the form Wu Bu Chuan and 9 of the 18 basic techniques

    Level 2 Form -Shou Louhan Chuan from the manual by Don F Dreggar (Students are invited to purchase a copy of the manual) 10-18 of the 18 basic techniques. Chi Kung Set Eight peices of Brocade

    Level 3 Form-Shaolin Chuan Fa and the two man set from the manual.

    Level 4 Form-Shaolin Shou Hong Chuan and 18 of the 72 technique series

    Level 5 Form-Da Hong Chuan (full version) 19-36 from the 72 techniques, 40 move two man set

    Level 6 Form-Shou Louhan Chaun 37-54 of the 72 techniques, and the Chi Kung set 18 Louhan hands

    Level 7 Form Da Louhan Chuan, Arhat two man set from manual (students willl be invited to purchase the manual), 55-72 of the 72 technique series.

    Level 8 Plumb Flower Fist, Chi Kung exercise Yi Jin Jing (Livingston's version)

    Level 9 (Black sash) Form- Cannon Fist, 108 technique series, seated Chi Kung "Sui Xiue Jing" if I can find someone to give me corrections by the time I have a student that far along. If not then Taji Ruler Chi Kung. Maybe the 18 move two man set if I get it good enough by then. or possibly the Chi Na flow drill, whichever I'm better at at the time.
    Don't take this badly, but you're repeating the same mistakes that I see most traditional Asian martial arts practitioners make. Their study revolves arounds sets and that just doesn't make any sense from a martial standpoint. Combat is not like a book. It doesn't start one place and then logically progress to another, according to a prescribed method.

    Further, consider that you are using material from different periods of time and different authors. Complexity is not a measurement of effectiveness in the martial arts. Complexity is someone a) trying to prove something, if only to differentiate himself; b) trying to come up with a specific answer for specific situation; c) a reference demonstration. What is the focus of the material? What are the underlying principles? Sets are not unquestionable techniques of divine origin. They are simply men's attempt to catalog information. There's no guarantee of any sort.

    War is something to avoid, only to be used as a course of last resort. When it is unavoidable, it must be resolved as quickly as possible. When those whom people consider to be traditional martial art "masters" are questioned about the most effective techniques that they would use in a fight, it is noteworthy that just about all of them talk about simple and direct techniques. When interviewers talk to the 'top' "reality" close-quarter-combatives people, be it spec. forces trainers, street-smart fighters, or police trainers, we hear the same thing. Coincidence? So then, why do just about all traditional martial arts grade on complexity? Does that sound reasonable for arts that were supposedly used by warriors who didn't have time for nonsense and flowery technique? Why do TMAs measure proficiency on the basis of mastering ever-more complex katas/sets?

    The problem isn't at the heart of traditional martial arts, it is in the procession of masters who blindly taught every set and added sets to fill holes that they thought existed. If you can imagine, as a TMA got farther from its roots, the more masters sought to 'perfect' something that can never be perfect. As I mentioned earlier, they added technique on top of technique. If someone was beaten by a martial artist from 'another' art, why there must be a technique 'missing', right? It is this that forms the trap that deadens a martial art 'style' to reality. The blind faith that masters have in those that came before them, is another kind of trap. It is the one that says that "master so-and-so couldn't have been wrong" and that every word written is some sort of divine inspiration. So, the madness continues.

    One must look at the "why" of a technique, at the background behind it, and at underlying principles behind it. It is these things, not the blind acceptance of dogma, that provide the proper material for growth. The 'internal' people talk about "inner chi" this and "flowing technique" that. The 'external' people talking "irresistable power" this and "unbeatable technique" that. Both groups are blind men feeling up the elephant of martial arts. They have pieces of truth, but draw false conclusions. I wonder what the 'originators' of their arts would say if they were alive today. In some way, we can see what must have happened when we look at JKD 'practitioners' today.

    Measure on the basis of combative performance, not the ability to memorize technique. What does it matter that someone can perform the "Seven Fists of Death", but can't fight at each range of combat? So, if you want to teach every set, go ahead. HOWEVER, please don't fall into the trap of 'deadness' by measuring by 'mastering' a set.

    There's a lot that needs to be said, but I think that it can be written later. Of course, it's all just my opinion, anyways. Good luck in your training and future endeavors.
  3. Royal Dragon is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    205

    Posted On:
    8/16/2002 7:48pm


     

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Hi,
    What you don't realise is I don't just make them memorise the form and techniques. They are TOOLS I use in the training process. I want thinking fighters, and one of the sets has alot of really stupid things in it. I had origianlly pitched the set, but later realised that If I taught it as a mental exercise it would have much greater impact. Basically I teach the set verbatum and once the students have it well understood I go and pull ot one of the techniques and demonstraight it's uslessnes. Once they see this, I have them go through the entire set looking for holes and problems and invent methods of explioting them. This teaches the student to start looking for weakneses and openings in their opponents. I do this with the form as a whole set, as well as with indivudual techniques isolated from the set.

    Once a student has a way of exposing the weaknes of the original technique, I have their partner apply the same thinking to the new technique and many, many generations later we not only have created a large number of really good techniques, but the student has gotten REALLY good at anylising situations and can instinctually exploit weaknesses in other's defence with out having to use much concious thought.

    It also teaches them to apply previously taught principals and fundementals as the act of "Figuring it out" actually teaches and reinforces those principals and fundementals.

    The whole thing cumulates with as close to free sparring as I can with mainsteam students. (Hard core students go as hard as possible wile still being injury prevention concious.)

    Then, once they are realy good, they get moved up one level, and learn a new form and start all over again.

    I expect my students to pitch techniques that don't work for them and keep the ones that do work, so most of the system will be pitched unless they want to teach someday. The idea is to expose them to IDEAs more than memorise the techniques. I don't even have all this stuff commited to memory myself. I took notes or videoed myself and I teach thechniques from there and I teach the applications to the form as well make students deciper the techniques as a mental exercise.

    The forms I teach are all similar in execution and principal, and are rather direct and to the point. Not flashy Whu Shu. They are very traditional and very martialy oriented, especially if you know how to unwrap them.

    The whole system is actually in 4 forms, Wu Bu Chuan, Shou Louhan Chuan, Shou Hong Chaun and Da Hong Chuan and the 40 move two man set (contained in the Hong Chuan sets).

    Everything else is added to apeas the main stream student. Also, the Cannon fist form is an entire art in and of itself, and one could literally pitch the entire system except Wu Bu Chaun and Cannon Fist, same goes for the Plumb Flowerfist set and the two Louhan sets.

    Shaolin Chuan FA is sort of a mix of the Hong Louhan and Cannon sets, and is intended as an intro the the entire curriculem. If I could teach in a PURE traditional manor, in would teach up to Shaolin Chaun Fa, and watch to see what aspects of that form the student seems best at, and then have them learn only Hong, Louhan or Cannon respectively based on their martial tendancys. The Plumb Flower is just a neat form and really does not need to be taught, but for a main stream public program, I needed one more form and since I always liked it, it got a spot.

    My program is set up to where I can teach traditionally (Which is why Shaolin Chaun Fa is were it is in the curriculem) or just as easily teach it as a main stream public program with out having to really change gears too hard.

    It's a brilliant system if I don't say so myself.

    For me, I practice Wu Bu Chuan for basics, Shou Hong Chuan and Cannon Fist and that's really about it. Remember, when a traditionalist says they prctice a set (form), it does NOT mean just doing it in the air, but breaking the set down into it's components and drilling them with partners (When I can) and doing the footwork drlls and various other drills contained within the form.

    Your forms are like a compressed file in your computer. I as the teacher, am the Zip file extractor in the formula.
  4. PeedeeShaolin is offline
    PeedeeShaolin's Avatar

    Co-Founder, Retired Admin

    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,517

    Posted On:
    8/16/2002 9:25pm

    supporting member
     Style: BJJ, Karate,

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    This is THE poster for USELESS martial arts.....

    "Migo is such a nerdy, panzy ass, ****** mutherfukker." -Every member of the ADCC Forum(at one time or another).
    "All warfare is based on deception." -Sun Tzu, ca. 400BC


    Reverse punch Kiaii!!!
  5. PeedeeShaolin is offline
    PeedeeShaolin's Avatar

    Co-Founder, Retired Admin

    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,517

    Posted On:
    8/16/2002 9:28pm

    supporting member
     Style: BJJ, Karate,

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Hey Royal Dragon: Can you explain why Matt Furey went to China and became the Shuai Chiao WORLD CHAMPION using only some simple wrestling moves? Furey isnt even a world class wrestler and hes FAT. Doesnt say too much for that art now does it?

    "Migo is such a nerdy, panzy ass, ****** mutherfukker." -Every member of the ADCC Forum(at one time or another).
    "All warfare is based on deception." -Sun Tzu, ca. 400BC


    Reverse punch Kiaii!!!
  6. Royal Dragon is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    205

    Posted On:
    8/17/2002 12:48pm


     

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    You know what, our guys in Australia teach Hand to hand to the military, I just got a video in of some of the classes taught ON the base. It's all techniques taken right out of the base forms.

    If Kung Fu is so bad, why does the Australian military contract a Kung Fu school to run their Hand to Hand training??

    Also, if MMA's are so tough, how come you never see them fight in the Kuo Sho or San Shou??

    All your exapmle proves is anyone can beat anyone else if they are skilled enough.

    Also, If Kung Fu is so bad that a mediocr wrestler can beat it, how come "I" have beaten wrestlers who have gone on to compete in state championships? Surely someone who has competed in state is not of mediocre skill, but my Kung Fu is pretty poor compared to the Big Boys in our style.

    So, there you have it, Kung Fu sucks because wreslting beats it, and Wrestling sux because it's easily beaten by Kung Fu.

    Now that everything sux, what do we look at?? Muy Tai?? Oops, can't go there, Kung fu has beat that, and we all know kung Fu sux, so Muy Tai must also suck too.

    Now what BJJ? got news for you, your average Bjj almost always loses in the MMA's, only a few of them make it to the top Only to get beaten by someone else who has a mixed bag of tricks.

    Wait, so maybe having a mixed bag is the answer, Nope, can't do that, because Bjj guys have neaten them on occasion, and we already proved that bjj sucks because so many of it's practiiones are only average and never make it to the top. Plus, many who have mixed bags have Kung Fu and wrestling in that bag, and we know those suck.

    So what are we left with?? Needle point??
  7. PeedeeShaolin is offline
    PeedeeShaolin's Avatar

    Co-Founder, Retired Admin

    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,517

    Posted On:
    8/17/2002 4:25pm

    supporting member
     Style: BJJ, Karate,

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    First of all I dont believe you that you've destroyed wrestlers. Your full of shiit.

    And second, EVERYONE knows that San Shou is NOT KUNG FU! EVERYONE! Its Muay Thai kickboxing with a sidekick and some wrestling. Try and convince me otherwise. Hell, try and convince Cung Le otherwise, at least HE admits it.

    "Migo is such a nerdy, panzy ass, ****** mutherfukker." -Every member of the ADCC Forum(at one time or another).
    "All warfare is based on deception." -Sun Tzu, ca. 400BC


    Reverse punch Kiaii!!!
  8. Royal Dragon is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    205

    Posted On:
    8/17/2002 5:57pm


     

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    First silly, it was "A" wrestler that my sister was dateing at the time. Second, when he went for the shoot, I dropped an elbow on the back of his neck and took him face first into the carpet in my livingroom. Then, I kneeled on his neck untill he tapped. It was a perfect kneeling sleeper, and he even admits to everything going black when he was tapping.

    Third, Shan Shou is a great platform,and many, many, many pure Kung Fu guys fight and do well in that venue, as well as the Kuo Shuo.

    My point above was that every one can be beat reguardless of the art they train in. It's not an MMA Vs Kung Fu battle, it's more a matter of who has trained the hardest. When I beat my sister's boyfriend, the fight had been building for awile, so I took the time to work some good anti takedows techniques. The one worked well due to the fact I had been working hard on them, and the techniques were fresh in my mind. It was a pure Kung Fu technique. The other reason was HIS misjudgement of what Kung Fu was. He thought a take down and submission would be as easy as a Gracie fight in the early 90's. "HE" was thinking he was fighting a pure "Striking" artists. It was, because he did not know me, and could not have been prepared for such an unexpected move. Especially since dropping an elbow on the back of the neck (Base of brain) is illegal in just about all sport fighting events. He had no defence for it, and never saw it commming. From his point of view, One second he "Had me cold" and the next he was blacking out and trying to tap. No Kung fu style is pure striking, it's Kick, Punch, Lock Throw, not nessarily in that order.

    Your problem is your trying to make it out like "your" favorite fight venue is better than mine, and trying to site individual examples as proof when everyone knows damm well there really has been minimal mixing of the two, and certainly not enough inter mixing to effectively judge any sort of superiority. It's tit for tat. I think the real question, is can one of YOUR fighters beat one of mine?? I know a solid traditional Kung Fu guy in Chicago right now that would put you or your fighter in a world of hurt and really shake your belifes. And I bet if I looked hard enough, I could find plenty more as well.

    Also, San Shou is not a style, it is a competition with rules. People have to adjust their training when they compete in that, or any other venue, so you can't say "Your" fighter is a better fighter, or "Your" style is a better style. In a no rules situation, things will drasticlly change, especially if your "Sport" fighter thinks he is so superior and does not think to change for a real fight. Then if he did, how would he know what I have up my sleave anyway? How would he prepare for what he does not know? That changes a hell of alot my freind.

    Rudy (sister's boyfriend) had no clue a technique like that was comming, I caught him totally off guard. There is no way he could have seen it comming. His idea of Kung Fu was like some sort of twisted, conveluted mix of bad kick boxing Sunday morning "Kung Fu Connection" and flashy Wu Shu. He had no way to prepare for a fight with me even if he wanted to. I on the other hand knew what he was about. I had watched him, and listened to his stoies about his bar challenges, and I knew he would intimidate me and then go for some sort of take down. All I had to do is make sure I timed it right.

    In a competitive fight, very often it's not the art that wins, it's the fighter that did the most homework.



    Edited by - Royal Dragon on August 17 2002 18:02:27
  9. RellBound is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    44

    Posted On:
    8/18/2002 7:18pm


     

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I can't believe Hapkido has the least amount of votes on this poll.
  10. Emendez is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    19

    Posted On:
    8/19/2002 12:42pm


     

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    migo
    You replyed with "Ahh, the typical 'My art's too dangerous' argument."

    To be honest with you, Kung Fu IS designed to be that destructive, and it's not just the groin shots & eye gouges thing either.

    IF you had two fighters of equal high level skill and conditioning in a REAL kill or be killed fight, my $$ is on the Kung Fu guy. Especially if he is a Shui Chiao or Internal fighter, or has spent a good amount of time on the Shui Chiao aspect of thier art. Remeber, all the things normally banned in tournments will be used on both sides and the fight will be on hard ground or at beast grass (Which is MUCH MUCH harder than the cusshy mat MMA's "play" on).

    The difference, is the Kung Fu guy will have more practice in that stuff as THAT is what he traines for. The MMA is a RING fighter, and ultra violent instant fight ender techniques are not really covered in depth. The MMA trains for submissions mostly. If not, then every MMA tournment would end with deaths and debilitaing injuries in 50% of the cometitors.

    If you put those same two guys in the octagon, even under original UFC rules, the MMA will win as the Kung Fu guy does not train as much of a non destructive arsenal even though he has it.

    The only way a Kung Fu guy will do good in the MMA tournaments would be if he trained specifically for that specific venue. Then you guys would be calling him an MMA and he would no longer be recognised as a Traditional Kung Fu guy anyway, even though most of his training would have been traditional.

    One other point, Only a small few MMA do good in MMA style tournamnts anyway. You can't compare those small few elite level fighters to joe average Kung Fu guy because those same elite level fighters would also cream joe average MMA guy as well.

    Remember, a punch is a punch, a kick is a kick. The guy that knocks you out with one has just spent more time working on it, they are all trained the same way pretty much reguardless of style. Same with throws locks and takedowns.

    Before you shoot your mouths off, enter a Kuo Shuo or a San Shou tournament, and see how well you stand up. I'm betti'n your in for a RUDE awakening.



    Vist the Royal Dragon discussion forums at www.royaldragonusa.net

    Edited by - Royal Dragon on August 10 2002 12:48:13
    I don't fully agree with that.. you say that those styles of kung fu are deadly and what not.. and there's no rules and blah blah blah.. but how can someone EFFECTIVELY practice this art without seriously damaging his sparring partner??.. he's going to fake the moves?? or just stop 2 inches for his face? in essence, so REALLY what he IS trained for is to fake moves and stop punches 2 inches from someone face.. who's a willing participant..
Page 6 of 73 FirstFirst ... 23456 789101656 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.