All Styles

[7starmantis]

I have seen some people in these forums who believe that all MA have the same basic principles and you should take them and develop them to what matches you as an individual. ANyone agree with that statement? I have to say that if you are not changing yourself, then how are you learning a MA ? And also, what basic principles does muay thai have that kung fu has? I guess I just don't understand.



7sm

[tonbo]

I would agree that *many* MA have things in common, but not all. The striking arts seem to have things in common, in that they all rely quite a bit on strikes and kicks; the more internal arts rely on manipulation of energy more than trading punches, etc.

My understanding is that there is not a whole lot new in the martial arts world, when it comes down to tools and/or targets. Its the way the arts are put together or practiced, as well as the philosophies and sciences involved that make the arts different. Some arts believe that you should use "one punch, one kill" type methods, others believe that you should flow with your opponent's attacks. It is all in how you look at it.

I would also agree that the best way to do things is to personalize the art of your choice. A formal training in an art is a good thing, but at some point (like, when you get more advanced), it should be more tailored to the individual. If not, I don't think it will be as effective when (or if) it is needed.

Your mileage may vary.

Peace--

[Despairbear]

I have never come across two people who use their art exactly the same. My Aikido is different from that of my Sensei, who's is different from his Sensei and so on up the line. People put their own little twists on each MA so that is works for them. Now I am not saying that a person who has been training for only a few years should decide that what their teacher is teaching them is wrong for them. But I am saying that each person on the road to mastery will add their own flavor to the art, and the art will be stronger for it.

As for the same basic principles it can all be boiled down to this; do what you can to them and keep them from doing what they can to you.
Some forms are more alike than others to the point of having the same moves under different names. The human body only moves in so many ways and can only be manipulated in certin ways, all martial arts will have the same limit in this manner.


Despair Bear

[hand2handCombat]

most martial arts have the things in common but with little gaps. striking arts rely mostly on kicks, while the gap between them is different styles and forms of kicks. philosophy behind martial arts is really different. its what defines the art, it defines how and in what way to take down the opponent. for example, "using the opponents strengh against him", or "take them down as fast and most beautifully as possible" or just plainly brute force. id say that most MA are on the defensive side. there are more defense/couters as there are offensive moves. arts such as Muay Thai are purely brute force/offense-oriented, while kung fu uses moves that are smooth

[Carbon]

Are you taking this from the new member MartialArtist 7?

He has said similiar things to what you are bringing up and I am wondering if you got them from him?

Maybe he can compare and contrast and show you the similairites in the styles and the way he views them.

[7starmantis]

Originally posted by Carbon

Are you taking this from the new member MartialArtist 7?

He has said similiar things to what you are bringing up and I am wondering if you got them from him?

Maybe he can compare and contrast and show you the similairites in the styles and the way he views them.

I think he has said things like this to, but not only him, I have heard others too, I'm just curious what everyone thinks about it.


7sm

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by 7starmantis

I have seen some people in these forums who believe that all MA have the same basic principles and you should take them and develop them to what matches you as an individual. ANyone agree with that statement? I have to say that if you are not changing yourself, then how are you learning a MA ? And also, what basic principles does muay thai have that kung fu has? I guess I just don't understand.



7sm
First of all, you can't compare kung fu with muay thai. Kung fu is too broad a term. Maybe with a specific art of kung fu.

Same principles, it's pretty obvious. We are all bound by the same laws of physics, our anatomy is different as I haven't seen a guy with tentacles and 6 legs and if a guy did, his fighting style would be different from bipeds.

I also agree that you develop what is your own. Develop what is best for you.

Similarities are there, you just got to keep an open-mind and not confused by the idea that "my art is better than yours or mine is superior" crap.

Jab
Straight
Roundhouse
Round Kick
Clinching/Locking
Using footwork
Attacking certain areas of the body
The list goes on and on

Some aspects will be different, but in a general sense, yes, they are similiar.

[7starmantis]

Originally posted by MartialArtist


First of all, you can't compare kung fu with muay thai. Kung fu is too broad a term. Maybe with a specific art of kung fu.


I wouldn't say that. As far as similarities, Kung Fu is similar to all styles. That was my point exactly. Kung Fu is a broad term, but all Kung Fu styles are relatively similar, but not to muay thai. That was the point. Yes we all have limitations, but they are all different limitations, I can jump higher or farther than him, he can run faster than me, ect, ect, ect.
That is why, yes, you should specify your style to you, but not all styles are the same basic principles.


7sm

[tmanifold]

On the one hand, there are only so many ways to throw some one or to punch them. Also we are all human so the movement will over lap alot.

On the other, I think the concepts and principles are what seperate the arts. Take Aikido and Daito ryu, while the techniques are very similar the aims and concepts are very different. Or take judo and wrestling, again very similar but very different principles



Tony

[sweeper]

well I'm new to martial arts in genneral, but because of how I think (I tend to learn completely new things slow and once I get a foundation I realy accelerate alot) I tend to draw alot of cross comparisons (MA - soccer, MA - chess, etc...). So When I see techniques in various martial arts I don't realy look at what is diffrent, I look at the mechanical nature of the technique. When it comes down to it most of what I have seen is mechaicly very simular, most of the real diffrence comes down to cosmetics. The biggest diffrence I see in most arts is how footwork is applied. To say all MA is one thing, that isn't to say Mauy Thai is Kung Fu or Boxing is Judo. When someone says all MA is the same I think they mean when you are fighting, truly fighting not sparring or playing a sport but fighting to win than everyone is playing the same game with the same rules, so the only diffrence is personal preference and the relativly small biometric diffrences from one person to another. When you look at sports, or very specified martial arts you can't always draw a cross comparison because their focus limits movement that may be allowed by a diffrent focus, this can also apply to various systems and styles of martial art, there is a focus and a methodology, but mechanicly speaking it is all the same, we all obay the laws of physics and that's all that matters. The rest is just perspective and details.

Man I hope that made sence.

[7starmantis]

Well we all oeby the laws of physics and thermodynamics, and even gravity. So would jumping and flying be the same thing? Both are breakin the laws of gravity, jumping far shorter than flying, but both are breaking it. Yes, we live in the same physical conditions, but I can train in a way that gives me different limitations, or less limitations than you. Everyone is playing the same game when truly fighting? I think that is the point of any MA system, is so that you are not playing the same game as your opponent. That you are not in the same ballpark, not in the same game as them. Thats what saves you. Yes we both kick with our legs. But to say that is the binding principle of all MA systems is pretty thin. My kicks in PM are not evne close to the kind of kicks you muay thai guys use. Not even close. I'm really not trying to sound argumentative, I'm just really enjoying these discussions. If I am offending anyone, please let me know.


7sm

[Shinzu]

i would say that the only thing that ALL martial arts have in common is learning to defend yourself in extreme circumstances.

sure there are many similarities from style to style, but this "common goal" would be the most justifiable.

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by 7starmantis



I wouldn't say that. As far as similarities, Kung Fu is similar to all styles. That was my point exactly. Kung Fu is a broad term, but all Kung Fu styles are relatively similar, but not to muay thai. That was the point. Yes we all have limitations, but they are all different limitations, I can jump higher or farther than him, he can run faster than me, ect, ect, ect.
That is why, yes, you should specify your style to you, but not all styles are the same basic principles.


7sm
Yes, you can compare styles of kung fu with muay thai. But for example's sake, let's just say we're comparing it with drunken choy li fut. Okay, both use intricate footwork. Both have locks and clinches under their belt. A lot of elbow strikes and they both have certain areas to hit.

Now, the differences are that muay thai likes to kick the leg during competition while d. choy li fut has many techniques hitting the eye.

You just can't look at it and say, "Oh, it's not similiar at all." Do we not kick, punch, and grapple? Is it self-defense (military versions) and a way to reach your potential? I've never seen an art that doesn't attack with general techniques not found in other systems, human anatomy/physiology and the laws of physics are there for a reason. You can't bring pain to another person without doing techniques found in various systems, that's the point. Sure they may be minor differences, but a kick is a kick, a punch is a punch like Bruce Lee said.

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by sweeper

well I'm new to martial arts in genneral, but because of how I think (I tend to learn completely new things slow and once I get a foundation I realy accelerate alot) I tend to draw alot of cross comparisons (MA - soccer, MA - chess, etc...). So When I see techniques in various martial arts I don't realy look at what is diffrent, I look at the mechanical nature of the technique. When it comes down to it most of what I have seen is mechaicly very simular, most of the real diffrence comes down to cosmetics. The biggest diffrence I see in most arts is how footwork is applied. To say all MA is one thing, that isn't to say Mauy Thai is Kung Fu or Boxing is Judo. When someone says all MA is the same I think they mean when you are fighting, truly fighting not sparring or playing a sport but fighting to win than everyone is playing the same game with the same rules, so the only diffrence is personal preference and the relativly small biometric diffrences from one person to another. When you look at sports, or very specified martial arts you can't always draw a cross comparison because their focus limits movement that may be allowed by a diffrent focus, this can also apply to various systems and styles of martial art, there is a focus and a methodology, but mechanicly speaking it is all the same, we all obay the laws of physics and that's all that matters. The rest is just perspective and details.

Man I hope that made sence.
Bump

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by 7starmantis

Well we all oeby the laws of physics and thermodynamics, and even gravity. So would jumping and flying be the same thing? Both are breakin the laws of gravity, jumping far shorter than flying, but both are breaking it. Yes, we live in the same physical conditions, but I can train in a way that gives me different limitations, or less limitations than you. Everyone is playing the same game when truly fighting? I think that is the point of any MA system, is so that you are not playing the same game as your opponent. That you are not in the same ballpark, not in the same game as them. Thats what saves you. Yes we both kick with our legs. But to say that is the binding principle of all MA systems is pretty thin. My kicks in PM are not evne close to the kind of kicks you muay thai guys use. Not even close. I'm really not trying to sound argumentative, I'm just really enjoying these discussions. If I am offending anyone, please let me know.


7sm
The kicks found in muay thai are also found in military TKD. Military TKD uses the roundhouse in which most of you are familiar with and the round kick which is basically the muay thai kick.

Do we not kick? Do we all have the same heart and aren't we going in the same direction, to reach a higher physical and mental state? Even arts that don't have a philosophy behind it have the same concepts of being your best and working. Every sport has it, like American football, most of their training would make you puke.

A motto of the Navy SEALS goes, "The more you sweat in training, the less you bleed in battle"

It's about time we start looking at the small details and look bigger.

[7starmantis]

So we are talking about MA systems haveing the same goal, not the same principles? I'm confused.:confused:

[MartialArtist]

Not really the principles like soft vs. hard but principles as in the common goal. And, the basic techniques are pretty much similiar. Yeah, they vary, but even with techniques that are different like the round kick and the roundhouse, one can see the similiarities. We all use the same thing. A punch is a punch. A wing chun punch is different from a boxing punch, but it's still a punch. I've never seen an art where they hit with their stomach expecting to bring pain. If they use the stomach, it's to push them or create more space. If they use the arm, it's probably to defend or to attack or to push or to lock up.


All arts have the same essence. There are arts claiming to be different but the only way I will believe them is when they fight standing on their head
The Tao of Jeet Kune Do - Although the wording is different, this is just off the top of my head

[sweeper]

Originally posted by MartialArtist

I've never seen an art where they hit with their stomach expecting to bring pain.

You must have never seen the movie "Kung Pow" :-p

7sm I'm not sure how you kick but I tihnk my statement "When you look at sports, or very specified martial arts you can't always draw a cross comparison because their focus limits movement that may be allowed by a diffrent focus" covers my perspective on it, mauy thai is a ring sport, it places limitations on it's self so some techniques don't make it into the line up. Now if you were to compare to say, my JKD class, I would bet you that our kicks are very simular, speaking biomechanily most kicks are the same, there are only maybe 5 or 6 ways to kick, the rest is just detail.

[MartialArtist]

Muay thai, like TKD, comes in two styles.

Muay thai can be associated with the ring.

But, have you ever seen military muay thai? It's pretty different, like the sport style of TKD vs. the military style. There are A LOT MORE clinches, a lot more knees, a lot more chokes, and they are lethal when used properly, just like the techniques of any other unadulterated art.

[sweeper]

exactly, when the limitations are the same the fighting styles for the given situation start to look alot alike, so when there are ffew or no limitations things look alike.

forgot to respond to this. "So would jumping and flying be the same thing? Both are breakin the laws of gravity, jumping far shorter than flying, but both are breaking it." neither nessisaraly breaks any law of physics.

[7starmantis]

I don't know, maybe I haven't seen enough true sparring with muay thai, and military tkd, but I just don't see the similarities between tkd and say 7*pm kung fu. yes we both use punches, but thats a very weak link to say we are similar. I'm not saying one is better, just completely different. Even jkd uses straight fist punches where most Kung Fu uses flat fist. I don't use as much power in my punch as a muya thai would because I'm also pulling my opponant into my fist, and if I feel the slightest resistance, I can change and bring in a completely different attack.


Originally posted by sweeper

forgot to respond to this. "So would jumping and flying be the same thing? Both are breakin the laws of gravity, jumping far shorter than flying, but both are breaking it." neither nessisaraly breaks any law of physics.

Both are, the law is not, "what goes up, must come down". Thats just a saying we have developed. The true laws of physics say we can't fly. We may be using something to make us stay up there, but then again, thats my point.


7sm

[fissure]

Lets take one movement, the roundhouse kick.Some styles use the instep, others the shin, still more the ball of the foot.Some generate power primarily from the hips, some from the knee.In one instance the joints of the body line up when this tech. is executed.In another the hips are "left out" of the allignment.There different to some extent, but basically the same.

Various styles teach various methods.However, even within a single class you can often see variations.Young athletic people can do whatever they are instructed to do, but some people have certain physical limitations, they can only do a tech a particular way.Does this meen they are no longer practicing that art?

I remember a prominant English Shotokan instructor from my childhood.His name was Bon Poynton, a 5th or 6th Dan.He was very accomplished at that time, however he could'nt do a traditonal side kick.He would basicaly throw a front kick out to the side of his body because of his hips.His side kick was completly "wrong" by JKA standards, yet he was one of the most respected British sensei of that time.
Whos to say that the old Masters who laid down the law for their system didn't just tweek things to fit their own bodies?A broken knuckle as a child=lots of open hand strikes.Dropped an anvil on his foot=round kick with the shin.Played to much ancient Chinese tennis and his elbows hurt=vertical punches. :D

[sweeper]

Originally posted by 7starmantis

Both are, the law is not, "what goes up, must come down". Thats just a saying we have developed. The true laws of physics say we can't fly. We may be using something to make us stay up there, but then again, thats my point.


7sm

Nope. there is no law of physics which states that something can't "fly" it states that it won't without sufficient motovating force to overcome gravity, and than there are helper laws that take care of things like wings of fins where the resistance of the body of fluid or gas alows for free motion, essentialy what jumping is is rapid acceleration (brought about by your muscles contraction), enertia carrying you off the ground whial you de-accelerate based on the rate of the gravitational pull (32ft per second per second?) taking into account air resistance and posably wind resistance. I don't see how the laws of physics don't alow for this, I think you are gona have to spell this one out for me.

as to the simularities between 7spm and mauy thai, as I said I have never seen your art practiced so I can't comment on it specificly, however if everyone has the same anatomy, there arnet going to be many variations on movement when trying to acomplish a certain goal (applying maximum force on a cetain vector for example). The only variations are based on perosn preference, tactical evaluation and your strategic planning. (I'm not going to lead with a thai kick because it's relativly easy to block or avoid as a lead weapon simply because it is telegraphed so much. If I lead with it I do so to draw movement from them, otherwise I will lead with something a little quicker on the same angle, say a JKd hok kick for example.). As to JKD using a vertical fist, that's one technique, we use all kinds of hand configurations, those (vertical fists) also apear in mauy thai, western boxing and kick boxing, but I think the vertical straight punch in JKD comes from wing chun or a western boxing/wing chun synthasis. But kenisiologcly speaking a vertical punch and a horisantal punch are very simular, so simular that you could take someone with virtualy no horisantal punching experience but alot of vertical punching experience, tell them to punch all horisantal, throw them into a ring and have them do fine (provided they had the ability to win with vertical punches). The point of all this is, if you were to start taking say JKD lessons, all those punching and kicking drills that you do in 7sM wouldprobably pay off, it wouldn't be like learning to walk all over again, after a couple of weeks to get used to the minor diffrences you would be back in the swing of things, of course somethings might not be emphasised as much and you would of course be learning new things so that isn't to say that JKD and 7sm are the same, just if you are doing 1 MA that has elements simular to another (say you both kick or you both punch) it isn't like starting from scratch when you go to the new school.

[7starmantis]

That is exactly my point. I was waiting for someone to say it. We are not breaking any of the laws, yet there is a major difference between flying and jumping. THat is the same differences between styles. While you are not working with different physical laws, you are using them differently. While both are putting you in the air, I think everyone would agree that not exactly the same way. We all use punches and kicks and there are only so many variations to those punches and kicks, however, the strength, timing, speed, process, contact point, everythign is different between styles. I just don't see how saying, "well, you both still fighting", can link styles as different as Kung Fu to TKD. Its the same as saying, rain or snow, its the same because they are both precipitation.


JMHO
7sm :asian:

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by 7starmantis

That is exactly my point. I was waiting for someone to say it. We are not breaking any of the laws, yet there is a major difference between flying and jumping. THat is the same differences between styles. While you are not working with different physical laws, you are using them differently. While both are putting you in the air, I think everyone would agree that not exactly the same way. We all use punches and kicks and there are only so many variations to those punches and kicks, however, the strength, timing, speed, process, contact point, everythign is different between styles. I just don't see how saying, "well, you both still fighting", can link styles as different as Kung Fu to TKD. Its the same as saying, rain or snow, its the same because they are both precipitation.


JMHO
7sm :asian:
It is different, but that's in a very technical sense.

Have you ever seen a military/hardcore version of a martial art not put their legs and hips into the punch? Or a kick? How about grappling, using the hands for pushing, or shooting for wrestling. Do they teach you to shoot high, or to shoot low? You can't grapple high and be very successful against a professional who plays low.

We are all restriced to the laws of motion/physics. Look at a boxing punch and a wing chun punch. A wing chun punch adds a little movement in the wrist right before contact while in boxing, you really don't do that. It's different in that sense although there is no better. You can get more power with the added wrist motion, but you can hurt your wrist easier. It's different. But nobody (good instructor) teaches you to punch from the shoulder/tricep without any other movement.

For striking point, timing, speed, power, etc., they are different between styles, but they are also different within styles. I've seen sport TKD people who throw roundhouses like a muay thai boxer would throw his round kick and visa versa.

With the essence of timing, it depends on your purpose. The best timing is when it's open and "correct" in a sense. Different people may have different views on when exactly to attack, but I'm betting all of you can tell when an opening is there, regardless of style. There's all one common point in time where we would all agree would be good timing. It's like a vendiagram. There is one central point. No, not even a vendiagram, something more specific. Like a line graph. One person may have a broader sense of what good timing is than another person who is more specific and is more precise. But no matter the difference between the length of the two lines, I won't doubt that they share some segment.

[sweeper]

the only thing that is diffrent between rain and snow is the temprature.. that's what I'm saying, the environment makes limitations and that is where the diffrences come from, ring mau thai looks like it does because of the rules, throw anyone else in that ring and they are gona look 90% the same (if they had time to optimise their style for the situation. now it doesn't always work the same going in the other direction, you can't always take someone with a more specialised style of fighting and make them less sepcialised (like take a ring fighter and tell them to teach a war art) but if you practice an art that didn't develop under special restrictions than it's probably gona look like other arts that developed simularly. But about the biomechanics, I still think there isn't all to much diffrence in people's methods of sttacking/deffending, if you could post a link to some videos of diffrences maybe that would help..

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by sweeper

the only thing that is diffrent between rain and snow is the temprature.. that's what I'm saying, the environment makes limitations and that is where the diffrences come from, ring mau thai looks like it does because of the rules, throw anyone else in that ring and they are gona look 90% the same (if they had time to optimise their style for the situation. now it doesn't always work the same going in the other direction, you can't always take someone with a more specialised style of fighting and make them less sepcialised (like take a ring fighter and tell them to teach a war art) but if you practice an art that didn't develop under special restrictions than it's probably gona look like other arts that developed simularly. But about the biomechanics, I still think there isn't all to much diffrence in people's methods of sttacking/deffending, if you could post a link to some videos of diffrences maybe that would help..
Exactly, they are going to develop in a very similiar sense, even if the arts didn't influence other ones. You hit using the same tools, using the same locks and such. Is there an art that emphasizes locking the pinky? Not that I have come across. They deal with the middle finger and the thumb. Have control of either finger depending on the grip, and you will be able to pry hugs and the like.

But disregard all ring versions of the martial arts, like ring muay thai. Just take in the military/full-contact versions. Are they the same? No. Are they alike? Most definetly yes. You can fight differently, but fighting is fighting, and fighting will be viewed differently. A wrestler would view a fight different from how a boxer would view a fight like Lee said. Just look past that.

[Bod]

Firstly, if you haven't done a form of traditional kung fu then you won't understand what 7sm is saying.

As far as I know a kick is a kick (unless it is a hooking kick), but a strike is definitely not a strike. Kung fu striking, done at an advanced level, is essentially different to all other forms of striking I've seen (or felt). Mechanically it is totally different.

I don't mean Bruce Lee's 'one inch punch' either, which is mechanically similar to karate and boxing, and little more than a stage trick.

Secondly, the 'military style' is not the definitive anadulterated art. Military styles are primarily designed to be easily learned and to teach people to be aggresive so that they will shoot better.

One styles philosophy and background will make it fundamentally different from anothers. Contrast the broadsword skills designed for a gunless battlefield and the duellists rapier fencing which was designed around the murder laws of the time.

The main influence in many modern styles is what looks good on screen, because if you don't teach it then students will go somewhere else. You will have a totally different art to one which is based around current or historical needs of self defence or battle, or around a religious philosophy, or around competition rules, .... the list goes on.

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by Bod

Firstly, if you haven't done a form of traditional kung fu then you won't understand what 7sm is saying.

As far as I know a kick is a kick (unless it is a hooking kick), but a strike is definitely not a strike. Kung fu striking, done at an advanced level, is essentially different to all other forms of striking I've seen (or felt). Mechanically it is totally different.

I don't mean Bruce Lee's 'one inch punch' either, which is mechanically similar to karate and boxing, and little more than a stage trick.

Secondly, the 'military style' is not the definitive anadulterated art. Military styles are primarily designed to be easily learned and to teach people to be aggresive so that they will shoot better.

One styles philosophy and background will make it fundamentally different from anothers. Contrast the broadsword skills designed for a gunless battlefield and the duellists rapier fencing which was designed around the murder laws of the time.

The main influence in many modern styles is what looks good on screen, because if you don't teach it then students will go somewhere else. You will have a totally different art to one which is based around current or historical needs of self defence or battle, or around a religious philosophy, or around competition rules, .... the list goes on.
I have already talked about this. Striking is striking. Mechanically, it may be different but it's using the same tools that we have. The mechnical EXTRAS may not be found in other arts, but it is essentially the same attack. For instance, an attack from drunken choy li fut is different from a boxing straight. Different hand formation, but it is basically a punch. If you claim an art is totally different from the other, then the art must have people hitting with the back of the tricep while standing on your head.

I think that you got the definition of 'military versions' all wrong. The military version is not really for the armed forces. It is labeled 'military' because it is militant in nature. For instance, military TKD doesn't mean the military practices it.

[7starmantis]

Originally posted by MartialArtist


I have already talked about this. Striking is striking. Mechanically, it may be different but it's using the same tools that we have. The mechnical EXTRAS may not be found in other arts, but it is essentially the same attack. For instance, an attack from drunken choy li fut is different from a boxing straight. Different hand formation, but it is basically a punch. If you claim an art is totally different from the other, then the art must have people hitting with the back of the tricep while standing on your head.

I think that you got the definition of 'military versions' all wrong. The military version is not really for the armed forces. It is labeled 'military' because it is militant in nature. For instance, military TKD doesn't mean the military practices it.

I think this is becoming a little petty. We are not going to change anyones mind here, and going back and forth saying, "yes it is", "no its not", "yes it is", "no its not", ect is not going to get us anywhere. I think you understand where I am coming from, because you sadi it in your post, "Mechanically, it is different". I understand where you are coming from, "...but its using the same tools...". You are saying the similarities in MA are that we all kick with our feet, and punch with our hands, and I'm saying the differences are that the use different techniques, lures, traps, blocks, ect.


7sm

[sweeper]

well though I would like to be of more use I realy havn't practiced any forms of kung fu, so I realy don't know what you are talking about :-p

Actualy I dont' think we are realy opposing each other just saying diffrent things, it seems you are speaking of the diffrences in the methods of fighting where as I'm pointing out the simularities, most arts will have minor diffrences and minor simularities to most other arts. so obviously there is nothing to disprove, I could explain it better if I actualy new how kung fu punches were executed, but my point was simply, ultimatly the goal of a punch is to direct force in a given direction to a given target through a given focus/weapon. All the rest is just detail.

[7starmantis]

Originally posted by sweeper

well though I would like to be of more use I realy havn't practiced any forms of kung fu, so I realy don't know what you are talking about :-p

Actualy I dont' think we are realy opposing each other just saying diffrent things, it seems you are speaking of the diffrences in the methods of fighting where as I'm pointing out the simularities, most arts will have minor diffrences and minor simularities to most other arts. so obviously there is nothing to disprove, I could explain it better if I actualy new how kung fu punches were executed, but my point was simply, ultimatly the goal of a punch is to direct force in a given direction to a given target through a given focus/weapon. All the rest is just detail.

Agreed. "All the rest is just detail". :asian:

[Bod]

I think the argument so far has been

'There are differences.'

'No there are similarities.'

'No there are differences.'

Some of us find the differences more interesting, some find the similarities more interesting.

I personally respect the differences. I want to find out why things are different, and learn from that. The similarities are less interesting to me.

For instance:

Thumb wrestling as a martial art.

We can learn a lot about martial arts, distance, timing, softness, hardness, psychology and so on from the ancient, some would say 'Sport' (damn their eyes) art of thumb wrestling. These are similarities.

However if you are going to take this art to the street, you really need to know the differences, as compared to other arts, because that is where you will lack. If you know, you can compensate, and use your training to much better effect.

Another example:

Boxing.

If you box you need to know why other arts don't do as you do. If you find out, you'll do much better on the street, than if you had said 'A strike is a strike'. You might not break your hand for instance, because you are aware of the danger. You'll then be able to really use your strengths to your advantage, rather than suffering from the disadvantages of your weaknesses.