Creating new styles/forms/techniques

[zen_hydra]

I do not feel ready yet to begin doing such, but it is something of great interest to me. I realize that with all the various martial styles and schools out there, there is very little new under the sun. However, I feel that my martial path will lead this direction all the same. I feel, that by eventually doing so, I will refine my understanding of the principles involved. I am curious to hear of any experiences that those of you who have already done this might be willing to share. One particular interest of mine is to one day merge swordsmanship principles from Hungarian sabre fencing, Chinese broadsword, and Japanese kenjutsu. I am also interested in the concept of creating forms based on the observations of animals. Obviously, that is not a new concept, but I am sure that my eyes will see things from a much different perspective than the eyes of a man from another time and place did. Please, share your thoughts.

[Matt Stone]

Why base your forms' movements on the movements of animals? Why not base them on the movements of people?

Admittedly, I practice Xingyi's 12 Shape/Animal form. However, the form doesn't mimic the movements of these animals. Rather, it tries to represent the feelings that the animal represents, as well as tactics the animal uses in fighting/hunting (e.g. tigers attack prey from behind, so the Tiger Shape strikes from a sidewards position to the target).

Maybe that is what you meant... But folks that try to mimic the actual movements of animals forget that they lack the structural characteristics that make those animals capable of those movements (tigers don't have collarbones, making their inward raking movement stronger than ours, not to mention the claws, fangs and several hundred extra pounds of body weight!).

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

[zen_hydra]

Reproducing the conceptualized spirit of an animal is what I have in mind. For example, a coyote form might imitate the quickness, and playfulness of a real-life coyote, but also the deceitfulness, and trickery of Grandfather Coyote (from Native American myth).

[A.R.K.]

My advice is to go for it. We would not have the disciplines we enjoy today had not someone had the desire to put their knowledge, skill and heart into it. Perhaps you will be the next :cool:

And don't let anyone tell you that you can't. There are people that will always attempt to tear you down. Leave them behind and proceed.

:asian:

[yilisifu]

I can't imagine combining European sabre, Chinese broadsword, and Japanese kenjutsu. These are three arts using different types of swords which were developed to fit their techniques and philosophies of combat - which are all quite different.......

[chufeng]

Zen...

I'm with Mya on this one...
What you want to do is really on the edge...
But, as you said, you see things through different eyes...

Good luck...

...and when you get it done, bring it back and test it against the older systems...if it is true, it will hold up...

Just don't get a bug up your butt and promote yourself to some pie in the sky rank...keep it on the level of common folk...

:asian:
chufeng

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by chufeng
Just don't get a bug up your butt and promote yourself to some pie in the sky rank...keep it on the level of common folk...

I've never understood how a 4th dan in one style can close his school then open up again later the same week teaching a new style with a 10th dan rank...

Why are founders required to hold rank? They're the founder after all, right? Shouldn't the founder be the repository of all knowledge regarding that art? Why would he/she need rank of any kind? Wouldn't it only be the students of the founder that would need rank of some sort?

That's always puzzled me... :confused:

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

[chufeng]

OK...fine Sifu is now a white belt...but you tell him, OK?

chufeng;)

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by chufeng
OK...fine Sifu is now a white belt...but you tell him, OK?

chufeng;)

Okay! :D As long as its long distance... :D As old as he is, he'll forget before October... I hope!

Seriously, though, I don't recall his ever laying claim to a particular grade... He is the Founder and headmaster. I've never asked if he is a Level Whatever Master Grade...

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

[MartialArtist]

Some snakes move around by flopping almost like a sideways whip. Why should I copy that?

New forms are okay, it's just that you have to understand what the purpose of the form is. A form really isn't the best way to learn self-defense, but it's a good way of getting down technique and the flowing motion.

It's not as easy as merging arts... For instance, BJJ and judo are very similiar, but they have different emphasis. Most BJJ practitioners like more submission moves while most judo instructors practice a lot of throwing. It varies form instructor to instructor, but there is a general emphasis. And you can't emphasize two different things at once, you have to pick one over another at times. I'm not saying a BJJ practitioner hates throws, or a judoka hates submission moves. What I'm saying is sometimes, you can't emphasize driving manual transmissions, then go on to say you emphasize driving automatics. That's more of a play on words.

[Shinzu]

i really enjoy developing new forms, but i always have a picture in my mind of what i am doing and why. i just dont throw moves together and call it a form. it must have meaning.

[yilisifu]

White belt's fine! A return to the beginner's mind....

[zen_hydra]

I can't imagine combining European sabre, Chinese broadsword, and Japanese kenjutsu. These are three arts using different types of swords which were developed to fit their techniques and philosophies of combat - which are all quite different.......

That of course will be the challenge. To try and take the best from each way of thought and forge them into one. The weapons do all have a connecting thread, and that is enough (I feel) to allow me to eventually do this. They are all single-edged swords, that can be wielded one-handed, and have a thrusting tip. So a darn dao and katana have comparable movements, but trying to adapt jian techniques to katana (were one might use the jians reverse edge) is less feasible. It is the fact that the sabre, katana, and broadsword are similar, but not the same, that compels me to try.

As I said in my first post, I am not ready to begin developing these ideas. They are just passions of mine that will one day be developed, when I feel I have the mastery I need to do so. I was primarily interested in hearing from those that have experience in this. What are your experiences with combining elements of different styles? What about developing a completely new school of thought? Please, those of you who have experience in this, share.

As to self promotion, I have no aspirations for such. Rank is nothing but a measuring stick (you must be this tall to ride). My goals are to become the best martial artist that I can be. If what we study is truly art, then creating a new, and personal expression of it, using the tools and techniques that we picked up along the way, is necessary (IMO).

[A.R.K.]

Why are founders required to hold rank? They're the founder after all, right? Shouldn't the founder be the repository of all knowledge regarding that art? Why would he/she need rank of any kind? Wouldn't it only be the students of the founder that would need rank of some sort?

Good point and valid question. Does anyone know where this originated? I have always understood that a 10th Dan, at least in regards to 'new' systems [i.e. not directly from ancient times] were merely a formality or honorary, but not an actual rank.

In Yiliquan 1's example;

I've never understood how a 4th dan in one style can close his school then open up again later the same week teaching a new style with a 10th dan rank...

The 10th is merely honorary as founder but 4th would be the actual 'fighting' rank so to speak. Normal upward progression would ensue from the 4th by those above our new 'grandmaster' in th original system...if there is one. Perhaps that is a simplistic and even unrealistic approach. There do seem to be quite a number of 10th dans running around.

Several organizations 'recognized' me originally at this exulted rank as 'founder'. Great...fine...wonderful :shrug: It resides with all the other 'stuff' in the bottom of the closet. I don't need or want to be known as a '10th Dan grand mac daddy'. Well...maybe the mac daddy part ;)

Who was the first to appoint himself or be appointed a 10th Dan? And who did the appointing?

:asian:

[zen_hydra]

So is no one willing to share some incite on the development of forms? I am sure some of you have done this. How about the people that founded there own schools/systems? Did you all just adapt forms directly from other systems, or did you change them? What are the points you have focused on when developing a new form? What vastly different ideas/concepts have you brought together to make something new? This forum is for sharing information and ideas, so please share, but let's keep this on topic.

[Randy Strausbaugh]

I had to develop my own form as part of the requirements for my shodan test. I emphasized the techniques and combinations which I felt were "me"- which focused on my strengths and preferences. Since this was to be a personal form and not for others, I felt free to make it an extension of my personal practice. Over the years, I have "tweaked" it here and there, since my practice has changed (for the better, I hope). If you wish to develop forms for others, please be aware that different forms will develop different attributes in the practioner. A good place to start would be to decide what qualities you wish your students to develop at each level, and design your forms accordingly. Hope this helps.

Trying to avoid life's potholes,
Randy Strausbaugh

[sweeper]

Well comming form someone who hasn't developed a new fighting style :-p

It seems that if you were to create a fourth styleof sword fighting from european/hungarian/chinese backgrounds you would need a new sword.. I mean kicking and punching are related, they both have mechanical simularities, they both focus force through an articulation of your body, but most people wouldn't think of going to an olympic TKD school to gain insight into olympic boxing.. And yet on the otherhand plyometric techniques that developed from track and field have been applied to martial arts and boxing (actualy virtualy every athletic activity that could require maximal contraction of a muscle).

I guess my point is you have to look at simularities rather than diffrences when merging anything, and you have to have a goal in mind. to get back to the sword thing, are you interested in strengthening your ability with one sword? all three? or a new sword? And how can you guage progress, how will you know a new system is good because of the system or because of your previous training?

Over all I don't see how creating new systems/forms/techniques could realy hurt you or anyone else, to some extent most of us do this when we learned something new at class and have to think of how we are going to integrateit into what we do personaly.

So good luck :)

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by zen_hydra
That of course will be the challenge. To try and take the best from each way of thought and forge them into one. The weapons do all have a connecting thread, and that is enough (I feel) to allow me to eventually do this. They are all single-edged swords, that can be wielded one-handed, and have a thrusting tip. So a darn dao and katana have comparable movements, but trying to adapt jian techniques to katana (were one might use the jians reverse edge) is less feasible. It is the fact that the sabre, katana, and broadsword are similar, but not the same, that compels me to try.

As I said in my first post, I am not ready to begin developing these ideas. They are just passions of mine that will one day be developed, when I feel I have the mastery I need to do so. I was primarily interested in hearing from those that have experience in this. What are your experiences with combining elements of different styles? What about developing a completely new school of thought? Please, those of you who have experience in this, share.

As to self promotion, I have no aspirations for such. Rank is nothing but a measuring stick (you must be this tall to ride). My goals are to become the best martial artist that I can be. If what we study is truly art, then creating a new, and personal expression of it, using the tools and techniques that we picked up along the way, is necessary (IMO).
From my understanding, a katana is supposed to be held by two hands. A katana is light enough to be controllable and very quick, yet heavy enough to cut through bone, I can't imagine one yeilding two Japanese swords with one hand and having as much control and speed of someone with two lighter swords.

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by sweeper
Well comming form someone who hasn't developed a new fighting style :-p

It seems that if you were to create a fourth styleof sword fighting from european/hungarian/chinese backgrounds you would need a new sword.. I mean kicking and punching are related, they both have mechanical simularities, they both focus force through an articulation of your body, but most people wouldn't think of going to an olympic TKD school to gain insight into olympic boxing.. And yet on the otherhand plyometric techniques that developed from track and field have been applied to martial arts and boxing (actualy virtualy every athletic activity that could require maximal contraction of a muscle).

I guess my point is you have to look at simularities rather than diffrences when merging anything, and you have to have a goal in mind. to get back to the sword thing, are you interested in strengthening your ability with one sword? all three? or a new sword? And how can you guage progress, how will you know a new system is good because of the system or because of your previous training?

Over all I don't see how creating new systems/forms/techniques could realy hurt you or anyone else, to some extent most of us do this when we learned something new at class and have to think of how we are going to integrateit into what we do personaly.

So good luck :)
It would be like trying to combine match pistol, skeet shooting, rifling, tactical assaults, etc. into one art. That is impossible due to the different weapons, and how they function and how they run. Obviously, they all have the same principles of firearm safety (such as the rule of never having the finger on the trigger until you are ready to shoot), acquiring the target and using your sights, etc. Well, it's actually harder since a gun rests more on the weapon than you. Mastering the sword is harder than mastering a regular firearm for most self-defense situations. Different ways to achieve a simple purpose. The purpose of a heavy sword is for power, not for speed, and I don't think many of the techniques based on speed won't work on a heavy sword, just as how you can't use the same movements for a heavy sword as you can with a sabre or an epee. Basic, underlying principles are pretty much the same, but due to differences, I personally can't see combing all the sword arts into one deal without a new weapon, in agreement with sweeper.

[Matt Stone]

The jian, the dao, the katana all are swords. The similarity in their use pretty much ends there.

The jian is used to cut vital areas. The broadsword is a utilitarian blade that can cut through limbs, but is much better at cutting softer body areas. The katana can cut through damn near anything.

As for weight, the jian is extremely light. The broadsword less so. A shinken ("live blade") katana is pretty darn heavy.

Musashi did use two blades at a time, and his katana is known to have been rather large (I have seen a replica of it in Japan, and it is much larger than contemporary blades). Musashi, however, was also known to be quite a large, strong man, and therefore better enabled to use two at a time.

The use of these swords, though, their intended purposes, are extremely dissimilar. The cutting action of a straight sword versus a curved blade are significantly different, and function follows form.

Good luck, but I don't think you'll be able to do it without coming up with a new blade design to incorporate the movements you want to into one method. And given that blade technology is a very old art, I don't think you will be able to come up with a design that hasn't already been done before.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
The jian, the dao, the katana all are swords. The similarity in their use pretty much ends there.

The jian is used to cut vital areas. The broadsword is a utilitarian blade that can cut through limbs, but is much better at cutting softer body areas. The katana can cut through damn near anything.

As for weight, the jian is extremely light. The broadsword less so. A shinken ("live blade") katana is pretty darn heavy.

Musashi did use two blades at a time, and his katana is known to have been rather large (I have seen a replica of it in Japan, and it is much larger than contemporary blades). Musashi, however, was also known to be quite a large, strong man, and therefore better enabled to use two at a time.

The use of these swords, though, their intended purposes, are extremely dissimilar. The cutting action of a straight sword versus a cuved blade are significantly different, and function follows form.

Good luck, but I don't think you'll be able to do it without coming up with a new blade design to incorporate the movements you want to into one method. And given that blade technology is a very old art, I don't think you will be able to come up with a design that hasn't already been done before.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:
Question... Did Musashi use two swords during combat at once or did he use one for specific situations/opponents/etc. or what? I think that would be interesting to know.

That reminds me of William Wallace. He had a very long sword (for people who have a 7' frame almost), and from the looks of history, fit him well. He would be much better off with a heavy sword like that then he would a lighter sword that was intended more for faster people. I mean, I can't imagine how a 5' person would walk with a 7' sword, when the hilt would be touching the ground and dragging along as he walked.

[Matt Stone]

Yes, Musashi did use two swords simultaneously. It is outlined in historical documents, the Go Rin No Sho, and is carried on in the teachings of the sword art he created, Ni Ten Ichi Ryu (still practiced widely in southern Japan).

As for William Wallace, it is my understanding from some limited reading I did that, though rumored to be of larger than life proportions, he was really a pretty normal guy. Large swords (like the claymore Mel Gibson used in Braveheart) of that design were certainly used, and used against other combatants, but specific versions (like the Landsknecht sword from Austria/German) were used specifically to disable pikemen (by damaging or destroying their weapons). Weapons with specific purposes like this (i.e. Chinese Pu Dao "horse chopper" sword) are not uncommon, and are not carried in a scabbard like normal swords, but are carried in hand.

Or I could be wrong. :D

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

[yilisifu]

The creation of a form is something that should not be considered until one has spent at least 2-3 decades of study in a given system. There is much more to them than just so many outer, "obvious" movements. The old ones who designed the traditional forms inserted a huge amount of information into eahc one and they began designing these sets only after many, many years of training and experience.

It has been compared to writing a symphony, but it is so much more involved than that.

[Wmarden]

Isn't it possible the william wallace sword is a bearing sword menat for parade type events.

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
Yes, Musashi did use two swords simultaneously. It is outlined in historical documents, the Go Rin No Sho, and is carried on in the teachings of the sword art he created, Ni Ten Ichi Ryu (still practiced widely in southern Japan).

As for William Wallace, it is my understanding from some limited reading I did that, though rumored to be of larger than life proportions, he was really a pretty normal guy. Large swords (like the claymore Mel Gibson used in Braveheart) of that design were certainly used, and used against other combatants, but specific versions (like the Landsknecht sword from Austria/German) were used specifically to disable pikemen (by damaging or destroying their weapons). Weapons with specific purposes like this (i.e. Chinese Pu Dao "horse chopper" sword) are not uncommon, and are not carried in a scabbard like normal swords, but are carried in hand.

Or I could be wrong. :D

Gambarimasu.
:asian:
About the two swords, do you know what types of swords they were? Betting the one he used with his better arm was heavier, maybe a katana? And the one he used with his weaker arm was...?

Yes, large swords didn't mean big guys... But that sword was at least twice as heavy as a normal two-handed sword. Fromwhat I understand, Wallace's broadsword is more comparable to a Chinese sword than a Nordic heavysword, right? But based on the design, what do you think the sword was intended for? The Britons were more famous for their archers than their pikemen, but I'm not really sure... Maybe the Celts had a need for them?

[sweeper]

well aren't most of the accounts of wallace recorded through bardic depictions? I mean couldn't they have been embellished over time?

[zen_hydra]

The darn dao, sabre, and katana are all much more closely related than casual observation might reveal. Prior to the end of the "Warring States" era of Japanese history the katana was most often used on the battlefield from horseback, and one-handed at that. It has a curved edge to achieve a better cut from horseback. There is archaeological evidence, that prior to the advent of horse-borne combat, the swords of the Japanese were not curved, or single edged. The curved, single cutting edged katana is essentially a heavier sabre, tulwar, or scimitar. The sabre draws a direct lineage from the scimitar. The darn dao is a little trickier. I have yet to find a history of development for this weapon, though it physically appears to share many of the properties of the scimitar family. In weight it is comparable to a katana. Here are some of my thoughts on combining these different elements. I have observed that both Japanese and European fencing try to use economy of movement, which is nothing like the darn dao forms that I have been exposed to (very frenetic). If the weapon that I choose to use is the katana (the direction that I am leaning), then one could not parry in the same manner as a sabre fencer (the katana blade can't handle that sort of blade on blade contact). Darn dao fighting tends to incorporate all of the bodies weapons in a fight (something that is understated in both Japanese and European fencing). Sabre fencing has a strong background in circular parrying (something that can be safely done with a katana blade), and riposte. Modern sabre is fought in a completely linear fashion (so it's tactics don't consider flanking attacks). Double darn dao techniques may easily be adapted to dual katana and wakizashi. I could go on, and on, and on about swords all day, but I should probably do some work. :D

[sweeper]

yeah but modern sabre is a sport, classical sabre you did move in a circle. Also hasn't european sabre fencing evolved (even in classical fencing) into a dualing art? All the manuals and writings I have seen on it suggest in the past couple hundred years it was learned more for ground combat than anything else..

But I tihnk the biggest diffrence is blade weight, if you look at the evolution of fencing from rapier to small sword to sport/foil, you can see the methods moving from one in wich distance and timming were more important to one in wich speed was the most important.. Now I'm not 100% sure about the sabre becoming much lighter, but I do know that there are diffrences between mounted sabre and dualing sabre, I can only assume japanese weaponry has simular distinctions, from what you have spoken of it seems like you are practicing on foot, wouldn't the dissimularities of the present form of the weapon supersede the simularities of past blades if you train in a modern style?

BTW I realy don't know a whole lot about fighting with curved blades, only fillipino weaponry and what I have read of other fighing styles, so please don't view my comments as directly confrontational, rather more inquisitive in nature. : )

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by sweeper
yeah but modern sabre is a sport, classical sabre you did move in a circle. Also hasn't european sabre fencing evolved (even in classical fencing) into a dualing art? All the manuals and writings I have seen on it suggest in the past couple hundred years it was learned more for ground combat than anything else..

But I tihnk the biggest diffrence is blade weight, if you look at the evolution of fencing from rapier to small sword to sport/foil, you can see the methods moving from one in wich distance and timming were more important to one in wich speed was the most important.. Now I'm not 100% sure about the sabre becoming much lighter, but I do know that there are diffrences between mounted sabre and dualing sabre, I can only assume japanese weaponry has simular distinctions, from what you have spoken of it seems like you are practicing on foot, wouldn't the dissimularities of the present form of the weapon supersede the simularities of past blades if you train in a modern style?

BTW I realy don't know a whole lot about fighting with curved blades, only fillipino weaponry and what I have read of other fighing styles, so please don't view my comments as directly confrontational, rather more inquisitive in nature. : )
In my limited experience with weapons, I would agree with that statement. Weight and design have a lot to do with the tactics. Of course economy of motion is something common in almost everything, but the economy of motion with a sabre or an epee would be different from that of a katana. Same principle, yes, but how the weapons work as you stated, circular parries may be considered wasted motions for heavy broadswords.

[Deathtrap101]

I know pretty much nothing about swords, but...
I would have to say sword weight and design have everything to do with tactic. Those three weapons were built for differant purposes and techniques. I do not beleive they just forged a weapon and put a technique to it(I could be wrong). I would have to believe they came up with an idea for a way of doing something and then forged a weapon to suit what they wanted. IE: "I want a weapon that will destroy that city with one swipe" and wabamo! there's the A-bomb. "I want to kill this guy from really far away" pow! there's the sniper rifle.

Those are really broad examples but you get the drift. I might be just repeating something someone els said, im sure i am. But that's my idea on it. Still though, im not you zen_hydra, and you could have a completely differant idea on exactly how you want to merge them. I don't have your eye's.

Good luck :asian:
have fun

[Marginal]

Originally posted by MartialArtist
About the two swords, do you know what types of swords they were? Betting the one he used with his better arm was heavier, maybe a katana? And the one he used with his weaker arm was...?

A short sword.

[Don Roley]

Originally posted by zen_hydra
As I said in my first post, I am not ready to begin developing these ideas. They are just passions of mine that will one day be developed, when I feel I have the mastery I need to do so. I was primarily interested in hearing from those that have experience in this. What are your experiences with combining elements of different styles? What about developing a completely new school of thought? Please, those of you who have experience in this, share.

Good. You are not going to immediatly run out and create your own style. It has been my observation that once someone has created something and put their name on it, they cease to develop. They may show up to a few seminars, they may give lip service to never giving up the begginers mind, but in reality they stop making the type of progress that a student does.

First of all, you have read Musashi. You realize that he said he did not really understand swordsmanship until after he was 50. And he went around killing a lot of people with a sword before he was three decades old. You can probably see that someone who has not killed anyone with a sword looks a little silly creating their own style before they hit that age. In fact, since you will never have q chance to use a sword as it is intended, you should be extra conservative about announcing your own style. So you have plenty of time to be a student. Go out, try things and reach farther than you can grasp. When you fall flat on your face, dust yourself off, figure out how you got on the ground and don't repeat your errors.

Leave one style out of your mind while you train with another art. In time, you will start to see patterns by themselves. Don't rush it. Don't force it. Sometimes you can fool with them, but try to leave a katana mindset outside of the dao class.

Make sure you have good instruction. There are only a very, very few people fully qualified to teach a katana in the US. Who are you training under? For that matter, who are your teachers in all the arts? For a few decades you should just be a student, and you need to be the best student you can.

I have studied the jian, study the katana and am a member of ARMA. (ARMA.org.) In all three arts, it is not just the forms that are important, the underlying knowledge of the era and circumstances are important parts of the learning process. I would say that to fully understand the katana, you need to live and experience Japan for a time. There may be ways of picking up the type of knowledge I am talking about outside of Japan, but I do not see how. The same thing probably applies to the dao. Have you thought about travelling overseas to live and train Someday?

In short, think less of how you are going to combine them and concentrate on just learning all you can right now. If you get the best instruction you can and do your best, later the whole problem of combining things will probably take care of themselves. You are going to have to be wary of the temptation of being a master. I have seen that before. If you make a very determined effort to just be nothing more than a student for a few decades, you will stand a much better chance of getting to where you want to get, rather than those guys that make their own styles and then start defending what they do rather than grow further.

[KennethKu]

Originally posted by Don Roley ..... Musashi.....said he did not really understand swordsmanship until after he was 50. And he went around killing a lot of people with a sword before he was three decades old.....

I was thinking about this and it seems to me that he DIDN"T need to understand swordsmanship to excel at using a sword, wouldn't you say?

I have always thought that martial art is a skill set. The "do" and other philosophical meanings are just "add-on", to make the art richer. In some cases, it is most likely the product of the founders' half-baked attempt at philosophy. Some founders are/were flawed individuals with questionable personal lives. Yet, they piled on boat load of philosophy and "DO" etc onto their arts.
It makes them look greater than life, to the uninitiated.

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by Marginal
A short sword.
So he used his wakizashi (other than something more of a decorative peice)? From what I've read, the wakizashi was more of a decorative piece and a symbol of rank? Correct me if I'm wrong.

[chufeng]

MA,


From what I've read, the wakizashi was more of a decorative piece and a symbol of rank?

The wakizashi was not just a decorative piece...it was a very effective weapon.
In the time when samurai were essentially running Japan, one was not allowed to enter into someone else's home with a long sword (katana or tachi)...but, they were allowed to keep on their person the wakizashi (and most also carried a tanto). Yes it showed rank in that a samurai was allowed to keep a sword on his person...but it was still a very effective weapon.

:asian:
chufeng

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by chufeng
MA,



The wakizashi was not just a decorative piece...it was a very effective weapon.
In the time when samurai were essentially running Japan, one was not allowed to enter into someone else's home with a long sword (katana or tachi)...but, they were allowed to keep on their person the wakizashi (and most also carried a tanto). Yes it showed rank in that a samurai was allowed to keep a sword on his person...but it was still a very effective weapon.

:asian:
chufeng
thanks for the information

[Marginal]

Along those lines, Musashi also gives some practical reasons for carrying a short sword and a long sword in the Book of Five Rings. The short sword's more effective indoors where a katana's length may be restrictive and stuff like that.

[Don Roley]

Originally posted by KennethKu
I was thinking about this and it seems to me that he DIDN"T need to understand swordsmanship to excel at using a sword, wouldn't you say?

I take it to mean that Musashi was a very, very efficient killer when he was young. And when he hit about 50 he knew even more than he did at 30. In fact, from the way he wrote about it, he realized a vast amount of information that made all his previous knowledge pale in comparison.

Yagyu Muneyori- another dangerous individual who killed a lot of people with a katana, also wrote soemthing along the same line. And the greatest Japanese swordsman in history- Tsukahara Bokuden, did not really teach much until he was pretty well along in years.

Now, I do not have a lot of experience fighting other people to the death with swords. Nor do I have the experience of hitting 50. So when I see people whom I can respect like that seeming to regret not waiting until they hit 50 to teach, then I have to pause and try to learn from them. It may be conservative, but I am in no rush to be a teacher or a master. I may have to use my art before I hit 50, but I think I will put off creating my own style for as long as I possibly can- if ever. If I have to fight using my art, then the consequences for my lack of knowledge all end with me. But if I create something and pass it along to someone else, then the consequences of my imperfect knowledge falls on other people. I do not want that type of responsibility.

Back to practice!!!!!

[sweeper]

well I think people try to create new stuff before they have learned the old for good reason.. if you tell me I have to study for 30 years to attain a good understanding of something such as martial art, I'm gona look for better ways of doing it now.. yes I may say the same thing when I'm older, but especialy when self deffence is concerned, I'm interested in what I can do now or relativly soon, otherwise there isn't much point...

(edit) Almost forgot, most weapons are not created for a specific purpose so blunt as to kill someone from a distance, to cut better or whatever, it's more of a gradual evolution.. Yes some weapons have been designed for something like more power (.44 mag for example) but something like a sword tends to evolve over time, or you get a suden burst of creativity with a new artisan comming into their prime. Very rarely has a weapon in the past been created scientificly.

[Don Roley]

Originally posted by sweeper
well I think people try to create new stuff before they have learned the old for good reason.. if you tell me I have to study for 30 years to attain a good understanding of something such as martial art, I'm gona look for better ways of doing it now.. yes I may say the same thing when I'm older, but especialy when self deffence is concerned, I'm interested in what I can do now or relativly soon, otherwise there isn't much point...

Of course, I should point out that there are different levels of ability in terms of using techniques, being able to teach those techniques and being qualified enough to create new techniques. In the case of this thread we are talking about the last case, the case that require the most skill of the subject.

And the problem with creating something new now rather than muddling along with the old system is that people keep re-inventing the wheel. That is, if they even get that far. All too often, people who start their own styles have only a very superficial knowledge of the subject matter. If they stayed in one system, they may find that the answers were staring them in the face all along. It is amazing how many "new discoveries" can be found in the writings of the ancients. I am talking about things like Ichi- no tachi, Sen- no- sen and Kyojitsu tenkanho. These concepts and ideas are ancient, yet they have been lost by people who only gain a very limited breadth of knowledge of the subject before they run off and "improve" something. I honestly believe that if we spent more time trying to learn what the old guys did, we would have less reason to create new things. I think it was Bismark who said that a fool tries to learn from his mistakes, while a wise man tries to learn from other people's mistakes.

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by Don Roley
Of course, I should point out that there are different levels of ability in terms of using techniques, being able to teach those techniques and being qualified enough to create new techniques. In the case of this thread we are talking about the last case, the case that require the most skill of the subject.

And the problem with creating something new now rather than muddling along with the old system is that people keep re-inventing the wheel. That is, if they even get that far. All too often, people who start their own styles have only a very superficial knowledge of the subject matter. If they stayed in one system, they may find that the answers were staring them in the face all along. It is amazing how many "new discoveries" can be found in the writings of the ancients. I am talking about things like Ichi- no tachi, Sen- no- sen and Kyojitsu tenkanho. These concepts and ideas are ancient, yet they have been lost by people who only gain a very limited breadth of knowledge of the subject before they run off and "improve" something. I honestly believe that if we spent more time trying to learn what the old guys did, we would have less reason to create new things. I think it was Bismark who said that a fool tries to learn from his mistakes, while a wise man tries to learn from other people's mistakes.

Wrong!:rolleyes: SWEEPER was totally right.

Your quote "If they stayed in one system, they may find that the answers were staring them in the face all along." is a lifelong journey and in the end we still know that MOST ARTS are not complete and that there are MUCH FASTER ways of doing things in this day and age!

If you belong to the slow methodology, thats fine FOR YOU! :D

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by akja
Wrong!:rolleyes: SWEEPER was totally right.

Always nice to know you are open to different opinions... It seems to me, and this isn't aimed just at AKJA, that non-traditional MAists cling just as strongly to their dogma as traditionalists do... Which is amusing to me, since many non-traditionalists espouse the oft quoted "empty your cup" phrase popularized by Brucie! Lots of overflowing cups going around it seems... :shrug:


Your quote "If they stayed in one system, they may find that the answers were staring them in the face all along." is a lifelong journey and in the end we still know that MOST ARTS are not complete and that there are MUCH FASTER ways of doing things in this day and age!

For those who want self-defense RIGHT NOW, they should go and buy a gun. Way more lethal than any kick, punch or throw, is far less expensive in the long run, far easier to put into use effectively, and simply displaying the gun will end most fights immediately (unlike striking a MA pose and issuing a "kiai," which could very likely draw more attention, and more friends of the bad guy, making your odds of success much lower than they had been previously).

Martial arts (note the second word in that phrase) are a lifelong journey. But I think too many people interpret that too narrowly, thinking that you must study only one art for your entire life. If you look at the samurai (who really did apply their arts on the battlefield, unlike the karate teacher who just opened his own school in the minimall teaching his made up style), they studied widely - sword arts, bow arts, horsemanship, siege warfare, strategy and tactics, spear arts, empty handed combat, etc. If you look at classical karate, "real" kung fu (as opposed to the 7 million modern wu shu inspired flowery, jumpy, posing arts sold so often today), and similar arts from other cultures, you will see that they did address all ranges of fighting to one degree or another based on the experiences of those people who had formulated the style (out of their combat experiences) in the first place.

The only arts you waste time studying for a lifetime are the arts that are intended for tournament competition, the arts created by 22 year old 7th dans, the arts that are nothing more than poorly and incompletely learned renamed and repackaged minimall karate and TKD, and the arts you fail to supplement with other experience and training...

I do Yiliquan. Yiliquan is the art I will study for the rest of my life. Yiliquan has strikes, kicks, sweeps, throws, joint locks, chokes, weapons defenses, weapon use, grappling and some ground fighting. I have studied Modern Arnis, Aikido, and RyuTe Karate (very briefly). Not because I was "supplementing," mind you, but because I was either interested in learning those arts just to learn them, or because they provided me with a perception of my Yiliquan that I hadn't been able to see previously! I will still be studying Yili the rest of my life, and I may still never understand it all...

Which brings me to the

there are MUCH FASTER ways of doing things in this day and age!
portion of your comment...

We may be able to learn things faster than previously (education and language skills are wonderful things; more information is available than previously thanks to technology and research), but the speed at which understanding is gained has not changed at all... That just takes time, and in some cases, it can be done in only one lifetime - and in that case it is still pretty fast!

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

[RyuShiKan]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
Why base your forms' movements on the movements of animals? Why not base them on the movements of people?

Admittedly, I practice Xingyi's 12 Shape/Animal form. However, the form doesn't mimic the movements of these animals. Rather, it tries to represent the feelings that the animal represents, as well as tactics the animal uses in fighting/hunting (e.g. tigers attack prey from behind, so the Tiger Shape strikes from a sidewards position to the target).

Maybe that is what you meant... But folks that try to mimic the actual movements of animals forget that they lack the structural characteristics that make those animals capable of those movements (tigers don't have collarbones, making their inward raking movement stronger than ours, not to mention the claws, fangs and several hundred extra pounds of body weight!).

Gambarimasu.
:asian:


Yiliquan1,

What you have said it very true and often misunderstood by people that hear the term “animal forms”.
This term ultimately takes into consideration the “personality” that the animal has or some distinctive “attitude”.
One must understand the body mechanics of humans to beat humans………..there is no two ways around this.
Humans all have the same muscles, bones and so on in the same place and therefore all have “basically” the same weaknesses.

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
Always nice to know you are open to different opinions... It seems to me, and this isn't aimed just at AKJA, that non-traditional MAists cling just as strongly to their dogma as traditionalists do... Which is amusing to me, since many non-traditionalists espouse the oft quoted "empty your cup" phrase popularized by Brucie! Lots of overflowing cups going around it seems... :shrug:



For those who want self-defense RIGHT NOW, they should go and buy a gun. Way more lethal than any kick, punch or throw, is far less expensive in the long run, far easier to put into use effectively, and simply displaying the gun will end most fights immediately (unlike striking a MA pose and issuing a "kiai," which could very likely draw more attention, and more friends of the bad guy, making your odds of success much lower than they had been previously).

Martial arts (note the second word in that phrase) are a lifelong journey. But I think too many people interpret that too narrowly, thinking that you must study only one art for your entire life. If you look at the samurai (who really did apply their arts on the battlefield, unlike the karate teacher who just opened his own school in the minimall teaching his made up style), they studied widely - sword arts, bow arts, horsemanship, siege warfare, strategy and tactics, spear arts, empty handed combat, etc. If you look at classical karate, "real" kung fu (as opposed to the 7 million modern wu shu inspired flowery, jumpy, posing arts sold so often today), and similar arts from other cultures, you will see that they did address all ranges of fighting to one degree or another based on the experiences of those people who had formulated the style (out of their combat experiences) in the first place.

The only arts you waste time studying for a lifetime are the arts that are intended for tournament competition, the arts created by 22 year old 7th dans, the arts that are nothing more than poorly and incompletely learned renamed and repackaged minimall karate and TKD, and the arts you fail to supplement with other experience and training...

I do Yiliquan. Yiliquan is the art I will study for the rest of my life. Yiliquan has strikes, kicks, sweeps, throws, joint locks, chokes, weapons defenses, weapon use, grappling and some ground fighting. I have studied Modern Arnis, Aikido, and RyuTe Karate (very briefly). Not because I was "supplementing," mind you, but because I was either interested in learning those arts just to learn them, or because they provided me with a perception of my Yiliquan that I hadn't been able to see previously! I will still be studying Yili the rest of my life, and I may still never understand it all...

Which brings me to the

portion of your comment...

We may be able to learn things faster than previously (education and language skills are wonderful things; more information is available than previously thanks to technology and research), but the speed at which understanding is gained has not changed at all... That just takes time, and in some cases, it can be done in only one lifetime - and in that case it is still pretty fast!

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

Actually what you stated would fall in line for the most part with my personal beliefs. Theres nothing wrong in the least bit in training in a system for your whole life. We all should have an art that we favor.

The response to Don was meant to mean that we don't have to wait that lifetime to achieve faster results if thats what we choose.

He was putting it back to the issue "of not spending enough time in one system."

For self defense or overall "streetfighting awareness" it can be done faster. That does not make them an expert at anything, just a bit safer in the overall sceme of things.

The journey that each and everyone of us takes is our own and will take us in possibly differant directions and will take those of us that are true a lifetime.
:asian:

[RyuShiKan]

Originally posted by akja
Wrong!:rolleyes: SWEEPER was totally right.

Your quote "If they stayed in one system, they may find that the answers were staring them in the face all along." is a lifelong journey and in the end we still know that MOST ARTS are not complete and that there are MUCH FASTER ways of doing things in this day and age!

If you belong to the slow methodology, thats fine FOR YOU! :D


I find that most people that are in a “rush” to learn martial arts never become good at them for several reasons.

One reason is your body must be trained to respond to certain stimuli and that can only be done with time.
Take something common to most arts like blocking a punch…………the basics can be taught in a short time………accomplishing the feat takes lots of practice.

The second reason is people that are in a “rush” are normally impatient and that slows the quality of their skill as well.

I can’t train someone from scratch to run a marathon in a short time but I can help them develop the skills they will need to accomplish such a goal.

Teaching your body a martial art takes time………plain and simple.

[A.R.K.]

I find that most people that are in a “rush” to learn martial arts never become good at them for several reasons.

Actually I would agree with this. However, we need to differentiate between learning to defend oneself and a martial ART.

A martial ART is filled with things like kata's and pre-arranged sparring drills etc. These aren't bad things at all. But they take time to learn and master. They can assist in actual combat...but are NOT necessary to be successful in actual combat.

For example a boxer can be quite successful in and out of the ring. What does a boxer concentrate on in training? Footwork, and a few types of punches. He works on timing, conditioning, speed and strength.

One can learn to successfully defend themselves in a short amount of time. With periodic training to keep it fresh. It doesn't take years! Does this mean the individual can win a UFC or defeat a biker gang single-handedly? No, of course not. But can they protect themselves from a mugger, rapist, disorderly drunk? Sure they can.

Most of winning is based on commitment, timing, decisivness and HEART. Not technique!

I remember Tony Blauer talking to an Aikido master one day at a seminar. The Master was pissed off at Tony's teaching people to respond brutally and decisively so quickly. He stated "It takes me 10-20 years to teach someone the complete art of Aikido so they can defeat someone", Tony's simple reply was 'please don't put your limitations on me'.

Learning to fight is not difficult or complicated. Learning to avoid the fight can be. And learning an ART definately is.

:asian:

[sweeper]

yeah, what I as getting at is that in alot of cases the student sn't realy looking for a "complete" art, they want something else, and going down that path in a way is a wrong turn.. also alot of people learn diffrent, and good teachers are few and far between, it's posable a person knows enough to teach people a martial art yet does not know how to teach. Students in schools that are not optimal to what they want are going to look for it elsewhere, now I know some people just "create" their own art for the ego trip, but I'm sure there are plenty of other people who want something but just don't know where to look or perhaps they don't know exactly what they want.

[sweeper]

BTW, I know it's a little off topic but how many people have actualy met a mean biker gang? All the bikers I have known/met were pritty nice to me :-p

[chufeng]

If your goal is to be a bad-ass street fighter...then Karate or Chuan Fa are not the vehicle. Why? Because they teach much more than fighting skills...they ultimately teach you how not to fight...

If I have someone who comes to me and says that he wants to learn "kung fu" for self-defense...I tell him, he is wasting his time...buy a gun.

If you want to learn how to be a bad-ass street fighter...go into a bar, find the biggest dude there and spit in his beer...when you get out of the hospital, do it again, and again, until you finally get it...

Or go to a school that teaches "street fighting 101," whatever that is...there sure ain't no rules in a street fight, so I would wonder how to codify a particular technique...

I am quite content with the old slow method that I learned...

:asian:
chufeng

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by akja
Wrong!:rolleyes: SWEEPER was totally right.

Your quote "If they stayed in one system, they may find that the answers were staring them in the face all along." is a lifelong journey and in the end we still know that MOST ARTS are not complete and that there are MUCH FASTER ways of doing things in this day and age!

If you belong to the slow methodology, thats fine FOR YOU! :D
First off, I don't think that you ever really defined what complete was. A complete art, yeah, okay, what does it mean? Just because an art focuses more on grappling than locking, more striking than throws, more takedowns then groundfighting, does it make it incomplete?

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
Always nice to know you are open to different opinions... It seems to me, and this isn't aimed just at AKJA, that non-traditional MAists cling just as strongly to their dogma as traditionalists do... Which is amusing to me, since many non-traditionalists espouse the oft quoted "empty your cup" phrase popularized by Brucie! Lots of overflowing cups going around it seems... :shrug:



For those who want self-defense RIGHT NOW, they should go and buy a gun. Way more lethal than any kick, punch or throw, is far less expensive in the long run, far easier to put into use effectively, and simply displaying the gun will end most fights immediately (unlike striking a MA pose and issuing a "kiai," which could very likely draw more attention, and more friends of the bad guy, making your odds of success much lower than they had been previously).

Martial arts (note the second word in that phrase) are a lifelong journey. But I think too many people interpret that too narrowly, thinking that you must study only one art for your entire life. If you look at the samurai (who really did apply their arts on the battlefield, unlike the karate teacher who just opened his own school in the minimall teaching his made up style), they studied widely - sword arts, bow arts, horsemanship, siege warfare, strategy and tactics, spear arts, empty handed combat, etc. If you look at classical karate, "real" kung fu (as opposed to the 7 million modern wu shu inspired flowery, jumpy, posing arts sold so often today), and similar arts from other cultures, you will see that they did address all ranges of fighting to one degree or another based on the experiences of those people who had formulated the style (out of their combat experiences) in the first place.

The only arts you waste time studying for a lifetime are the arts that are intended for tournament competition, the arts created by 22 year old 7th dans, the arts that are nothing more than poorly and incompletely learned renamed and repackaged minimall karate and TKD, and the arts you fail to supplement with other experience and training...

I do Yiliquan. Yiliquan is the art I will study for the rest of my life. Yiliquan has strikes, kicks, sweeps, throws, joint locks, chokes, weapons defenses, weapon use, grappling and some ground fighting. I have studied Modern Arnis, Aikido, and RyuTe Karate (very briefly). Not because I was "supplementing," mind you, but because I was either interested in learning those arts just to learn them, or because they provided me with a perception of my Yiliquan that I hadn't been able to see previously! I will still be studying Yili the rest of my life, and I may still never understand it all...

Which brings me to the

portion of your comment...

We may be able to learn things faster than previously (education and language skills are wonderful things; more information is available than previously thanks to technology and research), but the speed at which understanding is gained has not changed at all... That just takes time, and in some cases, it can be done in only one lifetime - and in that case it is still pretty fast!

Gambarimasu.
:asian:
Good post!

One thing I have observed is that each person who has been studying for quite some time, all of a sudden, it all clicks. It happens in almost anything you do. Some, the clicking is more gradual so one doesn't really notice it. For me, I remember wrestling was a fast "click", while TKD and boxing was more of a practice and "hey, I've come along".

Another thing I've noticed is that the age of a person's prime is different depending on principles. For a lot of the hard striking arts like boxing, TKD, muay thai, etc., you don't see a lot of old guys participating as much as they used to. They can still kick everyone's behind, but they just don't have anything left to say, compete in a large tournament.

In internal arts, you see that a lot of the more mature, experienced people can still chug along, and take people on who are younger, physically more powerful and faster, etc.

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by akja
Actually what you stated would fall in line for the most part with my personal beliefs. Theres nothing wrong in the least bit in training in a system for your whole life. We all should have an art that we favor.

The response to Don was meant to mean that we don't have to wait that lifetime to achieve faster results if thats what we choose.

He was putting it back to the issue "of not spending enough time in one system."

For self defense or overall "streetfighting awareness" it can be done faster. That does not make them an expert at anything, just a bit safer in the overall sceme of things.

The journey that each and everyone of us takes is our own and will take us in possibly differant directions and will take those of us that are true a lifetime.
:asian:
I agree with you there.

You can learn how to defend yourself on the street with a simple MMA. Learn the basics of striking, grappling, and groundfighting. You learn to be an all-around fighter.

However, for long-range purposes, sticking to what you're best at is IMO, much more effecient, as you can then understand what the concept of unity really means. You know yourself better, you understand what your body can do, you learn to "think", and IMO, is better for defending yourself against more experienced fighters.

But someone who's looking to be street-ready in a few years or so should be taking MMA. One who's looking for a long and arduous task shouldn't be sticking to such general aspects. Now I'm not saying TMA can't get you street-ready in a couple of years or that MMA is a "quick fix", anyone who's been training under TMA or MMA understands how much dedication is necessary. But in general, you can take a short path, or a long path of understanding.

Regardless of whether you're in TMA or MMA, you still need to be an all-around fighter, and be able to defend yourself under all ranges and any condition (rainy grass, rainy cement, snow, when wearing heavy clothing, in a crowded room, etc.).

[Matt Stone]

Self-defense can be learned in a weekend. Comprehensive self-defense could be learned over several weekends. Becoming proficient at what you just learned in less than a month could take maybe only 6 months to a year with repeated practice.

Getting to the point where you are the eye of the storm while assailed on all sides by various ruffians and thugs? Ain't happenin' anytime soon, much less "faster" than it took someone 100 years ago...

I have only been training since 1986. Not very long by some standards, quite a while by others. I am only now getting to the point that, intellectually, I don't see much of a difference between techniques... kicks, punches, all the same. Joint locks, throws, all the same. Step forward, step backward, all the same.

Getting to the point where I can actually use this is still some time off yet... Just ask Chufeng (who beat me like a b*tch last weekend! :D ).

But while you can learn a defense against a bear hug, or how to use your keys as a weapon, or how to defend against the mount, in only a weekend, "mastering" those things will take only maybe a lifetime...

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
Self-defense can be learned in a weekend. Comprehensive self-defense could be learned over several weekends. Becoming proficient at what you just learned in less than a month could take maybe only 6 months to a year with repeated practice.

Getting to the point where you are the eye of the storm while assailed on all sides by various ruffians and thugs? Ain't happenin' anytime soon, much less "faster" than it took someone 100 years ago...

I have only been training since 1986. Not very long by some standards, quite a while by others. I am only now getting to the point that, intellectually, I don't see much of a difference between techniques... kicks, punches, all the same. Joint locks, throws, all the same. Step forward, step backward, all the same.

Getting to the point where I can actually use this is still some time off yet... Just ask Chufeng (who beat me like a b*tch last weekend! :D ).

But while you can learn a defense against a bear hug, or how to use your keys as a weapon, or how to defend against the mount, in only a weekend, "mastering" those things will take only maybe a lifetime...

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

Did Chufeng give you a CAPITOL HILL ***** SLAP?:D

[A.R.K.]

And just to clarify things...

My biker comment was just a generic example. Not intended to put a shadow of wrong-doing on that passion for HOGS . :D

In fact my pastor is a biker at age 60 and one awesome evangelist!

:asian:

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by akja
Did Chufeng give you a CAPITOL HILL ***** SLAP?:D

I have been the recipient of the famed CHBS, however he reserves that for special guests and very special treatment for me... I am a little odd in the melon - RyuShiKan could verify that, but he isn't here anymore.

I get hit. I writhe in pain. I get back up. I get hit again. I writhe in pain again. I get back up again. Rinse. Repeat. I get knocked down, I get back up (regardless of the wisdom of that decision).

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

[KennethKu]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
.....I have only been training since 1986. Not very long by some standards, quite a while by others. I am only now getting to the point that, intellectually, I don't see much of a difference between techniques... kicks, punches, all the same. Joint locks, throws, all the same. Step forward, step backward, all the same.

Getting to the point where I can actually use this is still some time off yet...

Please do not take this as a personal swipe. However, I think it is important to point out that many people I know, have been able to reach the stage where they master the perspective of "a punch is just a punch, a kick is just a kick", after a relatively few years of training. Granted, these are dedicated and intelligent individuals who live and breath martial arts. I do not wish to see people mistaken that decades of dedicated training is the prerequisite to such perspective.

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by KennethKu
Please do not take this as a personal swipe. However, I think it is important to point out that many people I know, have been able to reach the stage where they master the perspective of "a punch is just a punch, a kick is just a kick", after a relatively few years of training. Granted, these are dedicated and intelligent individuals who live and breath martial arts. I do not wish to see people mistaken that decades of dedicated training is the prerequisite to such perspective.

Another good post!:asian:

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by KennethKu
Please do not take this as a personal swipe.

I won't if you won't...


However, I think it is important to point out that many people I know, have been able to reach the stage where they master the perspective of "a punch is just a punch, a kick is just a kick", after a relatively few years of training.

Except that wasn't what I was talking about... A punch (lunging, jab, reverse), a backfist (horizontal, forward), a knifehand (circular, horizontal), etc... All the same, really... No difference in their application. Kicks the same way.


Granted, these are dedicated and intelligent individuals who live and breath martial arts. I do not wish to see people mistaken that decades of dedicated training is the prerequisite to such perspective.

Granted there are dedicated and intelligent individuals who, after a short time training, reach a level of understanding. But I don't wish to see people mistaken that that is either a) possible for every person, or b) possible with only a short time in training... Typically, long term training is a prerequisite for such a perspective and understanding.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

[KennethKu]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
I won't if you won't...


None what so ever. Differences in opinions between reasonable adults are expected, and never to be taken personally.



Except that wasn't what I was talking about... A punch (lunging, jab, reverse), a backfist (horizontal, forward), a knifehand (circular, horizontal), etc... All the same, really... No difference in their application. Kicks the same way.

May I ask "same" as in terms of what? It would be helpful if the parameters are defined.



Granted there are dedicated and intelligent individuals who, after a short time training, reach a level of understanding. But I don't wish to see people mistaken that that is either a) possible for every person, or b) possible with only a short time in training... Typically, long term training is a prerequisite for such a perspective and understanding.

Generally true. If we know what "level of understanding" you are referring to, we can avoid talking pass each other. If you were referring to understanding Qi power and "harmony between heavan and earth and men" eastern philosophy as resonated in Asian MA, then we have not been on the same page.

[chufeng]

Ken,

I think he means that once the weapons are trained, all you have to do is think the technique and it happens...

I think corkscrew punch and my punch is already on target...
I think knife hand and it is already on target...
I don't have to think about the mechanics of each technique.

This is WHY it is important to practice correctly...otherwise you "wire in" wrong movements.

I'm certain that he wasn't being so esoteric in his discussion about knowledge...

:asian:
chufeng

[KennethKu]

I see. Instinctive action.

The British Army in their research concluded that if you repeat an action 2400 times, it will become an instinctive action.

[Matt Stone]

I guess I wasn't really all that clear, was I? Trouble is, at the simplistic level of my understanding at this point, I find it hard to put it into adequate explanation...

Chufeng handed me my butt last weekend. Really stepped all over me, introduced me to the interesting nature of how being hit once can hit you three times in a row... ("I can get up! No, I can't! I can get up! No, I can't! I CAN get up! NO, I CAN'T!")

Why does he do this when I talk so much about understanding? Because Yiliquan is a 100% defensive art. We never attack. What is it that I am doing wrong? Attacking! When I train with others, and I am able to be on the defensive side, I find that (along some rather predictable - at least by me - preferential methods) I am able to just "be there" at the right spot to be able to do whatever I want. Except I don't stop to think "gee, I'd really like to do X." I find I am there, and am surprised that I did something to the other guy already.

So punches, kicks, whatever. At some point they really become kind of irrelevant. Feeling the opening, being at the opening, is more important than the techniques used once there. I guess it is this awareness that takes a while to get.

Sure, you can learn to punch passably well in a short time. You can learn some preset counters to situations in a short time, too. But to enter into that moment where it is just a movement of his and a movement of yours and then the opponent is puking up his guts... That is something that can't be learned overnight.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

[FST]

Very nice post Yiliquan,

The level of proficiency you are talking about takes some time to develp IMHO. At this level you are able to execute a technique and it strikes the available target with no conscious thought in that you did not have to think about it but it was just there. I know that I will get nailed for this example but I equate it to Star Wars in which Luke is getting ready to fire his torpedo and is using the guidence system and then Obiwon tells him to use the force and he guides them with it. Not the greatest example but it is strange when you are sparring and you cannot remember what techniques you have done but they occured. I feel that a person can become a good fighter in a couple of years but it takes longer to develop this ability. This is why a 50 year old who has practiced the martial arts for 30 years can beat a 25 year old who is faster/stronger/more endurance that has practiced for 5 years.

[KennethKu]

That might be the truth in combat for Yili art practitioners, but not necessary the truth in combat for another person. If it takes decades of practice for Yili to reach its truth in combat, that is the Yili way. But that is not necessary another person's way. And certainly not the ONLY way.

People seek for different things from their martial arts, and receive different results from their training.

What you posted is true, Yiliquan1. However it isn't exclusive to Yili nor does it requires decades of training to reach that stage. Again, I am not saying this to make light of your skills. Not at all.

Instinctive actions can be, and have been, program trained successfully wthin reasonably short duration.

[sweeper]

well technicly they aren't instinctive are they? They are reflexive, and combined with massive parallel processing in your brain you effectivly bypass the analysis/decision phase of a responce.

so basicly your deductive reasoning capabilities stay intact but somewhat seperate from perception/responce calculation, so by the time you see an opening, it is already exploited.

[KennethKu]

Instinctive actions/reactions: In the presence of a stimulus, eg. attacking hands/legs, or an object, you execute an intercept, a counter or an attack, without invoking conscious analytic effort. A punch flying to your face, and you slip while an intercepting punch launched without the need of thinking about it.

One time I was riding my mountain bike and a car just crossed in front of me. My right foot went out with a front kick. Made contact and I flew backward. Landed on my ass. The bike made total impact with the car. I thought about it later and remember that there wasn't time to think, sense, analyze nor decide. I certainly have never sat around and pre-planned as to what to do when faced with a car while riding on a bike. The thing is, many people would react more or less the same way under a similar situation. It certainly didn't take decades to learn to use your feet to save your ass.

If you spar or fight, you would know what instinctive actions are. Only in training when you think about "with this x attack, then I would do Y counter."

[sweeper]

that is a reaction not an instinct. And you did process the information, but like you said it was not a conscious effort.

An instinct is an action or inclination innate to an individual, the will to save your life is instictual, the action of jumping off your bike is not. What I'm saying is normaly people process conscious thought in a linear/logical manner, but it is quite posable to process it in a non-linear manner where you don't realy know why or how you come to a conclusion because there aren't any apparant steps involved..

[chufeng]

Good post Sweeper...
You are closer to my point than Ken is (sorry Ken)...

The reaction to "intent" is what we train in YiLi...Ken seems to think its an amazing feat...but, it has been taught for a very long time...just in different ways.

When Yiliquan1 attacks...his intent is so strong I have time to pick from a list of possible counters...however, he has recently taken my advice and "cloaked" the intent until it's a) too late, or b) after I react to the feint (which has just enough intent to fool me)...

On the other hand, when he surprises me with a "hidden-intent" attack, I don't really think about anything at all...IT just happens (much to Yiliquan1's chagrin)...

As he has pointed out, YiLi is a defensive system designed on joining with an attack and neutralizing it (in many different ways). It is not an art of ATTACK...It feels wrong to attack, and it is against our philosophy...so Poor guy is at a HUGE disadvantage when I say "attack me."

But, I am also able to show him where his attack is weak...

He's getting much better at hiding intent, and I think it will soon be my time to be the attacker and give him the opportunity to hand me my ass.

:asian:
chufeng

[sweeper]

I think the various sides of this discusion are simply out of sync. That is to say It seems like both of you are essentialy talking about the same things but diffrent aspects..

[chufeng]

I think we are talking about a similar thing, but at different levels.

YiLi teaches to react to the intent of the attacker...

According to old traditional Chinese boxing methods...intent moves first, then qi, then the physical body...
We train to feel the movement of qi...(no it can't be measured)...so when one intends to attack, we feel it. Most of the time, we feel it before the attacker moves; so, we know where the attack is coming from and where it is going...very easy to counter with that information.

Ken is talking about reacting instinctively (without having to think, it's not really instinct) to visual cues (no matter how slight)...that is where we start...but that is also where someone can feint an attack to open you up...It is easier to lure in someone who uses visual cues.

We actually practice blind-folded, or in a dark room, from time to time specifically to limit visual reaction...

:asian:
chufeng

[KennethKu]

Originally posted by chufeng ....The reaction to "intent" is what we train in YiLi...Ken seems to think its an amazing feat...but, it has been taught for a very long time...just in different ways.


To "sense" an opponent's intent before hand is the equavalent of cracking the German Enigma and reading the Japanese Navy code in WWII. If you know before hand what strike is coming from which weapon, then you have reached the highest level of fighting skills. Very few people have achieved such mastery. My most heartfelt congratulations to you, Chufeng. I mean this sincerely. (Believe me, if someone else told me they can "sense" intent, they would get a roll-eye from me.)




....As he has pointed out, YiLi is a defensive system designed on joining with an attack and neutralizing it (in many different ways). It is not an art of ATTACK...It feels wrong to attack, and it is against our philosophy...so Poor guy is at a HUGE disadvantage when I say "attack me.".......

Normally, to limit one to defence only is handicapping oneself, as combat has no rule. Offence is the best defence, are not just empty words. Take the most ruthless H2H combat, the military. They teach "speed kills" with which, you attack with full force, full speed, full ferocity. They didn't choose this philosophy because it is cool or trendy, but rather it works consistently.

Your defence must be exceptionally powerful to compensate for such handicap.

[KennethKu]

Originally posted by chufeng
.....Ken is talking about reacting instinctively (without having to think, it's not really instinct) to visual cues (no matter how slight)...that is where we start...but that is also where someone can feint an attack to open you up...It is easier to lure in someone who uses visual cues.....

The attack might be 1. a deception, 2, with extremely fast "starting speed".

This is nothing new. The solution is to attack first with your own feints and "speedy kills" tactic, ie to "awe and shock". The solution is hardly new nor proprietary neither. The British SAS has been training their troops in "speed kills" all along.

[chufeng]

Ken,

Mastery? Hardly...

We actually start teaching this from the very first (beginner) promotion...so, almost any of our black sash level folks can do it.

It seems "magical" but it is something each of you can do.
It requires a regimen of qigong combined with sensitivity drills.
Sifu Starr has a specific training method which includes staff and belt work...PM me if you want the specifics...

I had the opportunity to train with one of our senior black sashes and one of his students a few months ago...I had not met either of them prior to that meeting...But the technique for listening to intent held true...neither could touch me if I chose not to let them.

Once the defensive aspects are fully developed, the "offensive" piece is added...now it is not offense in the sense of an all out attack...it is making the other person believe that you ARE going to launch an offensive attack...when he reacts to that, then go over the top of his defense...It is feinting with false intent...When you know where to hit, it requires very little force to bring the opponent down...

Then there is the YiLi shield...it takes the idea of manipulating energy to another level and really requires a full understanding of the philosophy of the system. It allows one to stand and absorb the attack (no defense)...options for countermeasures vary depending on the attack...but what better feint than to let the opponent think he actually hit you...once his attack is fully extended, strike fast and with accuracy (or not, sometimes taking the guy's best shot and just smiling at him ends it).

I frequently laugh and joke when sparring...it is a fun time for me...and it screws up the opponents focus.

:asian:
chufeng

[chufeng]

Yiliquan1 can share an experience he had very early in his training...I use a one inch drill from time to time...I will allow the defender to retreat one inch, no more, and he has to counter before the second strike comes...

Distance and timing are joined...but it requires an "active" stance...you can't just step back one inch...you have to shift back and keep the legs loaded so you can release like a spring...

It is best to keep retreats to a minimum because you have to regain the ground lost by backing up...if you do retreat, keep it small...one inch is all you need. Better to change distance by advancing at an angle.

:asian:
chufeng

[chufeng]

Ken
The attack might be 1. a deception

That is why reading intent is so important...very few people can fake intent...if they can, your best bet is to turn and run.

:asian:
chufeng

[Matt Stone]

The very first exposure to Chufeng that I had was around 1986 or so... I had been training for less than 3 or 4 months. He was visiting the school, and it ended up being just he and I left in the school after class.

He allowed me one inch between the heel of my rear foot and the wall, told me to "load" my fighting stance, and react to his punch. The idea was to retreat only that one inch, and follow the punch back in, allowing it to nearly literally "suck" me back in to strike him...

I didn't fare too well, and ended up being impaled on his punch repeatedly... :(

The entire idea is, missed by an inch, missed by a mile. The deviation of a strike need only be so much that it allows for the strike to miss its target. Causing the strike to miss by more than that creates an additional "space" in which other strikes may be inserted before the defender is able to launch his own strikes.

As for "cloaking" intent, I have only managed a very few times to calm down the "locomotive" of my intent so that Chufeng has a more difficult time reacting to it... From over a decade of military training, my naturally "take and hold" oriented attitude, and the methods by which I apply Yiliquan, I have a rather "direct" approach - charge in, punish and destroy. Apparently is is pretty easy to read no matter how calm I try to make my exterior.

However, the times I have managed to camoflauge my intent, I have entered in almost unopposed. It is only in hindsight, however, that I can realize that I did what I did... At the moment it is nearly indescribable... It just "happens," like water flowing smoothly over a rock. Then BANG you are on top of your opponent.

Neat stuff.

Additionally, though, I must admit that I possess too much of a "wade in and slaughter" approach to fighting... When I match up against our juniors, because I know they are incapable of doing much that will give me any real cause for concern (after the beatings I have taken at the hands of RyuShiKan, Chufeng and "the Kerker Principle," I'm not really concerned about too much else), I have a bad habit of just very literally walking up to them, no stance, no correct movement, just walking up and letting them throw whatever they like...

With Chufeng, on the other hand, I enter in with great amounts of caution, borne of too much time spent getting intimate with the ground in our training areas...

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

[chufeng]

and I wouldn't wish anyone to suffer the punching force of the YiLi Fatboy...for all of his girth, he moves very fast and hits like a mule...lots of fun for us twisted folk.

:asian:
chufeng

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by chufeng
and I wouldn't wish anyone to suffer the punching force of the YiLi Fatboy...for all of his girth, he moves very fast and hits like a mule...lots of fun for us twisted folk.

:asian:
chufeng

Awww, you're just being nice... In all seriousness, I don't think I hit all that hard. I really feel like my strikes need a lot more work before they are where they should be for my satisfaction.

I've always had a dream to be able to punch someone in the sternum and have their spine snap. Until I can do that, I'll always feel that my strikes need more work...

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

[Jill666]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
I've always had a dream to be able to punch someone in the sternum and have their spine snap.

You've had that dream too??? :boing2:

But truly it's a bit frustrating to have all my best work happen by instinct and flow when I don't consciously intend it- because I haven't reached the point of being able to do that twice. :cuss:

You know- when someone compliments you and you say- uh, yeah, I meant that. :rolleyes:

As for cloaking my intent, so far I'm about as subtle as a jackhammer. If I pull off the feint-strike, I'm so jazzed it worked that I get frozen in the moment and eat a punch or three. :shrug:

:rofl:

Well, I'm a work in progress I guess. :D

[Matt Stone]

"Cloaking" intent is more than just throwing a feint. In Yiliquan, we are taught "never to feint," since any feint should be thrown as if it were the real technique (since it may well land, and if it does so with all the power of a falling leaf, you might find yourself in a bad place pretty quickly...). So we find ourselves only throwing "the real technique" with every single technique thrown.

"Cloaking" intent has much more to do with quieting the mind and not thinking about throwing any particular technique... The technique actually feels like it is pulled out of you, rather than it being something you planned on doing.

Cool stuff, but I still have a long way to go.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

[yilisifu]

Body and mind are inseperably united...:D

[Jill666]

Nice clarification.

BTW, I'm not ignoring your question re: Ninpo stances, just reflecting. I'm having a difficult time putting the idea into words. Will get back on that.

[KennethKu]

Originally posted by chufeng
....It seems "magical" but it is something each of you can do.
It requires a regimen of qigong combined with sensitivity drills.
Sifu Starr has a specific training method which includes staff and belt work...PM me if you want the specifics...
.....
Chufeng,
It would be an honor to read about your training method. Please forward at your convenience. Much appreciated.

[KennethKu]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
"Cloaking" intent is more than just throwing a feint. In Yiliquan, we are taught "never to feint," since any feint should be thrown as if it were the real technique (since it may well land, and if it does so with all the power of a falling leaf, you might find yourself in a bad place pretty quickly...). So we find ourselves only throwing "the real technique" with every single technique thrown.

"Cloaking" intent has much more to do with quieting the mind and not thinking about throwing any particular technique... The technique actually feels like it is pulled out of you, rather than it being something you planned on doing.

Cool stuff, but I still have a long way to go.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

A Poker face? Or the Vulcan's emotionless demeanor? lol