Fantasy Martial Arts

[Kung Fu Wang]

He describes most of the problems with "traditional" martial arts today.

What was the true "traditional" CMA training?

Here are examples. If you want to learn

- sword, you need to go into the woods and swing your sword to chop down 1,000 tree branches.
- joint locking, you need to go into the woods, use one hand to hold on a tree branch, spin and drop your body, use the other upper arm to break that tree branch. You will need to break 1,000 tree branches this way.
- chain punches, you will need to train "1 step 3 punches" for 3 years.
- ...

In other words, the true "traditional" CMA training did not start from the "form" but started from much more basic.

 

[DaveB]

Except not all traditional martial art fall in to those traps.

Judo for example.

You mean the modern combat sport of judo?

Old judo had forms at high level.

 

[DaveB]

Personally I'm on the fence. Some of what he says are problems are issues in some school's but his broad brush approach is ridiculous.

 

[KPM]

That's what most of your posts on this forum are attempting to do for yourself.



You have to insult people, calling them fantasy martial artists because they disagree with you... Your face-saving tactics are awful.



Neither he nor you know most TCMAs.

You can probably only name a handful, and there are literally thousands.

You are just trying to promote your "Wing Chun Boxing" by style-bashing others.

I see you are still arguing and looking for every opportunity to discredit me. You never change!

 

[drop bear]

You mean the modern combat sport of judo?

Old judo had forms at high level.

Traditional isn't really age though.

 

[anerlich]

I'm not particularly impressed. Most of this is pretty obvious and I disagree with other bits. You can argue about the value of forms or points but without them what you are doing isn't Wing Chun. Tradition isn't everything but it is definitely something.

As for not having complicated terminology or techniques, Tenth Planet Jiu Jitsu intentionally use weird names for obfuscation while coaching in competition.

Sometimes nicknames are necessary as the technical terminology would take several breaths. Just call it a Cryangle, Locoplata or Berimbolo.

Most techniques are both simple and complicated. I've met guys that can speak authoritatively and informatively on a straight footlock for more than twenty minutes. You can convey the fundamentals quickly. Explaining the details that make it more effective can take a lot longer.

 

[jobo]

What Martial D said above. I also disagree with the part about rejecting forms practice. But I thought the rest of the article where he talks about lack of competitive sparring, trying to save "face" and the rest were pretty "on the money." He describes most of the problems with "traditional" martial arts today. He also speaks to some of the points brought up on the other thread in this forum about "What is Wrong with Wing Chun." He describes a lot of what is wrong with Wing Chun! So yeah. I thought it was a pretty good article. But maybe it hits a little "too close to home" for some in this forum???

he tried to lump just about everything into his fantasy category, even k v is in there and military combat training and then says as an absolute fact that they are no good for self defence, that is fundamentally untrue, they may not be as good as combat,styles, but all of them are useful for a self,defence to some,degree or another, dependent of course on the physical attributes and,skill of both you and your attacker

 

[PiedmontChun]

Judo has kata, and it has been a part of the system since it's inception at the Kodokan under Kano, though it does not play as big of a role as Karate systems where it is more prevalent.
Judo players also practice the entrance of a particular throw over and over. The idea is that to setup a throw 25 times, and throw once with power and good form.... is more beneficial than 10 sloppy throws. While it is very technique based training, I do see similarity or a parallel to WC's emphasis on forms to teach the body how to move. Every fighting system or art has ways of transmitting that information. Having a boxing coach stop you while you are working on the heavy bag and correct your jab, then you go back to it drilling that into muscle memory..... not all that different, just less formal and definitely less esoteric than most TMA's methods of training the body.

 

[KPM]

Many years ago in the "other" forum, Terrence Niehoff used to hammer Wing Chun people with a lot of the same points that are in this article. It didn't go over too well then either.

 

[jobo]

Many years ago in the "other" forum, Terrence Niehoff used to hammer Wing Chun people with a lot of the same points that are in this article. It didn't go over too well then either.

but the points made vary between grossly untrue and gross exaggeration, there is nothing there than can be said to be,fundamentally accurate

 

[PiedmontChun]

I'm sorry, but this article is silly and full of straw man arguments.

I can sit and enjoy the IP Man movies as entertaining......I know of no fellow student who reveres Donnie Yen. That's just absurd. If he is a "poster boy" for WC, then it would be to outsiders with no other knowledge.

Forms and kata are very different things, and he just throws them all in the same box and dismisses them equally, while proclaiming to teach an art of hiss own innovation, but based on an art which would have required him to learn the forms to even begin to understand in the first place. Facepalm.

I'm not even going to bother to comment on the rest. Cranky on a Monday morning.

 

[Juany118]

I would say the article is uneven. As an example I disagree strongly with his takes on the difference between self defense and fighting, the pseudoscience bit and his last point. I will explain why at the end. I think people are missing the first part of the article. He is speaking from growing from the neophyte student to the instructor over decades. So let me be less wordy...

Forms (kata) practice: are not how you fight. If the instructor doesn't put you in sparing to turn the movements in the form into a practical skill you have found a fantasy Martial Art.

Belief: do not become trapped by dogma. Not every martial art is meant for every practitioner, so allow the evidence of your success, or failure, to guide you.
(I say the above for two reasons... First using Martial Arts is more than the physical techniques. As an example some martial arts also have different mind sets and if the mind set/philosophy of the Martial Art conflicts with the practitioners personality/temperament it just won't work. Some people may say "studying the MA can change your personality/temperament" but that is easier said than done. Second some TMAs, over the years [especially some TCMAs], have evolved to be vehicles for performance in competitions and not practical fighting. Thank the Chinese Government for that.)

Non-competitive: part of the form issue... there is no full spar/free fighting to turn the art into a practical fighting skill. So drills become an extension of the form issue.

Complicated terminology and tactics: When you teach combatives you need to keep to the K.I.S.S principle. If you use terminology that can confuse the student, or use tactics that have 5 steps when 2 or three would be more effective you create both cognitive and physical inefficiency which can make or break a fight.

Secret Moves : ( some may find my belief here odd considering what my GM said early in his teaching career). Because it remains "secret" and is only handed down to "select" students, you never actually know if it's real. Even if it exists how can you see it's power because you will never see it in practice for fear of the secret "getting out." It really does smack of the "learn the mystic arts of the Far East" marketing.

(it is also imo simply disingenuous. You are essentially saying "pay me for an incomplete curriculum" to the majority of your students.)

A hierarchical system: I definitely agree with this. Some TKD, and Karate federations go to far with this imo. In short they reward time in the dojo at least as much as they do skill, sometimes more. For a good example of this see the history of Dolph Lundgren. 1979 at the World Open Championships they had to find a Brown Belt for him to wear because he was technically only a Green Belt, but he was good enough to actually make it to the final round against Makoto Nakamura. He went the distance and Makoto (a 2nd Dan Black Belt) won the title in a very controversial decision.

Okay onto where I disagree...

Self-defense, not fighting: My issue is with he last point, "I can't tell the difference." There is one. Self-defense, imo, is first about avoiding the fight in the first place. Second it is about surviving, if that means simply opening up an avenue of escape, that works. To me fighting is about "winning" the fight, in other words, "last man standing." You can survive using self-defense even if both are still standing (or at least capable of doing so.

Pseudoscience isn't science: We used to have an actual Scientist in my school who said "Wing Chun is a class in practical Newtonian Physics." Many martial arts, if not all, are just that. The angles of deflections, the use of momentum, the body mechanics to generate power, these are all scientific. The difference is some teachers will point out the physics/science behind the techniques and others don't. Regardless the science is always there.

The origin story: TBH in my school the only part of the "Origin story" that was ever mentioned is that GM William Cheung was a student of Yip Man. Beyond that the art is "sold" on the fact that my Sifu used it operationally. He and his Sifu both instruct it to Local, State and Federal LE and that one of my other instructors has used it in unsanctioned competitions that you can see on YouTube. So in other words it is sold on the basis that, anecdotally, a number of my teachers have used it in reality and it worked. My anecdotal experience on the job confirms this. So I suppose I am saying that he seems to forget that looking at any Community (in this case the WC community) as a monolith leads to the Fallacy of composition.

I think he kinda lets slip why it's uneven in the end. When he talks about being "black listed" from the WC community. This definitely seems to be written by someone who is disillusioned with said community so overall the article is a tad passive aggressive imo.

Lastly, on a side note. Donnie Yen actually has been in more than a few fights. His mother (a martial arts instructor) sent him back to China from the US because he was running with a Chinatown Street Gang and getting into fights, then in 1993 he put 8 people in the hospital for harassing his girlfriend as they left a nightclub. He was actually initially arrested for that incident but was released after the police completed the investigation. Now since it was 1993 he didn't use WC because he didn't study it, to my knowledge, until the first film (released in 2008), but he can fight none the less I think.

 

[JowGaWolf]

What was the true "traditional" CMA training?

Here are examples. If you want to learn

- sword, you need to go into the woods and swing your sword to chop down 1,000 tree branches.
- joint locking, you need to go into the woods, use one hand to hold on a tree branch, spin and drop your body, use the other upper arm to break that tree branch. You will need to break 1,000 tree branches this way.
- chain punches, you will need to train "1 step 3 punches" for 3 years.
- ...

In other words, the true "traditional" CMA training did not start from the "form" but started from much more basic.

Breaking tree limbs is traditional training for chi na. Most people aren't aware of that. Thanks for mentioning it.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Articles like this are useless because not everyone takes a martial art to learn how to fight with it. In order to write such an article one would need to talk to and view the fighting skills of the school's fighters. trying to see fighting validity in those who don't train to fight is a waste of time.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Breaking tree limbs is traditional training for chi na. Most people aren't aware of that. Thanks for mentioning it.

When I was 7, my brother in law taught me how to hit my stick along a tree surface. He told me that if I could be good at that, the moment that my stick can contact on my opponent's stick, I can slide my stick along his stick, hit his fingers, and drop his stick.

2 students wanted to learn the spear technique from a spear master. The spear master asked them to do the following drill for a year:

- clockwise parry,
- counter-clockwise parry,
- stab.

1 year later, both came back to the master. After the master had examined their spear drill, the master asked them to go home and repeat the same drill for another year. After both students had spent 3 years in this simple drill, the master asked both to go home and never came back. The students said, "But you have not taught us any spear form yet." The spear master said, "If you are good in this spear drill, you don't need to learn any spear form."

That's the true "traditional" CMA training. The true "traditional" CMA training did not start from the "form" training but started from much more basic.

 

[Steve]

I would say the article is uneven. As an example I disagree strongly with his takes on the difference between self defense and fighting, the pseudoscience bit and his last point. I will explain why at the end. I think people are missing the first part of the article. He is speaking from growing from the neophyte student to the instructor over decades. So let me be less wordy...

Forms (kata) practice: are not how you fight. If the instructor doesn't put you in sparing to turn the movements in the form into a practical skill you have found a fantasy Martial Art.

Belief: do not become trapped by dogma. Not every martial art is meant for every practitioner, so allow the evidence of your success, or failure, to guide you.
(I say the above for two reasons... First using Martial Arts is more than the physical techniques. As an example some martial arts also have different mind sets and if the mind set/philosophy of the Martial Art conflicts with the practitioners personality/temperament it just won't work. Some people may say "studying the MA can change your personality/temperament" but that is easier said than done. Second some TMAs, over the years [especially some TCMAs], have evolved to be vehicles for performance in competitions and not practical fighting. Thank the Chinese Government for that.)

Non-competitive: part of the form issue... there is no full spar/free fighting to turn the art into a practical fighting skill. So drills become an extension of the form issue.

Complicated terminology and tactics: When you teach combatives you need to keep to the K.I.S.S principle. If you use terminology that can confuse the student, or use tactics that have 5 steps when 2 or three would be more effective you create both cognitive and physical inefficiency which can make or break a fight.

Secret Moves : ( some may find my belief here odd considering what my GM said early in his teaching career). Because it remains "secret" and is only handed down to "select" students, you never actually know if it's real. Even if it exists how can you see it's power because you will never see it in practice for fear of the secret "getting out." It really does smack of the "learn the mystic arts of the Far East" marketing.

(it is also imo simply disingenuous. You are essentially saying "pay me for an incomplete curriculum" to the majority of your students.)

A hierarchical system: I definitely agree with this. Some TKD, and Karate federations go to far with this imo. In short they reward time in the dojo at least as much as they do skill, sometimes more. For a good example of this see the history of Dolph Lundgren. 1979 at the World Open Championships they had to find a Brown Belt for him to wear because he was technically only a Green Belt, but he was good enough to actually make it to the final round against Makoto Nakamura. He went the distance and Makoto (a 2nd Dan Black Belt) won the title in a very controversial decision.

Okay onto where I disagree...

Self-defense, not fighting: My issue is with he last point, "I can't tell the difference." There is one. Self-defense, imo, is first about avoiding the fight in the first place. Second it is about surviving, if that means simply opening up an avenue of escape, that works. To me fighting is about "winning" the fight, in other words, "last man standing." You can survive using self-defense even if both are still standing (or at least capable of doing so.

Pseudoscience isn't science: We used to have an actual Scientist in my school who said "Wing Chun is a class in practical Newtonian Physics." Many martial arts, if not all, are just that. The angles of deflections, the use of momentum, the body mechanics to generate power, these are all scientific. The difference is some teachers will point out the physics/science behind the techniques and others don't. Regardless the science is always there.

The origin story: TBH in my school the only part of the "Origin story" that was ever mentioned is that GM William Cheung was a student of Yip Man. Beyond that the art is "sold" on the fact that my Sifu used it operationally. He and his Sifu both instruct it to Local, State and Federal LE and that one of my other instructors has used it in unsanctioned competitions that you can see on YouTube. So in other words it is sold on the basis that, anecdotally, a number of my teachers have used it in reality and it worked. My anecdotal experience on the job confirms this. So I suppose I am saying that he seems to forget that looking at any Community (in this case the WC community) as a monolith leads to the Fallacy of composition.

I think he kinda lets slip why it's uneven in the end. When he talks about being "black listed" from the WC community. This definitely seems to be written by someone who is disillusioned with said community so overall the article is a tad passive aggressive imo.

Lastly, on a side note. Donnie Yen actually has been in more than a few fights. His mother (a martial arts instructor) sent him back to China from the US because he was running with a Chinatown Street Gang and getting into fights, then in 1993 he put 8 people in the hospital for harassing his girlfriend as they left a nightclub. He was actually initially arrested for that incident but was released after the police completed the investigation. Now since it was 1993 he didn't use WC because he didn't study it, to my knowledge, until the first film (released in 2008), but he can fight none the less I think.

Excellent post.

 

[Phobius]

Forms (kata) practice:
I ignore this point, it is silly. Forms never harm anyone unless you missuse them.

Belief:
Silly argument, all arts have belief. If they did not noone would train them. You believe the art is this or that great, and as such you start training in it, otherwise you would just as likely pick another art more closer to your home.

Non-competitive:
Non-competitive may not be the problem but pressure testing is a major concern. An art needs pressure testing and for non-competitive arts this sometimes becomes a problem because some wants to be fighters and others want to be teachers. There has to be room for both.

Complicated terminology and tactics:
Everything is complicated at first. Think BJJ is easy to learn and grasp just like that? BJJ is by UFC standard not a fantasy art.

Secret Moves :
Marketing, you lure people to your club so that you can pay the bills. Those that are good students will get that extra juice not because it is kept secret from others but because others will never understand or find out about it. It is all there. Problem is you have to train something so much that it becomes second nature because the body will only use what is deemed basic when in a fight.

Agree or dont agree with the secret moves but it is marketing and says nothing about the art but about the teachers approach to creating a business.

A hierarchical system:
See grading not as symbol of skill but symbol of basic knowledge. Like following a set of courses that for each course they complete they earn a grade. Once you receive a grade it tells you nothing about what you have learned, only what it is pointless for the teacher to spend time learning you again.

You group people up and make it more efficient to teach all 'equally'. It harms noone but the one thinking a grade means skill.

Self-defense, not fighting:
This is just silly. A pressure testing is what is essential. Self defense or fighting can be both the same or not. Self defense is a lot more than fighting. What does it mean to the art? Nothing if the student is taught in the same way no matter what.

Pseudoscience isn't science:
There is a lot of things in this world people call science when it is not. But yes, almost all arts are scientifically proven. You can do it, therefore it works at least this once.

The origin story:
What does this have to do with anything? What if an alien came to earth to teach boxing to the first ever boxer. What then, would it change the art? Nope. Only thing it would do is have more fans wanting to investigate if the origin against all odds can be partially true.

All in all it is an interesting topic about what needs to be present in a beginners training. But the answer to all his rant summed up is following: Pressure test an art.

 

[LFJ]

I see you are still arguing and looking for every opportunity to discredit me. You never change!

I did neither.

Just noticed that when people disagreed with you, you said they "obviously didn't read the whole article".

And when they confirmed they had, you said it "must hit a little too close to home", iow "you must be fantasy martial artists."

I just think it's funny how you react to people disagreeing with you. Either deflect or insult.

 

[drop bear]

Forms (kata) practice: are not how you fight. If the instructor doesn't put you in sparing to turn the movements in the form into a practical skill you have found a fantasy Martial Art.

Yeah that was missed i think. I have conversed with people who think kata was fighting. And their lack of fighting ability was due to their lack of understanding the kata.

And that is just dumb.

But if you are doing kata as a movement training exercise then it works fine.

A drill is not fighting.

It is something we have to explain a fair bit when we go from drills to resisted. And for some reason the technique they learned ten minutes ago doesn't just work. Of course for us. (And I have stressed this as a big deal sepparating fantasy from reality) If it is resisted. It should not work untill it does work. Sorry if you dont get a double leg takedown for months. Sometimes that is how long it takes.

That is where styles like krav move into full retard in their training. They take a drill. And then move that drill into full contact. Whithout bothering about the other guy fighting back part.

 

[Flying Crane]

Personally, I don't see any reason why someone should be concerned with what someone else puts up on the internet in a blog like this. Decide for yourself if your training meets your needs. Lots of people seem to have a Life Mission to try and discredit anything that anyone else does if it does not conform to their own narrowly defined ideals.

I ignore articles like this one. I have ignored this article too. It's not worth the time it takes to read it.

If you think Wing Chun has something wrong with it, then do something else. Don't worry your pretty little head about what other people are doing. Ain't your business.