Street Kung Fu

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, but a spinning Wushu flip isn't going to help you in the streets all that much.

Kung Fu, when learned and taught correctly, is just hard, brutal, devastating combat, nothing short of the brutality of Muay Thai or BJJ.
 
I think that the learning curve is much longer than for many of the other arts. CMA doesn't get incredibly impressive until it becomes more internalized. It's not as straightforward as other systems, not as intuitive. But, once the techniques are truly learned, I feel it to be a more complete system, and certainly one that can be implemented long into old age.
Hence, I don't think CMA's are good for those wanting to learn strict self-defense: to spend a few months and then be able to be the bar-brawl champion. But, if one wants to truly master their own body, internally and externally, and along the way become a bad@ss, then I feel it's the best choice out there.
 
Isrephael said:
I think that the learning curve is much longer than for many of the other arts. CMA doesn't get incredibly impressive until it becomes more internalized. It's not as straightforward as other systems, not as intuitive. But, once the techniques are truly learned, I feel it to be a more complete system, and certainly one that can be implemented long into old age.
Hence, I don't think CMA's are good for those wanting to learn strict self-defense: to spend a few months and then be able to be the bar-brawl champion. But, if one wants to truly master their own body, internally and externally, and along the way become a bad@ss, then I feel it's the best choice out there.
I agree that the learning curve is longer with CMA. Kung Fu is not based on natural movements and thus must be learned and drilled to be effective. Its effectivenss although contingent on the players skill, is limitless. I dont agree however that it is not effective quickly. Measured against itself, the effectivness of beginners is not even comparable to those with higher skill, but for pure self defense and life or death application, I think it is extremely effective, even early on. Sport fighting it is not and I dont think it lends itself well to sport fighting.

As a point of business....
- MT Mod Note -
Please dont attempt to circumvent the profanity filter, we would prefer you just go ahead and type what you like and allow the filter to perform its job. Instead of typing bad@ss simply type badass and allow the filter to work. This word is not filtered so its not an issue.

No harm done, simply for future refrence for all of us. Thank you.
MT Senior Mod
7starmantis
Adam C
 
Its funny how something could not be based on natural movements yet still be more efficient than your natural movement a contradiction yet true.

THe first 3-5 years you can definitely be behind the curve compared to other thing but then you catch up rapidly.
 
47MartialMan said:
But given that Kung Fu is a skill, then anything on the street that is effective is effective kung fu?
In every intellegent discussion there must be set definitions that are accepted and we are using the term "kung fu" to mean CMA. Lets not get into semantics, we are still saying the same thing.

7sm
 
7starmantis said:
In every intellegent discussion there must be set definitions that are accepted and we are using the term "kung fu" to mean CMA. Lets not get into semantics, we are still saying the same thing.
7sm
I get what you mean...but my old Chinese Shifu, has us thinking this way. Per it not meaning CMA.....
 
With sincerity, I do not think that particular post (But given that Kung Fu is a skill, then anything on the street that is effective is effective kung fu?) was entirely about semantics. For it was a belief/view/opinion, instilled into my mind.

For example, how can UFC be truely "ultimate"?

Or someone believing that God had helped man create martial arts, in some way.

Or that Chi/Ki does (or does not) exist.

Or that most fights end up on the ground.

Or that there is the difference (or not) between Kenpo and Kempo.

In my view/opinion, the term kung fu is not describing CMA alone. Anyone practicing a martial art/combat/or auto mechanics, etc., has gong fu. Thus, for me to look at a CMA, I would look at the origin or system. Or per the term Chuan/Kuen/Kuyhn or Chuan Fa.

:) This was a discussion that I had with someone about computers-PC or Mac....They informing that either "IBM" or Mac, are both PC's (Personal Computers).

I guess this could or anything else be considered semantical, pending the viewpoint.
 
It is very much semantics and is not the topic of this thread.

7sm
 
47MartialMan said:
So if I train in a style that is street effective, I cannot call it street Kung Fu?
You can call it whatever you like, the name changes nothing as you just said. So, using the term kung fu changes nothing in our discussion. The words "Street" and "kung fu" alone do not make this topic. This thread needs to return to the original topic immediately or it serves no purpose and will be closed.

7sm
 
Please, let us just use the term "kung fu" to avoid confusion???:flame:
 
I have this sneaking suspicion that you're being baited, Adam.
 
Getting to topic....per how I was taught/told:

We do not train for wushu-ish properties of athleticism, performance, or competition.

We train for defense, the drills, called gungs, or repetitious routines, that will bore the average beginner with a mindset on flash. Thus, the results become skills (gung fu)

Several of us, HAD, used it in defense situations, including ONE of us had legal problems/court because of using it. (Semantics among other things turned the case and won it in our favor-I can post the short story of this if anyone should request)

What is it that makes kung fu applicable to being used on the street?
How one is trained. We are trained and told that it ISN"T a martial art, but development of skills (gung fu)

What is it that makes in ineffective for pure self defense?
Too many emphasize long drawn out moves and/or xings (hsings/zhings), instead of realizing the gungs, are simplistic methods focusing on the particular skill (gung fu)

If you study CMA do you do so for self defense?
We train under a Chinese in America, but he and/or we, never consider it a CMA. The reason, perhaps, Shifu doesn't not want to consider it prejudicial. In fact, others that train with us of higher skill (gung fu). Shifu would observe a particular gung being progressed by a student and state that their gung fu (skill), is developing or had developed for that particular routine.
Speaking of Chinese vocabulary, does anyone know the Chinese word for "Grand Master"? Our Shimu, is our historian and had recently posed this question to us. Both Shifu and Shimu speak Mandarin. However, Shimu reads, writes, and speaks sanskrit also. Speaking of which Sifu, is not pronounced "Sea-Foo" but has close to a "Sh" sound like Shifu.

If so, why did you decide on kung fu for that self defense training?
Our Shifu trains us that way. Because it is a acquired or developed skill (gung fu) used for protection. It has another property of health, but when examined by a modern physician, such as mine, they sort of conjecture on how certian body functions and muscles look or behave.

Can kung fu be compared to systems like KM as far as usefullness or realistic usage goes?
Again, the answer being the same this question;
What is it that makes kung fu applicable to being used on the street?
It is how one is trained and progresses with their skill (gung fu)

Naming Kung Fu as only a CMA, decriminates it per semantics. For anyone practicing a skill, practices gung fu.

Speaking of semantics, in Webster's Dictionary, they define martial arts as:
..any one of Asian hand-to-hand combat or self defense methods, such a Judo, Karate, etc., usually practiced as a sport.
As martial artists, shall we allow such semantics to hold per this definition? As martial artists, upon reading this, would we want to clarify, or change this definition?
 
47MartialMan said:
If you study CMA do you do so for self defense?
We train under a Chinese in America, but he and/or we, ever consider it a CMA. The reason, Shifu doesn't not want to consider it prejudicial. In fact, other that train with us of higher skill (gung fu). Shifu would observe a pratuclar gund being progress by a student and state that their gung fu (skill), is developing or had developed for that particular routine.
Speaking of Chinese vocabulary, does anyone know the Chinese word for "Grand Master"? Our Shimu, is our historian and had recently posed this question to us. Both Shifu and Shimu speak Manderin. However, Shimu reads, writes, and speaks sanskrit. Speaking of which Sifu, is not pronounced "Sea-Foo" but has close to a "Sh" sound like Shifu.
Well actually if you're using the Cantonese spelling, then you would use the Cantonese pronunciation of Sifu as such. Considering I practice a Cantonese based art with my sifu, sigung & remainder of the teaching family all speaking Cantonese & Sei Yap... it'd be silly to try to correct them, wouldn't it?

The Mandarin for "grandmaster" is Shizu which also based on usage can stand for the founder of a system. Why is your shimu asking you for the word?
 
clfsean said:
Well actually if you're using the Cantonese spelling, then you would use the Cantonese pronunciation of Sifu as such. Considering I practice a Cantonese based art with my sifu, sigung & remainder of the teaching family all speaking Cantonese & Sei Yap... it'd be silly to try to correct them, wouldn't it?

The Mandarin for "grandmaster" is Shizu which also based on usage can stand for the founder of a system. Why is your shimu asking you for the word?
Because we have a certain mentality training as well as physical. And I spell Sifu, with the Sh, because of pronounciation/romaticism as I type it:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top