Anybody ever heard of shaolin-do???

[Flatlander]

No kidding. Someone just might jump in and say, "Hey! I've heard of that!"
Or not, who knows. :idunno:

 

[47MartialMan]

What Japanese and Korean arts?

In order from the late 60's to 80's:

Judo/Jiu Jitsu (slash means same instructor-two classes)
Kuk Sul Won
Tae Kwon Do/Hapkido
Aikido

 

[47MartialMan]

I think you'll find, 47MM, that claims like this will earn you no respect to speak of. If you've trained in an art nobody has heard of (as I do, at least most folks have never heard of it), simply name the art. Don't do your audience's thinking for them - let them say "I've never heard of that. What is it?" instead of saying "You'd never know what it is, so I won't bother naming it."

Just some constructive criticism. Take it for what it is worth...

Thanks for the advice......

The Chinese system is called
Chin Ga Kuyhn....

 

[47MartialMan]

No kidding. Someone just might jump in and say, "Hey! I've heard of that!"
Or not, who knows. :idunno:

Rightly so.....I see what you mean.

But in analogy of a local restaurant or business, how will one know of a family art on a national or global scale?

 

[sifu Adams]

Every body talks about the "Core Movements" of CMA what are they? who can name them. what fighting tech. are the Core Movements. As for mantis I thought one of the key movements to the mantis is that it's a inside fighter, you work to get your opponet as close to you so you can fight at a 0-1 step fighting range. I thought the mantis used pressure points with fast quick movements that would end the fight fast and quick? Call me a fool but I have watched a real mantis before and it used it's front two legs to strike and the hook on them to pull the pray in. he also used his middle legs to stike (like a instep kick). now what is the "Core" of the mantis. SD mantis uses these tech. in the forms. Dose everyone else use these movements? If they are not then the whole history of Shaolin kung fu (where they watched the anamials to get their movements) is not true. All who have talked bad about SD and there history I have a question if the monks Learned from the anamial souldn't the forms look like the anamials? If someone was watching you do your forms with no knowlage of Martial arts would they say that looks like a Mantis or tiger or another anamial?

 

[7starmantis]

Um, first of all, monks and shaolin are not the cradle, or birthplace or authorities of CMA as you imply. Saying so only shows the difference between your understand of CMA and mine. Not that one is right and one is wrong, just very, very different.

"Core" is used normally to describe more principles than techniques. You can't make a list of "core" using techniques, it’s about principles. Your misguided thinking that practicing a certain style of kung fu means you must "look" like the animal. That’s absurd. Mantis have more legs than I do, how can I act like a mantis? A tiger weighs 800 pounds, I weight 200, how can I look like a tiger. It’s a misunderstanding and misconception that is prevalent today on the outskirts of CMA. Mantis core principles are in line with CMA principles. However, simply mimicing a bug, or a form is not using principles at all. What are the fighting principles of the mantis in SD? The history of shaolin kung fu is allready incorrect and quite untrue. Someone watching real kung fu who has no martial arts background should say it looks like crap and that the fighters aren't really doing much to each other. Kung fu is quite unatural in its movements, an untrained person shouldn't look at kung fu and understand it at all really. Let alone think it looks like a mantis, or a tiger, or anything for that matter.

7sm

 

[pekho]

Well there is a very good point in saying the animal style movements should not necessarily look like the movements of a particular animal. But then why have animal movements? It seems to me the character of a movement comes from the perceived character in nature as expressed in Chinese culture. I learned a bamboo movement, and had trouble with it for years. I watched giant bamboo and tried to figure out how to copy it, and as you can imagine I got nowhere. Then I saw Crouching Tiger, and watching it, I began to understand the Chinese romantic ideal of bamboo. This started me on a path to a better understanding of the character of the movement. Movements like tiger, snake, and dragon may be based on a mixture of nature and myth, but you need to understand the myth to see the nature in a useful way. If one begins to understand what the figure of a tiger is in Chinese mythology, then watching one in the zoo can be useful. It sounds like the discussion of the movements of a praying mantis was based at least as much on the mythology as the mantis itself; this is as it should be. A description of how a mantis shears open its prey with its mandibles would not necessarily be useful. A description of the grabbing and holding power of a mantis is precisely applicable.

Josh

 

[sifu Adams]

Um, first of all, monks and shaolin are not the cradle, or birthplace or authorities of CMA as you imply. Saying so only shows the difference between your understand of CMA and mine. Not that one is right and one is wrong, just very, very different.

So you are saying that the monks and shaolin have nothing to do with CMA?

You can't make a list of "core" using techniques, it’s about principles.

Still no answer. lets change the names. what are the Techniques and Principles that I am missing in the SD mantis. Prove me wrong!!!!! please you keep changing the names but can't seem to tell me what SD is missing that makes your mantis so much better.

However, simply mimicing a bug, or a form is not using principles at all.

I agree if you JUST mimic the bug. I am talking about understanding the BUG. Do you fight at 0-1 step sparring? if so why. could it be that the mantis is a inside fighter? If so where did this Principle come from? This is common in the SD mantis and in the Southern Mantis I learned form Gin Foon Mark. Granted they are diffent in the way they approch a opponite but the Principle of fighting in close are the same. The SD has a little wider attacks that the southern. When I fight I like to use the SD mantis to move in then go to southern mantis. I like the combo when someone is useing kicking before I move in.

What are the fighting principles of the mantis in SD?

There are only 4 main forms in the SD Mantis. the first teaches you thrusting movements to striking pressure point in the body and head. We work from a close rang and in combos of 3-4 strikes ( once we move in we wont to finsh), the arms are bent at the elbows and kept away from the body. The second form teaches you how to blitz. In this form you learn to strike fast pushing off the back foot to get distence. you also learn combo attacks that open your oppontts body and head for attacks. ( like high, low tech) you learn to blitz your oppontt with both hands and feet. The thrid is for Trapping. this kata helps you learn to trap your oppontts legs and arms. allowing you to move in and attack. I have seen many styles teach self defence move that I can show you out of this kata. You use a lot of Morshu ( sorry if spelled wrong) tech. the last one teaches you how to change from one to another useing all the other forms.

 

[7starmantis]

Um, first of all, monks and shaolin are not the cradle, or birthplace or authorities of CMA as you imply. Saying so only shows the difference between your understand of CMA and mine. Not that one is right and one is wrong, just very, very different.

So you are saying that the monks and shaolin have nothing to do with CMA?

C'mon, you can't be serious. That actually made me laugh out loud its so much of a twist from what I said. I said nothing even close to, or implying anything close to that. Please re-read my post. Shaolin is considered by many to be the grandfather of CMA that is simply wrong. Shaolin is considered the grandfather and may have just been a grandson.

You can't make a list of "core" using techniques, it’s about principles.

Still no answer. lets change the names. what are the Techniques and Principles that I am missing in the SD mantis. Prove me wrong!!!!! please you keep changing the names but can't seem to tell me what SD is missing that makes your mantis so much better.

I'm changing names? What do you mean? Changing what names? I didn't say you are missing techniques, but since you mention it.... If you have only 4 mantis forms, you can't seriously believe you cover every technqiue that a full mantis school would do you? Your getting awefully personal, I dont think I've seen you do any mantis, or trained with you, so to get that personal would be impossible. I can tell you the videos I saw were lacking. As far as missing principles, do you recognize these?
ou, lou, tsai, kwa, tiao chin, peng ta, chan, nien, tieh, kao, chien shan, teng-nuo

However, simply mimicing a bug, or a form is not using principles at all.

I agree if you JUST mimic the bug. I am talking about understanding the BUG. Do you fight at 0-1 step sparring? if so why. could it be that the mantis is a inside fighter? If so where did this Principle come from? This is common in the SD mantis and in the Southern Mantis I learned form Gin Foon Mark. Granted they are diffent in the way they approch a opponite but the Principle of fighting in close are the same. The SD has a little wider attacks that the southern. When I fight I like to use the SD mantis to move in then go to southern mantis. I like the combo when someone is useing kicking before I move in.

While fighting distance is important in mantis, its simply not a determining factor of the mantis system. I'm not sure what you mean by 0-1 step sparring, is that like point sparring? I dont really spar at all, I play chi sou and I do full contact fighting. I dont really refer to anything I do as sparring, its very different in intent and methods. Your post about "using SD mantis to move in and then switch to southern mantis" pretty much sums up why I think SD is missing some principles. Let me say this, I'm not trying to attack you or your style. I'm not trying t osay you have no martial skill or anything like that. Just want to make that clear. I just think your understanding of CMA and mine are quite different as well as our application of CMA.

What are the fighting principles of the mantis in SD?

There are only 4 main forms in the SD Mantis. the first teaches you thrusting movements to striking pressure point in the body and head. We work from a close rang and in combos of 3-4 strikes ( once we move in we wont to finsh), the arms are bent at the elbows and kept away from the body. The second form teaches you how to blitz. In this form you learn to strike fast pushing off the back foot to get distence. you also learn combo attacks that open your oppontts body and head for attacks. ( like high, low tech) you learn to blitz your oppontt with both hands and feet. The thrid is for Trapping. this kata helps you learn to trap your oppontts legs and arms. allowing you to move in and attack. I have seen many styles teach self defence move that I can show you out of this kata. You use a lot of Morshu ( sorry if spelled wrong) tech. the last one teaches you how to change from one to another useing all the other forms.

Ok, I did not ask for techniques your forms (sorry kata) teach you. I asked for fighting principles, again showing the differences in our understanding. Principles are not technqiues. I'm not really sure how to explain that to you :idunno:. Your talking about bending the arms and keeping them away from the body which is really quite directly oposite from most mantis principels of keeping the elbows close to the body. You open your arm up and lift it away from your body and you just gave your opponent a huge handle to control your entire body with. I'm sorry, I was going to stop posting on this thread, but I just couldn't resist. Would you mind naming the 4 forms you guys have for mantis? Also, how did these forms come about? They are not forms from other mantis systems, so were they created when SD was created? Do they hold any ties to the mantis lineage accepted by mantis schools?

7sm

 

[47MartialMan]

"Core" is used normally to describe more principles than techniques. You can't make a list of "core" using techniques, it’s about principles. Your misguided thinking that practicing a certain style of kung fu means you must "look" like the animal. That’s absurd. Mantis have more legs than I do, how can I act like a mantis? A tiger weighs 800 pounds, I weight 200, how can I look like a tiger. It’s a misunderstanding and misconception that is prevalent today on the outskirts of CMA. Mantis core principles are in line with CMA principles. However, simply mimicing a bug, or a form is not using principles at all.

Yes, not all techniques in a given system, per animal, are mimicking. One must realize that the forms/methods, were created my martial art masters with previous fighting skills. They blended their fighting skills/ability, into a system best suited for them. For instance, if someone had practices/methods, to develop a certain area of skill, say power striking. Then he could relate to those skills as "Tiger". Because he is human, he doesn't have the weight, fangs, and claws, like the animal, he could never be a true mimick of it. The misconception is thought of as the animal systems must mimick the animal. In many animal systems, there are other title given to methods that doesn't reflect the given animal. For example:DAAIH FU YIN KYUHN.translates roughly as Big Tiger Swallow Fist. One would assume by observation that this is in a Tiger system, which it is in a Mantis system.

The history of shaolin kung fu is allready incorrect and quite untrue. Someone watching real kung fu who has no martial arts background should say it looks like crap and that the fighters aren't really doing much to each other. Kung fu is quite unatural in its movements, an untrained person shouldn't look at kung fu and understand it at all really. Let alone think it looks like a mantis, or a tiger, or anything for that matter.

Everybody, um-most inexperience people, are on tha "animal kick". Or the "monks watched animals". I too was thinking that-in my way-back, earlier years. But I did painstaken research, before the "almighty interent". And I had any interesting things that stating otherwise. One of my major sources was speaking to Buddhists. Two Buddhist monks of the Ch'en order had told me that much of "Shaolin History" has been fabricated because that was a form of entertainment in a place and/or time, that had no modern conveniences like the internet, electricity, television, etc. Each, especialy of those two, I had interviewd and had long discussions via mail correspondance at different intervals in the distant past.

I am thinking that SD, or other martial artists don't realize this because they want/desire the myths surrounding martial arts. And become in denial if something else should surface against these myths.

 

[sifu Adams]

While fighting distance is important in mantis, its simply not a determining factor of the mantis system.

Wow, Help me understande this. Gin foon Mark must be wrong. He stressed this to us over and over. What is the determining factors of the Mantis? I though this was a principle of the mantis.

ou, lou, tsai, kwa, tiao chin, peng ta, chan, nien, tieh, kao, chien shan, teng-nuo

Are these moves tech. decribe one for me. I may not know what you call it but that dose not mean I don't know the move.

If you have only 4 mantis forms, you can't seriously believe you cover every technqiue that a full mantis school would do you?

Nope never said we did. How many forms dose it take to understand the mantis style. 10, 20, 30, 300, or 1 ? I have said before according to Hiang The' and the letters that was wrote by his grandfather that the brothers leard from 4 other masters each having differnt styles. the Masters would only show what they thought the brothers needed. example: master Hiang is a master of the Tai Pang system from Lu Su Pong. He learned from other masters only what they thought would compliment the Tai pang System. Example if the mantis style had 18 forms they would learn the 2nd form, 6th form, 14th form and the 18th form. A better example of this so far almost all the differnt systems we have always have a trap. Ex. tiger trap, mantis trap, dragon trap, dagger trap, ect... Do all the movements look the same "no" each anamial has a differnt pricipal about how they trap becuase the mantis can't trap like a bird or tiger. All of our forms do have common moves in them however the way each system sets up a attack is all differnt.

you talk about not understanding the anamial thing. I think you are all wrong on this. Ex. in our 5 anamial form their is a snake. during the snake you make two differnt hand depending on what side you are on. the first side your hand is cuped like the back of the cobra on the other side you have two figers out like a fangs of a vipor. when you do the moves you have to think of the differanet snakes because that determans the way you strike. ex the cobra strikes fast (300 mph according to the anamial planet) and retraces back-- so when you strike you should hit fast to a Pressure point and pull back on the other side you strike like a viber. They have to inject the poison through the fangs. so they strike and latch on. We do the same this would be like a strike to the jugular vain in the neck. we would strike and grab. That's how we use the anamials and I do believe that is how the monks used the aniamials.


This to me is princapals of that styles. Please explain what you are talking about when it comes the the principals of the mantis.
I am not trying to make anyone mad I just really believe that the SD system is talked about only becuase they cant trace the history. Instead of chanllanging SD on the history ( that everyone know onone can prove right or wrong) how about chanllanging me and the SD system on the the knowlage of how to fight using the forms and the principals behind them?

I ask what do you see in the mantis that dose not reflect the pricipals of the mantis you do. Better yet help me learn how to make SD mantis better. the last two post I have showed you our thinking behind the differnt systems. What's Yours. Or do you know? (don't mean that in a bad way, just asking. Maybe if you explain one of your tech. I could help you understand it?)

 

[47MartialMan]

according to Hiang The' and the letters that was wrote by his grandfather that the brothers leard from 4 other masters each having differnt styles. the Masters would only show what they thought the brothers needed.

Yeah, I have to somewhat agree with some mantis principles in differences of system/teacher.

However, I disagree that a move has to mimick the animal. Although, the methods that I had learned, per Mantis, were aggressive-like the bug. But, some were not mimicking it always.

My very own Shifu, had his own that he taught and had learned. Ie became part of the "family's heirarchy".

Does this mean his mantis, or where he had learned it, is less valuable or not mantis?

 

[sifu Adams]

I not saying that you have to mimick that anamial. I have been told that when the monks first started they mimicked the anamial to a "T". then the 4 ancestors changed the forms to make them quicker to learn and tighten the forms up for the wooded south. At this point the forms started looking less like the anamials.

As for your Sifu I don't think any style is better that another if you understande what you are doing. I am sure your sifu had a reason for putting the style of mantis in your system. that is what Master do. they improve that systems.

 

[47MartialMan]

I have been told that when the monks first started they mimicked the anamial to a "T".

This is not fact.


However, the 4 ancestors changed the forms to make them quicker to learn and tighten the forms up for the wooded south. At this point the forms started looking less like the anamials.
But, you must realize, things of past was changed, including the event(s). This was a story told. Such stpries, including some that one of my Shifus told, are not entirely factual. As stories are tols through a raconteur, this was a method of entertainment or past time.

 

[sifu Adams]

47Martialman,

I would love to see some of your research and facts. Where they come from who your contact is. You are making some big statements. I not saying they are not true or they are true but names, dates, and how you know that the facts you believe are true would be a great help to all styles kung fu. I have learned my believes from differnt masters and a china intelagace officer. When you are discrediting a lot more masters than just SD's.

 

[47MartialMan]

I would love to see what a china intelagace officer has to say. I did not state my research was fact. I am stating that I had found indifferences in many of what was taken as common "belief". I am stating that such info/belief, that has been passed and exchanged for so long, has more chance of "clouding". Do you train in SD?

 

[sifu Adams]

the guy from china lives now in NJ he is veary interesting to talk to. his name is John Lee. Off topic but he just got me a braodsword with my school name and one one side a tiger the other a dragon and a bird on both sides near the wide part of the blade. veary nice. and good price.

 

[sifu Adams]

Back on topic.

I agree there are differant history. I have alway said I believe there is some good forms and tech. in the SD system but I really believe the brothers didn't spend that much time understanding the History of the system they were learning. I don't believe they made that many forms up that had the setup and tech. that you can get out of the forms. If they did I am impressed. if they did copy them from someone the picked good ones to copy.

 

[thepanjr]

nope i didnt heard about this one

 

[thepanjr]

how mant belts are in kung fu