Greetings from Florida

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I did not learn much TKD in the 90's (actually I'm learning it now from George W. Adkins to be honest). I also recieved a TKD instructor's manual passed down to me by one of Sabum Richard Marcelin's students from the ATA (which has more in common with the ITF than WTF) and practiced many TKD-like kicks and exercises during my time in MMA throughout the years.

As for Okinawan Kara-te, that is a style I only use now for demonstrations and counter drills. I did receive about 6 months of 1-on-1 private backyard training (more or less) equivalent to maybe 2 years (more or less) of someone who only attended a Karate class in a Dojo three times a week. In those 6 months, I trained in traditional Shotokan Karate until my white belt turned into a red belt (or brown belt) naturally from all of the blood, sweat and dirt. It was actually very difficult making the switch from Kara-te to Kung-fu, and even today I feel like I am sometimes too rigid as a result of Kara-te.

As for fencing, I learned quite a bit through slicing/deflecting drills, freestyle full-contact sparring with different weapons, using different methods and styles, and through light-contact simulation sparring. I had exposure to Spanish saber-fencing, Japanese bokuto-fencing, and Filipino rattan-fencing for a time period before training on my own. Most of the techniques I use for gun disarms, I learned from FMA knife-sparring (using either metal spoons, dull butter knives or unloaded guns). I also use some fencing principles in my footwork, broken rhythm, lead jab and cadence. I picked those up from JKD and Spanish fencing. Other than that, I don't practice much fencing. My art is more focussed on un-armed street defense than it is on weapons training. But I do count my many years of experience in JKD (which is missing from your list) as part of my training also.

You also forgot to mention Western Boxing and Judo/Jujutsu/Aikido, which I also took as seperate classes apart from MMA (and I am still a student of Judo/Jujutsu/Aikido to this day, despite being the founder of MMGF).

I just wanted to clarify all that.

So at 14 years old, you trained until your belt literally turned red from blood, and got the equivalent of 2 years of practice in 6 months?

Also, to clarify, why did you like my comment that I feel unqualified to teach, when I have more training in one art than you have in all of your arts? Are you agreeing with me that that amount of training does not make you qualified to teach? If you're creating your own style, I would hope you have a minimum of 10-15 years training in multiple arts (and I would not count anything below the age of 16 personally for that, although that's a topic for debate).

 

[Buka]

 

[TwentyThree]

So, here's why some of us are reacting... skeptically... to the things you've said here. I'll narrow it down to what I can speak about with a little knowledge, as I don't have much of a background in KMA. JMA outside of kobudo (and I'm still a newb there), MMA, etc.

You said, specifically, you don't study FMA but you've borrowed "the concepts". So basically, you've borrowed things from something you said you don't study. I can tell you, after having studied for nearly nine years now, that it is highly unlikely that you've borrowed a "concept" from the FMA's. You've copied a technique either someone showed you (very common to see this for FMA's), or you picked up off the internet via the YouTube dojo. This is not the same thing as a "concept".

A martial arts style is more than a simple collection of techniques, that you can pick from this and that, pull it all together, and call it a new style. It's a series of perceptions and opinions about violence (how it happens and how to cope with it), strategic choices, and a viewpoint of the world, often developed under very specific conditions. Within the FMA world, there are literally more styles than I can possibly name here, and often, the only thing we have in common with each other are the tools. The concepts - and what we think is important - can vary widely.

That being said, there isn't really anything that unique in the FMA's that can't be found in other styles when you look at techniques (in my specific lineage, it's one of our sayings - "It is all the same"). What we do exists in every other style in some way. What makes an FMA style a style (and in fact, makes any martial arts style a style), is how we organize our training, what strategy we employ in dealing with violence, and principles that form how we look at the world. That's when the deeper meaning - the CONCEPTS of what we do - come to light. By your own words, you haven't studied any of this.

You are basically doing wing chun with sticks. Nothing wrong with that in principle, but it's not FMA's.

I think none of us care much if you want to do your own thing - plenty of us do that. If it's you and your buddies playing around in a back yard or a garage, no harm done (except to yourselves, maybe, but you're a grownup). Where it's bothersome is that you claim you are synthesizing concepts from styles you haven't seriously studied into your personal style. You've made statements as fact that aren't true. And you want us to take you seriously as a founder of a style, obviously.

That's going to get a reaction - and you got it.

Best of luck to you in your training.

 

[oaktree]

Wei Wu style Mou Meng Gung Fu is a non-classical martial art system. Mou Meng Kuen (Cantonese for "Nameless Boxing") has been a family tradition for over a decade. Brother Wei Wu has trained in several martial art systems from various schools. He has training manuals, trophies and certificates in various styles under different masters and grandmasters. Brother Wei Wu is also the founder of what he now calls "Mou Meng Gung Fu," in order to prevent his siblings from stunting their growth by becoming stylized or opinionated. In this style, the system is molded to the individual. The individual is not molded to the style. They are expected to learn new techniques, and to test those techniques when training. Brother Wu Wei does not claim to be a master of martial arts. He also did not give his art a traditional ranking system. MMGF practitioners are refered to simply as brothers and sisters, juniors and seniors. He refuses to make a profit or teach Mou Meng Gung Fu to outsiders or the general public. This makes Mou Meng Kuen a secretive martial art with obscure training methods. Naturally, other schools question its authenticity and methodology. Brother Wei Wu's school only questions Mou Meng Kuen's methodology as they are always too busy training, sparring and experimenting with different tactics to answer to skeptics and politics. Brother Wei Wu wishes his art to stay alive and evolve with time.

What I am reading from this is that there is 2 names for this now Wei wu style mou meng gungfu and mou meng gungfu? when you put your name in front and then style it is to show difference from another style such as Chen style taijiquan or yang style taijiquan. One second mou meng is a style then its not a style then its a secret martial art but its being talked about on a public forum so confusing.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The way I see it, if you never learn to cook Chinese food properly, and then never learn to cook Italian food properly, and then dabble in some Korean cooking for 6 months, you wind up with a bad case of salmonella, and not good food.

Or, perhaps, you end up taking just a couple of notes from each and creating an interesting new dish or two that you can produce well. You won't be highly skilled at any one of them, but the knowledge can still be cumulative. I wouldn't expect the average student to progress on that level of learning, but I've met a couple of instructors with only 3 years of experience in their art who were actually quite good at teaching the basics of that art, and with a depth of understanding I wouldn't normally expect from someone with so little experience. One of them had some experience in other arts (a bit less broad than the OP, but a mixture), and the other had only some dabblings besides his 3 1/2 years in his art. Both were competent instructors.

As for starting one's own style, that's just a matter of being able to bring pieces together that work well in combination under a unified set of principles. I've seen it done well, and I've seen it done badly. Experience doesn't seem to be proof against the latter.

 

[hoshin1600]

I really didn't mean to sound ostentatious.

so you dont think you sound like this..

Ostentatious implies saying things in order to seek attention by boasting or showboating.

but you post this....

I really hope to get that point across to anyone who plans to do research into my art, because as I had mentioned before, MMK should not be confused with other martial arts, even if some of our weapons and techniques do sound similar.

trust me at this point no one gives a hoot about "researching " you art. what does that mean ...why did you use the term research? as if its a legit treasure that needs to be discovered. a non ostentatious person would have said in any is interested in what i do.


then you post this ... and i can honestly say no one cares what any individual practices. the point is you make posts that are deceptive and inflated to sound better than what the reality is.

As for Okinawan Kara-te, that is a style I only use now for demonstrations and counter drills. I did receive about 6 months of 1-on-1 private backyard training (more or less) equivalent to maybe 2 years (more or less) of someone who only attended a Karate class in a Dojo three times a week. In those 6 months, I trained in traditional Shotokan Karate until my white belt turned into a red belt (or brown belt) naturally from all of the blood, sweat and dirt.

for starters you never trained in Okinawan anything. you said you trained in the back yard with someone who new Shotokan which by definition is a mainland Japanese art. the fact that you didnt know that says something to me.
you practiced for 6 months, PERIOD six months is not 2 years. you think because it was in your back yard 1 on 1 that somehow that is better. well i can tell you from experience its not. it just isnt.
then that ostentatious pops up again....you trained so much and so hard your white belt was stained red... seriously ? come on. that makes you sound like a wannabe.

He has training manuals, trophies and certificates in various styles under different masters and grandmasters.

again with the wannabe language. no one takes you have a manual as anything other than bravado BS. it means nothing. trophies? no one cares. you didnt say you won anything, you said you have a trophy. big deal
and your karate was with a brown belt stop saying you studied under so many masters its annoying

 

[Grenadier]

Admin's Note:

This thread is now closed. No further replies will be accepted.

On a side note, if you do not like what someone has to say about your training, then it's entirely within your own power to use the "Ignore" feature that is part of the Xenforo forum software.