Intellectualising Martial Arts?

[JowGaWolf]

I personally think that sometimes really analysing what you are doing and pulling things apart can lead to a greater understanding, which is especially important when teaching.

You will need to use what you train or your analysis will be shallow at the best and incorrect at the worst. at the minimum you will need to analyze through use.

 

[isshinryuronin]

I personally think that sometimes really analysing what you are doing and pulling things apart can lead to a greater understanding, which is especially important when teaching.

It's a two-way street. I've found that teaching (well) and explaining things to students leads to pulling things apart, leading to analysis and to self-introspection and discovery. More than once I've realized something intellectually while teaching that I previously had only known physically. Being a teacher definitely made me a better student. Teaching and learning definitely go hand in hand.
......................................................................
I have just reread this post prior to hitting the "post reply" button and realized something I (and Damien) wrote: "...pulling things apart, leading to analysis..." This is actually the literal definition of bunkai.

We commonly use this term to simply refer to the meaning or true application of a technique, but its definition can go deeper - Not just what a technique does, but why it works. What makes it work? The pivot, foot placement, dropping your weight...? These details of execution can only be demonstrated, as JowGaWolf said, thru use (against a resisting partner).

 

[Damien]

It's a two-way street. I've found that teaching (well) and explaining things to students leads to pulling things apart, leading to analysis and to self-introspection and discovery. More than once I've realized something intellectually while teaching that I previously had only known physically. Being a teacher definitely made me a better student. Teaching and learning definitely go hand in hand.
......................................................................
I have just reread this post prior to hitting the "post reply" button and realized something I (and Damien) wrote: "...pulling things apart, leading to analysis..." This is actually the literal definition of bunkai.

We commonly use this term to simply refer to the meaning or true application of a technique, but its definition can go deeper - Not just what a technique does, but why it works. What makes it work? The pivot, foot placement, dropping your weight...? These details of execution can only be demonstrated, as JowGaWolf said, thru use (against a resisting partner).

I agree, teaching forces you to understand and articulate things in ways you might not otherwise.

Yeah the proof is in the pudding as they say. You can have all the theory in the world but using it helps you to understand better. One of my teachers once said that the reason so much had been chucked out of Shaolin when people went to spar with it in modern times is that they never even thought about trying it, they just assumed it was decorative/tradition. It works from some different principles, but it still works.

I'm currently working my way through my catalogue of Shaolin techniques, sprinkling them into Muay Thai sparring to see how they fare against people that are unfamiliar with them. Although the positions may be slightly less extreme in this scenario, I'm using the same mechanics. So far they've all been a success.

 

[hoshin1600]

As part of this " intellectual" discussion, I feel many people may mistake what that word means.
Google says the definition of intellect is, the faculty of reason and understanding objectively, especially with regard to abstract or academic matters.
I would not put the angle of your foot or where you put your big toe a matter of intellect. I would say Bunkai is embodied knowledge, not intellect.
Intellect and abstract thoughts for me are more like,
What is a style..how do you define a style?
What are your core beliefs about your art?
What is self defense?
How does violence manifest itself? Why?

These are bigger questions that are abstract and intellectual. Answering these type questions could change how you think about your practice and ultimately change the end result of your training and where you arrive in your journey.

How to do a punch, what kata you do and how, those to me are superficial. What meaning the arts bring to your life, those are the big intellectual questions. To dedicate 20, 30, 40 years of your life to something , maybe its worth asking those type of deep questions so that at the end of your life you don't feel all that time was wasted.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

As part of this " intellectual" discussion, I feel many people may mistake what that word means.
Google says the definition of intellect is, the faculty of reason and understanding objectively, especially with regard to abstract or academic matters.
I would not put the angle of your foot or where you put your big toe a matter of intellect. I would say Bunkai is embodied knowledge, not intellect.
Intellect and abstract thoughts for me are more like,
What is a style..how do you define a style?
What are your core beliefs about your art?
What is self defense?
How does violence manifest itself? Why?

These are bigger questions that are abstract and intellectual. Answering these type questions could change how you think about your practice and ultimately change the end result of your training and where you arrive in your journey.

How to do a punch, what kata you do and how, those to me are superficial. What meaning the arts bring to your life, those are the big intellectual questions. To dedicate 20, 30, 40 years of your life to something , maybe its worth asking those type of deep questions so that at the end of your life you don't feel all that time was wasted.

I like your post, though I'll disagree with the implication that it's only intellectual if it's abstract. Digging into finer points of how and why a specific position works better for a specific technique can be a mostly intellectual pursuit, since knowing that it works is all that's really important from a purely practical perspective. There are techniques I could use long before I understood some of the things I'd learned to do by rote. Of course, that understanding did improve other areas, but those areas likely would have improved with continued instruction (my primary instructor was technical, so corrected from a technical perspective).

 

[JowGaWolf]

These last few weeks for example, I've been thinking about stances more than any sane person would, in the process of writing a Shaolin kung fu stance guide. I've ended up drawing on concepts I explored in my PhD to explain them. I'm attempting to make something which is simultaneously easy to grasp for beginners, but allows those with more experience to really understand how and why stances are used.

As someone who has done this with the horse stance. Your best analysis we be to to use the stances and apply them in all sorts of situations even if you think it will fail you. Because you are doing an analysis, you'll want to have a good understanding of the limitations and points of failures as well as the point where the stances are successful. You'll want to know if the stance is use used from a static position or dynamic position. For example, a horse stance becomes "Static" when lift something heavy. At this point there's only 2 options. Your stance will either push through to the lift, or it will fail and crumble if the legs are weak. Here you can see where the horse stance remains static for a short period of time during the struggle.

Strikers often view stances from the position of striking, but there is also a grappling side to stances as well. I look forward to see where your analysis takes you. I'm sure it will be more extensive than what your first thought.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I'm currently working my way through my catalogue of Shaolin techniques, sprinkling them into Muay Thai sparring to see how they fare against people that are unfamiliar with them. Although the positions may be slightly less extreme in this scenario, I'm using the same mechanics. So far they've all been a success.

Sort of separate thoughts below that came up while I was typing the first one

One of the things I say about TMA is that "Family doesn't fight Family" (is what I say to a Jow Ga Sifu I know). Basically what it means is that I believe TMA systems were made to fight against other systems. So the biggest success of a TMA will come when it is used against another system. However, the problem that we have today is that today's TMA "Family fights Family" and as a result TMA has suffered in application quality and understanding of techniques. Most TMA tournaments are "Family fights Family" so we become good at fighting each other, but really suck when fighting someone who doesn't fight like us.

How do we determine who is the best in Boxer? "Family fights Family"
How do we determine who is the best in Karate? "Family fights Family"
How do we determine who is the best in Wing Chun? "Family fights Family"

How do we determine who is the best at applying their fighting system against someone "Outside the Family"? "MMA" and "Lei Tai"

 

[Damien]

As part of this " intellectual" discussion, I feel many people may mistake what that word means.
Google says the definition of intellect is, the faculty of reason and understanding objectively, especially with regard to abstract or academic matters.
I would not put the angle of your foot or where you put your big toe a matter of intellect. I would say Bunkai is embodied knowledge, not intellect.
Intellect and abstract thoughts for me are more like,
What is a style..how do you define a style?
What are your core beliefs about your art?
What is self defense?
How does violence manifest itself? Why?

These are bigger questions that are abstract and intellectual. Answering these type questions could change how you think about your practice and ultimately change the end result of your training and where you arrive in your journey.

How to do a punch, what kata you do and how, those to me are superficial. What meaning the arts bring to your life, those are the big intellectual questions. To dedicate 20, 30, 40 years of your life to something , maybe its worth asking those type of deep questions so that at the end of your life you don't feel all that time was wasted.

I think both can be classed as intellectual and both are worthwhile. Especially in a sphere where many people don't think about why certain elements are the way they are, and just do what feels natural or what they are told; neither of which are necessarily the best way.

But certainly the bigger questions are important too. I've talked before about having an intellectual honesty about what you are doing and why. It's fine to just train for the fun of it and collect a load of techniques and forms, so long as you are not under the illusion that this makes you an elite fighter. This honesty comes from reflecting on yourself, your motivations and your practice.

 

[Damien]

As someone who has done this with the horse stance. Your best analysis we be to to use the stances and apply them in all sorts of situations even if you think it will fail you. Because you are doing an analysis, you'll want to have a good understanding of the limitations and points of failures as well as the point where the stances are successful. You'll want to know if the stance is use used from a static position or dynamic position. For example, a horse stance becomes "Static" when lift something heavy. At this point there's only 2 options. Your stance will either push through to the lift, or it will fail and crumble if the legs are weak. Here you can see where the horse stance remains static for a short period of time during the struggle.

Strikers often view stances from the position of striking, but there is also a grappling side to stances as well. I look forward to see where your analysis takes you. I'm sure it will be more extensive than what your first thought.

I agree, gotta try stuff out. One thing me and some of my kung fu buddies were looking at pre-covid was taking everything and seeing what worked in a modern context and what didn't any more, starting from the assumption that stuff is in the style for a reason and nothing is "just tradition". That doesn't mean it works against MMA etc. but in a previous context it must have been there for a reason.

Now I'm in Australia I'm continuing that on my own against Muay Thai guys. Next on my list is Jin Ji Du Li, it works against oblique kicks and sweeps, but how does it fair against roundhouses? I suspect it doesn't have the same potential for balance disruption as a well timed/placed thai check, but I suspect that taking a hit across the big surface area you get could make a difference to how much damage your legs take. This would be especially important if you're fighting without shin pads. I don't even watch a huge amount of combat sports, and I've still seen half a dozen shin breaks; not something I want to be involved in on either side!

 

[JowGaWolf]

I think both can be classed as intellectual and both are worthwhile. Especially in a sphere where many people don't think about why certain elements are the way they are, and just do what feels natural or what they are told; neither of which are necessarily the best way.

But certainly the bigger questions are important too. I've talked before about having an intellectual honesty about what you are doing and why. It's fine to just train for the fun of it and collect a load of techniques and forms, so long as you are not under the illusion that this makes you an elite fighter. This honesty comes from reflecting on yourself, your motivations and your practice.

I asked my son about this because he trains martial arts with me. He told me that he only sees it as an exercise and he has no purpose for the training beyond that. I was shocked, but at least now I understand his perspective. I haven't decided if I will let that change how I train him. lol. But I do know that I'm going to record our training sessions in the event he ever wants to use it for self-defense or for fighting.

That doesn't mean it works against MMA etc. but in a previous context it must have been there for a reason.

This is how I tend to think of the techniques. It's must be there for a reason. This will then usually lead me to the question "Do I understand what I'm seeing"

Some of these movements are in the Jow Ga forms, but we were always lead to believe that they were strikes. After my new self training in Shuai Jiaon (I will eventually get formal training). I'm starting to think differently about what I see in my own forms. I tried some of the similar techniques as strikes and I not confortable with their application as a strike. No I'm thinking I was viewing the movement incorrectly from the beginning. It's not the system that was useless. It was my lack of understanding of what I was seeing.

I suspect that taking a hit across the big surface area you get could make a difference to how much damage your legs take.

I'm not sure if this helps, but this is what I do for leg kicks to my thigh. If I'm standing too high then it hurts. If I sink my stance then it land across more of my leg and it doesn't hurt. I still take damage but it doesn't hurt, it's soft compared to being kick while in a high stance. The stance doesn't have to be super low it just needs to drop a few inches, probably no more than 3 if measured. I'll try to get examples of this with the MMA guy. He has some good kicks.

 

[Flying Crane]

I agree, gotta try stuff out. One thing me and some of my kung fu buddies were looking at pre-covid was taking everything and seeing what worked in a modern context and what didn't any more, starting from the assumption that stuff is in the style for a reason and nothing is "just tradition". That doesn't mean it works against MMA etc. but in a previous context it must have been there for a reason.

Why would something not work in a “modern context”? What do you mean by that? Unless a technique is designed to rely on an obsolete implement, like a special grip on a piece of clothing that was common 200 years ago but nobody wears anymore, then why would a technique not work, if you have developed yours skill with it? That is what it always comes down to: you need to develop the skill. It isn’t that things inherently work or do not work. The ability to use something or not use something, lies with the individual.

Likewise, why would something not work against MMA? What do you mean by that? In the context of an MMA competition? Simply against someone who has trained to be an MMA competitor? Once again, you need to develop the skill to use it, but if you do so then of course you can use it successfully, if your skill is greater than your enemy. Simply being an MMA person doesn’t put one on a pedestal and suddenly eliminate the possibility of using certain techniques against him. MMA folks get hurt just like anyone else. Some things may be more risky to try in the context of an MMA competition, but that is an different issue and doesn’t mean that it simply does not work in a “modern context” or against MMA.

 

[Flying Crane]

Sort of separate thoughts below that came up while I was typing the first one

One of the things I say about TMA is that "Family doesn't fight Family" (is what I say to a Jow Ga Sifu I know). Basically what it means is that I believe TMA systems were made to fight against other systems. So the biggest success of a TMA will come when it is used against another system. However, the problem that we have today is that today's TMA "Family fights Family" and as a result TMA has suffered in application quality and understanding of techniques. Most TMA tournaments are "Family fights Family" so we become good at fighting each other, but really suck when fighting someone who doesn't fight like us.

How do we determine who is the best in Boxer? "Family fights Family"
How do we determine who is the best in Karate? "Family fights Family"
How do we determine who is the best in Wing Chun? "Family fights Family"

How do we determine who is the best at applying their fighting system against someone "Outside the Family"? "MMA" and "Lei Tai"

I think TMA systems were meant for use against whomever your enemy may prove to be, and that could definitely be someone who has trained in the same methods that you trained. Certainly the more experience you have against all types, the more educated you become and the better your odds. But I think you are turning it into something of a false dichotomy.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Why would something not work in a “modern context”? What do you mean by that? Unless a technique is designed to rely on an obsolete implement, like a special grip on a piece of clothing that was common 200 years ago but nobody wears anymore, then why would a technique not work, if you have developed yours skill with it? That is what it always comes down to: you need to develop the skill. It isn’t that things inherently work or do not work. The ability to use something or not use something, lies with the individual.

Likewise, why would something not work against MMA? What do you mean by that? In the context of an MMA competition? Simply against someone who has trained to be an MMA competitor? Once again, you need to develop the skill to use it, but if you do so then of course you can use it successfully, if your skill is greater than your enemy. Simply being an MMA person doesn’t put one on a pedestal and suddenly eliminate the possibility of using certain techniques against him. MMA folks get hurt just like anyone else. Some things may be more risky to try in the context of an MMA competition, but that is an different issue and doesn’t mean that it simply does not work in a “modern context” or against MMA.

What immediately comes to my mind is the techniques in my primary art that developed around swords (someone trying to stop you from drawing one, specifically). There are edge cases where they can still work, but they aren’t nearly as relevant today.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

So what do you reckon? Think deeply, or just go hit stuff?

Yes.

 

[isshinryuronin]

I asked my son about this because he trains martial arts with me. He told me that he only sees it as an exercise and he has no purpose for the training beyond that. I was shocked, but at least now I understand his perspective. I haven't decided if I will let that change how I train him.

It's great that you don't impose your perspective onto your son. Don't modify his training other than concentrate on the exercise a little more. Keep all the other stuff, though, as his focus on MA may (probably) change over time. Even if it doesn't, there may come a time when his self-defense drills will pay off.

Is there anything more rewarding than training your son?

 

[JowGaWolf]

I think TMA systems were meant for use against whomever your enemy may prove to be, and that could definitely be someone who has trained in the same methods that you trained.

My understanding of TMA is that it originated from Village defense. So the village is like a family unit that has it's method of hand to hand combat. Back then there would be disputes between villages would lead to fights. Fights could be as small as teens from my village going to your village to beat up another rival teen group. No different to how gangs work, were some people in one neighborhood don't like people from another neighborhood. When I lived in Baltimore, being from a specific neighbor could equate to "being on the wrong side of town." If people knew you from the wrong neighborhood then that would be a butt kicking for you. In the Philippines the martial arts systems are identified by location / village.

From what I can tell by researching other cultures. Tribal warfare and village warfare are a real thing back in the past and as a result. You would want to keep some fighting methods secret to your village and not shared with other village. You would also develop fighting techniques that would work against another villages strength. There would be cross pollination eventually either through friendships or fighting, but for the most part the villages are trying to out do the other. In terms of Martial Arts, there's a lot of stuff that doesn't make sense in Jow Ga until you use it against another system.

A good example is a technique that we have that punches off center in a series of jabs. If I use this technique on you and you stayed still in one spot then I would miss you with every punch. But if you bob and weave then the shots are going to lay you out. Jow Ga doesn't bob and weave, so by function the technique wasn't designed for Jow Ga vs Jow Ga. We have another technique that seems to be directed towards linear fighting systems like Wing Chun. I say Wing Chun because the more linear a person is, the more likely I can pull it off. I don't know anything more linear than Wing Chun

If we take a look a Wing Chun we being to see how Wing Chun exploits weaknesses in circular systems. Is Wing Chun Circular? Can Wing Chun fight against Wing Chun and win. Sure of course. I would never suggest that this was impossible. But from what I've seen time and time again and from my own experience is that TMA practitioners who use the techniques against other systems often have a deeper and better understanding of that technique than they would if they only used it in the context of System A vs System A.

But back to the point.
This is Wing Chun when you train Wing Chun vs other systems takes this shape. This is true for any system that does System A vs System B.

This Wing Chun when you train System A vs System A. It tends to take this shape. Again this is true for any system that does System A vs System A

 

[JowGaWolf]

Yes.

Best answer to an "Either or " question. Priceless

 

[JowGaWolf]

Keep all the other stuff, though, as his focus on MA may (probably) change over time.

This is what I think may happen as well. We all go through phases. My interest in Martial Arts now is more than it was when I was a kid. I didn't start to have interest in it again until my early - mid twenties. If it does change, I would like for him to have video of the lesson of him learning so he can revisit. I'm hopefully at the halfway mark of my life span so my attitude has been more about what I want to leave behind when and if I'm no longer able to teach or explain. Even if he's not interested in it then maybe my nephew who wants to do MMA will find value. Maybe my grandkids or others in my family would be interested. My brother-in-law was the president of a Philippine martial arts past away from Covid. There is no video of his knowledge or understanding. All of that information is gone. If his son wants to learn the same martial arts, then it will be without his father's understanding.

Is there anything more rewarding than training your son?

Not really. During a time where computers take over the attention of youth. It's the one thing that my son doesn't mind doing with me. I've trained more days with my son, than I have played video games and other things with him. I asked him if he was going to spar with the MMA guy and he said no. I was fine with that. I only asked so that I know I need to get a mouth piece for him. I'm not sure if he can even wear a mouth piece these days. He has had some dental work and is wearing an Invisalign (Alternative to braces). He has to keep in on for the majority of the day, but I don't know if taking it out for sparring will cause problems with the amount of time he needs to keep it in. So there may be another aspect to any sparring that he would do. Just wearing a mouth piece could be a bigger issue than the actual sparring.

I think the invisalign has to be in for 20 - 22 hours a day. I rather for his dental issue be correct than for him to spar. Alot of people get through life just fine without sparring so I'll do what's in his best interest. But he's 20 now so eventually he'll be making all of the decision about his well being and I will be playing a supportive role as needed.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Is there anything more rewarding than training your son?

I gave this some second thought. Not more reward but equal. If my daughter and her husband decide to train Jow Ga with me teaching them and training with them. Or if grand kids or other kids in the family decide to train with me. I don't want to be the old guy with nothing in common with the younger generation. Martial Arts does a great job in connecting older and younger generations.

 

[Damien]

Why would something not work in a “modern context”? What do you mean by that? Unless a technique is designed to rely on an obsolete implement, like a special grip on a piece of clothing that was common 200 years ago but nobody wears anymore, then why would a technique not work, if you have developed yours skill with it? That is what it always comes down to: you need to develop the skill. It isn’t that things inherently work or do not work. The ability to use something or not use something, lies with the individual.

Likewise, why would something not work against MMA? What do you mean by that? In the context of an MMA competition? Simply against someone who has trained to be an MMA competitor? Once again, you need to develop the skill to use it, but if you do so then of course you can use it successfully, if your skill is greater than your enemy. Simply being an MMA person doesn’t put one on a pedestal and suddenly eliminate the possibility of using certain techniques against him. MMA folks get hurt just like anyone else. Some things may be more risky to try in the context of an MMA competition, but that is an different issue and doesn’t mean that it simply does not work in a “modern context” or against MMA.

There are plenty of reasons things might not work in a modern context, and this is linked to the MMA practitioner idea; I'm not putting them on any pedestal.

Techniques- some techniques which are common now, weren't when certain styles were developed. As an example, roundhouse kicks were not a thing in northern China hundreds of years ago, so the kick defence approaches are very different.

Clothing- Certain techniques were indeed developed with certain clothing, armour or even hairstyles in mind. This could be your opponent wearing it or you. There are techniques which assume you are wearing heavy gauntlets to protect your hand, others that pull on helmet spikes etc.

Weapons- Certain techniques assume defence against a weapon e.g. a spear. Some systems built their hand techniques based on weapons fighting so that both could be taught at once.

Group Fighting- Some styles originate in the assumption that when fighting it would generally be in a group. This necessitates a slightly different approach than one on one

Sports- Not wanting to get into the whole sports applicability or groin shot arguments, but sports style fighting assumes 2 willing participants within a limited area and certain rules. Of course sports fighting is applicable outside of this context, but some techniques in traditional martial arts are based on the assumption that you are fighting outside, don't have space limits, are able to strike soft targets to gain an advantage, or aren't a willing participant. This means different footwork, different scales of movement etc.

So take all of that together and you have techniques which may not be particularly useful in some friendly indoor sparring against a guy that strikes like a kickboxer or muay thai fighter. Of course some of them might still be useful and we'd have to try them to find out, but I can tell you right now that I'm not going to use look back and enjoy the moon into a duck step whilst sparring, because I'd run out of space and I don't want to hit my training partner in the groin.