Kung Fu vs MMA

[drop bear]

Except I'm not him. It wasn't a crap response. It wasn't what you expected.

So kindly put me on ignore & you no longer have to deal with my crap responses in the future. I'll do the same for you.

You are right you are not him. He gave a sensible response. You acted like a child. And I wasn't really expecting a sensible response. So I am legitimately impressed at least someone took the time to explain how they do things.

If you want to put me on ignore you can do so without telling me how much you are ignoring me. It seems a bit counter productive to be honest.

 

[Flying Crane]

I believe I am the one who introduced the term exaggerated technique, in a prior post.

Exaggerated is not the same as over-extended, and I was referencing the biomechanics and establishing a methodology for the engine that drives ones techniques.

As has been pointed out above, it can take some set up to use the techniques in that fashion. Yes, that certainly works.

And the engine can be used to drive a shorter version of the technique, and get a similar power and effect. And then it looks different, but the engine is still there, it is still the same technique.

Context matters.

 

[JowGaWolf]

And the engine can be used to drive a shorter version of the technique, and get a similar power and effect. And then it looks different, but the engine is still there, it is still the same technique.

I agree and want to add that in almost every form, there will be punches that are longer than in applications. In application the opponent moves in and out of various ranges many times preventing one from being able to be "long" with a technique in the same manner that it is practiced in a form. In the system I study. Long is the same as exaggerated. It helps us to keep our range of motion flexible and strong. It's the same concept that weight lifters use. If they lift weights in with a small range of motion then the tendons get shorter and everything becomes tighter. It's easier and more practical to train long and to shorten if needed in application, than to train small and try to lengthen in application. If the tendons are tight and the flexibility isn't there, then lengthening a technique won't be possible.

 

[Flying Crane]

I agree and want to add that in almost every form, there will be punches that are longer than in applications. In application the opponent moves in and out of various ranges many times preventing one from being able to be "long" with a technique in the same manner that it is practiced in a form. In the system I study. Long is the same as exaggerated. It helps us to keep our range of motion flexible and strong. It's the same concept that weight lifters use. If they lift weights in with a small range of motion then the tendons get shorter and everything becomes tighter. It's easier and more practical to train long and to shorten if needed in application, than to train small and try to lengthen in application. If the tendons are tight and the flexibility isn't there, then lengthening a technique won't be possible.

I would hesitate to say that long is the same as exaggerated. Maybe a better way to describe it might be to say that the movement is bigger. That can include long, but not necessarily, and definitely not exclusively.

By bigger, I mean the body connections, turning the feet and driving the waist rotation and the reverse swing-back with the other arm. These are all things that add to how we build an understanding of full body connection. The entire body rotates starting at the feet. The exaggerated/big movement helps understand the connections.

But in use, it can become much much smaller.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I would hesitate to say that long is the same as exaggerated. Maybe a better way to describe it might be to say that the movement is bigger. That can include long, but not necessarily, and definitely not exclusively.

By bigger, I mean the body connections, turning the feet and driving the waist rotation and the reverse swing-back with the other arm. These are all things that add to how we build an understanding of full body connection. The entire body rotates starting at the feet. The exaggerated/big movement helps understand the connections.

But in use, it can become much much smaller.

I guess it matters in the context of what is being viewed. Form vs Free Sparring application vs Real World Fight Application. One could say that the length is normal for form but not normal for Sparring or Real world fight application.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I would hesitate to say that long is the same as exaggerated. Maybe a better way to describe it might be to say that the movement is bigger. That can include long, but not necessarily, and definitely not exclusively.

By bigger, I mean the body connections, turning the feet and driving the waist rotation and the reverse swing-back with the other arm. These are all things that add to how we build an understanding of full body connection. The entire body rotates starting at the feet. The exaggerated/big movement helps understand the connections.

But in use, it can become much much smaller.

This was how I read your initial usage of "exaggerated". I assumed you simply meant movements that were larger. I sometimes refer to the differences between Aikido styles by how "exaggerated" their circles are, and point out the advantages and disadvantages of those larger circles.

EDIT: "Exaggerated" vs. "Compact" - neither necessarily being a negative.

 

[Flying Crane]

I guess it matters in the context of what is being viewed. Form vs Free Sparring application vs Real World Fight Application. One could say that the length is normal for form but not normal for Sparring or Real world fight application.

Well, there were some important points made in some earlier posts about how we hit through the target. Sure, everyone has this concept in some way or other. But the baseball bat analogy was pretty good. We aren't content with penetrating. We are looking to completely blast through the target. So in that sense, the real world application still has room for the big movement.

It isn't always possible or practical under all circumstances. But underneath it all, that is the intention. It's kind of an "all or nothing" mentality. If we decide to hit, then we hit to destroy. If I don't feel it's worth destroying the target, then maybe it's not worth hitting at all. That is a recognition of the seriousness of violent action. It's not a game. This is also why it can be difficult to spar with out method, because the mental approach and mindset is to destroy. We practice a method with that intention. If we dial it back, then we undermine that intention and we develop a habit of holding back the power. That is completely counter to how our methodology is structured. I know that certain people will jump on that comment and have a heyday with it. Their opinion means nothing. That is why I ignore them.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Well, there were some important points made in some earlier posts about how we hit through the target. Sure, everyone has this concept in some way or other. But the baseball bat analogy was pretty good. We aren't content with penetrating. We are looking to completely blast through the target. So in that sense, the real world application still has room for the big movement.

It isn't always possible or practical under all circumstances. But underneath it all, that is the intention. It's kind of an "all or nothing" mentality. If we decide to hit, then we hit to destroy. If I don't feel it's worth destroying the target, then maybe it's not worth hitting at all. That is a recognition of the seriousness of violent action. It's not a game. This is also why it can be difficult to spar with out method, because the mental approach and mindset is to destroy. We practice a method with that intention. If we dial it back, then we undermine that intention and we develop a habit of holding back the power. That is completely counter to how our methodology is structured. I know that certain people will jump on that comment and have a heyday with it. Their opinion means nothing. That is why I ignore them.

My response is not an argument as your comment may be true for your system.

I don't like the baseball bat analogy because it's not a punch. The mechanics are not the same. Let's put the baseball analogy in the context of fighting.

Guy with baseball bat swings through as you stated. Watch what happens. He did exactly what you said. He swung through with power. If he hits, then great. If he misses then that power carries his swing through and as a result he gets punch through the opening caused by swinging through beyond where he actually needed to swing through. This is why many practical staff forms do not have staff swings that swing through like a bat. For the one's that do swing through like a bat, those swing around back to the beginning.

You can see my swing through punch here. You can also see me do multiple swings, and you'll see me do one that is like your baseball bat analogy except for the fact that I do something that covers that opening caused by the baseball bat analogy. I know from first hand experience because I got kicked by a Sifu who was helping me with my Jow Ga Kup Choys to understand the opening that swinging through leaves me, which in turn made me understand completely why this particular punch is always done a certain way in the Jow Ga form. You can also see the other things that were mention about the Paau Choih.

It was stated that the punch required a set up, but I think that's because of how Lama Pai throws them (You will have to ask them or if you take Lama Pai yourself then you would be able to compare the difference). In Jow Ga, the way that we throw the Paau Choih allows me to use them as an initial attack that doesn't require a set up. In the video my initial swings are not thrown short they are attacking the guard. I continue the swinging so I can keep him at bay and reset.

You can also see the punch here from this other Jow Ga School in Australia.

When I do some of my big punches, it is less about punching through the target (because punching through on a circular punch is only within a small range of contact), and more about following through, so that I can use the momentum of one punch to drive the power of my next punch. This not only makes my long fist punches faster, but it's also faster to do, than trying to reset that type of punch pull it back to reload and then launch it again. It's like you stated "it's an all or nothing" technique. You don't want to bail out of it. The effort that it would take to actually slow some of the long fist punches down from full force to stop makes bailing out very dangerous.

I also agree with your other statements about being difficult to spar with some of these techniques. This is why the punches in my sparring video are slow in comparison to how they would actually be thrown in a real fight or even a competitive fight. Here the baseball analogy fits. It's like swinging a baseball bat as hard as you can and then trying to stop your swing so you don't hit the ball.

 

[Flying Crane]

My response is not an argument as your comment may be true for your system.

I don't like the baseball bat analogy because it's not a punch. The mechanics are not the same. Let's put the baseball analogy in the context of fighting.

Guy with baseball bat swings through as you stated. Watch what happens. He did exactly what you said. He swung through with power. If he hits, then great. If he misses then that power carries his swing through and as a result he gets punch through the opening caused by swinging through beyond where he actually needed to swing through. This is why many practical staff forms do not have staff swings that swing through like a bat. For the one's that do swing through like a bat, those swing around back to the beginning.

You can see my swing through punch here. You can also see me do multiple swings, and you'll see me do one that is like your baseball bat analogy except for the fact that I do something that covers that opening caused by the baseball bat analogy. I know from first hand experience because I got kicked by a Sifu who was helping me with my Jow Ga Kup Choys to understand the opening that swinging through leaves me, which in turn made me understand completely why this particular punch is always done a certain way in the Jow Ga form. You can also see the other things that were mention about the Paau Choih.

It was stated that the punch required a set up, but I think that's because of how Lama Pai throws them (You will have to ask them or if you take Lama Pai yourself then you would be able to compare the difference). In Jow Ga, the way that we throw the Paau Choih allows me to use them as an initial attack that doesn't require a set up. In the video my initial swings are not thrown short they are attacking the guard. I continue the swinging so I can keep him at bay and reset.

You can also see the punch here from this other Jow Ga School in Australia.

When I do some of my big punches, it is less about punching through the target (because punching through on a circular punch is only within a small range of contact), and more about following through, so that I can use the momentum of one punch to drive the power of my next punch. This not only makes my long fist punches faster, but it's also faster to do, than trying to reset that type of punch pull it back to reload and then launch it again. It's like you stated "it's an all or nothing" technique. You don't want to bail out of it. The effort that it would take to actually slow some of the long fist punches down from full force to stop makes bailing out very dangerous.

I also agree with your other statements about being difficult to spar with some of these techniques. This is why the punches in my sparring video are slow in comparison to how they would actually be thrown in a real fight or even a competitive fight. Here the baseball analogy fits. It's like swinging a baseball bat as hard as you can and then trying to stop your swing so you don't hit the ball.

Well, as an analogy, I'm not going to compare it with someone actually fighting with a bat. When you introduce a tool or weapon, things are altered to some degree. The analogy is simply the follow-through and committment with the intention of maximum damage.

I agree that this can leave you open in some ways, and that is why I have commented that the big movement can go away while still having similar effect, as long as the principles that give it power are still in place. The big movement, in actual fighting, has its place, but can also leave you open, and ya gotta recognize when it is appropriate, or not. Context matters. We use one punch to flow into the next, and that can cover any openings so they are a lot less than one might suppose.

In don't train Lama Pai, I train in the sister method Tibetan White Crane. They are not identical, but the underlying methods and theory are still very close.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Well, as an analogy, I'm not going to compare it with someone actually fighting with a bat. When you introduce a tool or weapon, things are altered to some degree. The analogy is simply the follow-through and committment with the intention of maximum damage.

I agree that this can leave you open in some ways, and that is why I have commented that the big movement can go away while still having similar effect, as long as the principles that give it power are still in place. The big movement, in actual fighting, has its place, but can also leave you open, and ya gotta recognize when it is appropriate, or not. Context matters. We use one punch to flow into the next, and that can cover any openings so they are a lot less than one might suppose.

In don't train Lama Pai, I train in the sister method Tibetan White Crane. They are not identical, but the underlying methods and theory are still very close.

I think a problem occurs when you are talking many Chinese marital arts style as compared to non-Chinese systems. Many want to here "If he does "A" then I do "B" and that is simply not how many Chinese styles work, heck it is not even how much of Chinese culture works. Basically not all front jabs are created equally and depending on the speed, power and direction of force things can change drastically as it applies to a response.

 

[JowGaWolf]

The analogy is simply the follow-through and committment with the intention of maximum damage.

I agree.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I think a problem occurs when you are talking many Chinese marital arts style as compared to non-Chinese systems. Many want to here "If he does "A" then I do "B"

It's a big problem in many schools including the one I train in. It's not a slam on any school or system, it's just a common mindset. I'm was guilty of the same mindset until I started trusting the technique. I actually have a drill that I use to help keep me from moving back into that mindset.

 

[drop bear]

I believe I am the one who introduced the term exaggerated technique, in a prior post.

Exaggerated is not the same as over-extended, and I was referencing the biomechanics and establishing a methodology for the engine that drives ones techniques.

As has been pointed out above, it can take some set up to use the techniques in that fashion. Yes, that certainly works.

And the engine can be used to drive a shorter version of the technique, and get a similar power and effect. And then it looks different, but the engine is still there, it is still the same technique.

Context matters.

Head kicks to a certain degree are an example of an effective exaggerated technique.

Your foot goes from the floor in a circle to their head. That is a comparative massive distance to travel. But it also comes from an odd angle making it hard to pick.

 

[drop bear]

My response is not an argument as your comment may be true for your system.

I don't like the baseball bat analogy because it's not a punch. The mechanics are not the same. Let's put the baseball analogy in the context of fighting.

Guy with baseball bat swings through as you stated. Watch what happens. He did exactly what you said. He swung through with power. If he hits, then great. If he misses then that power carries his swing through and as a result he gets punch through the opening caused by swinging through beyond where he actually needed to swing through. This is why many practical staff forms do not have staff swings that swing through like a bat. For the one's that do swing through like a bat, those swing around back to the beginning.

You can see my swing through punch here. You can also see me do multiple swings, and you'll see me do one that is like your baseball bat analogy except for the fact that I do something that covers that opening caused by the baseball bat analogy. I know from first hand experience because I got kicked by a Sifu who was helping me with my Jow Ga Kup Choys to understand the opening that swinging through leaves me, which in turn made me understand completely why this particular punch is always done a certain way in the Jow Ga form. You can also see the other things that were mention about the Paau Choih.

It was stated that the punch required a set up, but I think that's because of how Lama Pai throws them (You will have to ask them or if you take Lama Pai yourself then you would be able to compare the difference). In Jow Ga, the way that we throw the Paau Choih allows me to use them as an initial attack that doesn't require a set up. In the video my initial swings are not thrown short they are attacking the guard. I continue the swinging so I can keep him at bay and reset.

You can also see the punch here from this other Jow Ga School in Australia.

When I do some of my big punches, it is less about punching through the target (because punching through on a circular punch is only within a small range of contact), and more about following through, so that I can use the momentum of one punch to drive the power of my next punch. This not only makes my long fist punches faster, but it's also faster to do, than trying to reset that type of punch pull it back to reload and then launch it again. It's like you stated "it's an all or nothing" technique. You don't want to bail out of it. The effort that it would take to actually slow some of the long fist punches down from full force to stop makes bailing out very dangerous.

I also agree with your other statements about being difficult to spar with some of these techniques. This is why the punches in my sparring video are slow in comparison to how they would actually be thrown in a real fight or even a competitive fight. Here the baseball analogy fits. It's like swinging a baseball bat as hard as you can and then trying to stop your swing so you don't hit the ball.

You guys enter really straight fo a lot of circular strikes. There are guys who pull off big loopy striking. But they tend to be unorthodox.

Even looking at the Jow Gar kata they are constantly cutting angles and hitting being basically awkward to predict.

hop Gar no surprise. Hits akward angles.
Tibetan Lama Pai Lion's Roar Hop Gar Kung Fu - The Eight Basic Punches

A better example as he is also hitting a level change going back through the middle. or hitting sort of back fist shots without going back through the middle.

Rare Hop Ga Forms

 

[JowGaWolf]

You guys enter really straight fo a lot of circular strikes.

I take angles as well. I just haven't shown those videos yet. Here's the general rules. If they flee, then follow. If they take and angle then take an angle. If they attack then take an angle. If they stay still then take an angle.

We train angles all the time both in drills and in sparring. I think I have 3 or 4 examples of me and another student taking angles during light sparring.

 

[mograph]

But it also comes from an odd angle making it hard to pick.

Defence against it: learn to watch for the weight shift then step back?

 

[drop bear]

Defence against it: learn to watch for the weight shift then step back?

It every time they shifted they threw a particular strike. But the idea is to have a few option to each shif you do. That way they don't know what is coming untill the last second.

 

[FighterTwister]

Kung-Fu vs MMA only back in the old days of UFC (Cage Warrior's) when it all started not anymore just no chance of that ever happening, again.

Under the revised striking guidelines in their contracts, thats for sure.

I would have loved to watch Kung-Fu San Soo at work in the old days though.......watch................

 

[Martial D]

Kung-Fu vs MMA only back in the old days of UFC (Cage Warrior's) when it all started not anymore just no chance of that ever happening, again.

Under the revised striking guidelines in their contracts, thats for sure.

I would have loved to watch Kung-Fu San Soo at work in the old days though.......watch................

Actually it happens all the time. Revised striking guidelines in their contracts? Wtf lol.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Kung-Fu vs MMA only back in the old days of UFC (Cage Warrior's) when it all started not anymore just no chance of that ever happening, again.

Under the revised striking guidelines in their contracts, thats for sure.

I would have loved to watch Kung-Fu San Soo at work in the old days though.......watch................

Originally the UFC was supposed to be different fighting systems against each other, which is awesome. I think it would have worked out well had it stayed that way, but people started mixing and matching skill sets instead of representing their fighting system. I think kung fu would have benefited greatly had it stayed as it was originally envisioned. Now it's just a bunch of fighters and if you ask them which system do they represent many of them will say, I don't represent one system I study a variety of things.

I would like the UFC fights more if it were people form various fighting systems testing out their ability and staying true to the fighting system that they are training. I think there are a lot of martial arts out there that would have advanced had it stayed this way. I like watching people find solutions within their own system.