Lack of lower body protection in Kung Fu?

[Twombles_62]

From what i have noticed, in my very brief time training in Hung Gar, is that there is very little blocking concerned with the lower half of the body. Especially the groin region. I understand that traditionally, most of the attacks were to the body as kung fu was more 'honorable.' Considering that most fighters on the streets will kick to the groin the first opportunity they see does this make Hung Gar, and Kung Fu in general impractical?

 

[Sukerkin]

I can't speak to Hung Gar as I trained in Lau Gar but I'm thinking that perhaps a little more time in harness, so to speak, will reveal that defences are there after all.

For example, many of our groin protection techniques were integral with changes of stance and body posture, a deflection being a part of the movement for good measure.

As ever with style specific questions like this tho', the stock fora answer of "Ask your sensei" is the one that applies. After all, we're well meaning in our replies but we may be leading you astray .

 

[qi-tah]

From what i have noticed, in my very brief time training in Hung Gar, is that there is very little blocking concerned with the lower half of the body. Especially the groin region. I understand that traditionally, most of the attacks were to the body as kung fu was more 'honorable.' Considering that most fighters on the streets will kick to the groin the first opportunity they see does this make Hung Gar, and Kung Fu in general impractical?

I don't know about Hung Gar, but the ba gua i am learning (Cheng style) has stacks of attacks to the legs - sweeps, rakes, knee strikes etc. I've seen a few hand strikes to the groin in various forms too, including one in the short Liu her form called "Ringing the dragon's bell" (!!) So it makes sense that there would be various defences and escapes from those attacks as well, generally, as Sukerkin says, as footwork and transitions in stance, with the limbs only coming into play as part of another counterattack.

 

[Nebuchadnezzar]

I can't speak to Hung Gar as I trained in Lau Gar but I'm thinking that perhaps a little more time in harness, so to speak, will reveal that defences are there after all.

For example, many of our groin protection techniques were integral with changes of stance and body posture, a deflection being a part of the movement for good measure.

As ever with style specific questions like this tho', the stock fora answer of "Ask your sensei" is the one that applies. After all, we're well meaning in our replies but we may be leading you astray .

From what little I know, Lau Gar is Hung Gar and vice versa. If you look at the forms they are both based on the Five Animals and come from Shaolin. They are for lack of better words, cousins.

Anyone with more knowlege than me care to elaborate?

 

[HG1]

EDIT - From what i have noticed, in my very brief time training in Hung Gar, is that there is very little blocking concerned with the lower half of the body. Does this make Hung Gar, and Kung Fu in general impractical?

Your question earns you my favorite quote "There's a method to the madness". You've been training Hung-Ga for a 'very brief' time so not all the answer will be immediately apparent, give it some more time.

As for protecting the lower half of the body - legs block legs.

 

[Xue Sheng]

From what i have noticed, in my very brief time training in Hung Gar, is that there is very little blocking concerned with the lower half of the body. Especially the groin region. I understand that traditionally, most of the attacks were to the body as kung fu was more 'honorable.' Considering that most fighters on the streets will kick to the groin the first opportunity they see does this make Hung Gar, and Kung Fu in general impractical?

HUH???

WARNING MINOR RANT TO FOLLOW

I don't know about Hung Gar but I believe you should spend a little more time training any style of Kung Fu before you start labeling anything impractical based on a false pretense such as "most of the attacks were to the body as kung fu was more 'honorable." Kung fu fights are down right nasty if they go all out and there is nothing off limits. Look at any Qinna or Shuaijiao and you will see that whole "honorable" thing go right out the window. And almost ALL CMA styles have a little of both in them.

Knee kicks are big in MOST kung fu styles as are groin kicks. Heck even Taiji blocks the lower body, but mostly with legs and kicks to block incoming kicks. And it attacks the lower body too. Xingyiquan also is BIG on Leg kicks, especially to the ankle and the knee. Bagua, Long Fist, Sanda, Tongbeiquan, etc are no different they all protect the lower body as well as attack it. GO off and fight a Xingyi guy thinking he won't attack the lower body and it WILL get you hurt.. really bad. Or for that matter go off and spar just about any CMA stylist and you will get the same resault.

I am not sure exactly what you are after here but you really need to do a bit more research before you start labeling entire arts based on a little experience in one southern style.

I could do that same with Karate, but it would be VERY wrong but I was INCREDIBLY unimpressed by what I learned in the month (1 whole month) I spent in a Villari Shaolin Kempo Karate school many years ago. But I’m not going off saying Japanese styles are ineffective based on that nor am I saying Karate is ineffective based on that because a month in ONE style does not make me an expert or a judge.

RANT OVER

 

[Nobody]

From what i have noticed, in my very brief time training in Hung Gar, is that there is very little blocking concerned with the lower half of the body. Especially the groin region. I understand that traditionally, most of the attacks were to the body as kung fu was more 'honorable.' Considering that most fighters on the streets will kick to the groin the first opportunity they see does this make Hung Gar, and Kung Fu in general impractical?

Well to start Hung Gar, does not approach fighting based on how honorable you are. It bases fight on the view what would happen in the street using this. Most application in Kung Fu's are more based on how to apply this to harm someone fast an not try to develop so much speed or power like karate will do with one technique. Kung Fu's tend to focus on have a very combine both power an speed are need to be effective in the fight. Here is a simple logic Karate focus on fighting in the school an tells them to never fight for fun cause it is dangerous, most kung fu's say never fight with your fellow brother for it is dangerous in the school but once the student leaves the school an is no longer under the teacher there often are still tournament that kill an maim still to this day in China. Also, not done based on Honor! Fighting is based on how the corporal soul feels in that person not on how someone else thinks of them. Kung Fu's from my experience is more based on how to street fight.

Though my instructor said not to fight in the school he did not mean do not play. So, as any student wanting to test the idea we regularly kick punched and because we learned how to do proper things like took certain types of hit medicine we were able to fight very close to reality. Unlike Karate they have removed most methods of rending flesh an fajing practices.

At least in my opinion the applied is much easier to see an get from kung fu than a karate system this is probably why there is a lot of bunkia in karate an no need for it in kung fu.

 

[mrhnau]

Xue, could this be a result of his self-proclaimed limited time in Hung Gar? I assume given enough time he will be learning those things?

 

[Xue Sheng]

Xue, could this be a result of his self-proclaimed limited time in Hung Gar? I assume given enough time he will be learning those things?

Could be, could be I am overly sensitive when it comes to blanket statements too, particullarly about the style (General - Kung Fu) I have been doing for so long

 

[Touch Of Death]

From what i have noticed, in my very brief time training in Hung Gar, is that there is very little blocking concerned with the lower half of the body. Especially the groin region. I understand that traditionally, most of the attacks were to the body as kung fu was more 'honorable.' Considering that most fighters on the streets will kick to the groin the first opportunity they see does this make Hung Gar, and Kung Fu in general impractical?

Perhaps dropping your guard is impractical.
Sean

 

[Nobody]

From what i have noticed, in my very brief time training in Hung Gar, is that there is very little blocking concerned with the lower half of the body. Especially the groin region. I understand that traditionally, most of the attacks were to the body as kung fu was more 'honorable.' Considering that most fighters on the streets will kick to the groin the first opportunity they see does this make Hung Gar, and Kung Fu in general impractical?

The thing is you need to figure that out for yourself an study for a bit longer an see if it has no lower blocks.

 

[Tames D]

HUH???

WARNING MINOR RANT TO FOLLOW

I don't know about Hung Gar but I believe you should spend a little more time training any style of Kung Fu before you start labeling anything impractical based on a false pretense such as "most of the attacks were to the body as kung fu was more 'honorable." Kung fu fights are down right nasty if they go all out and there is nothing off limits. Look at any Qinna or Shuaijiao and you will see that whole "honorable" thing go right out the window. And almost ALL CMA styles have a little of both in them.

Knee kicks are big in MOST kung fu styles as are groin kicks. Heck even Taiji blocks the lower body, but mostly with legs and kicks to block incoming kicks. And it attacks the lower body too. Xingyiquan also is BIG on Leg kicks, especially to the ankle and the knee. Bagua, Long Fist, Sanda, Tongbeiquan, etc are no different they all protect the lower body as well as attack it. GO off and fight a Xingyi guy thinking he won't attack the lower body and it WILL get you hurt.. really bad. Or for that matter go off and spar just about any CMA stylist and you will get the same resault.

I am not sure exactly what you are after here but you really need to do a bit more research before you start labeling entire arts based on a little experience in one southern style.

I could do that same with Karate, but it would be VERY wrong but I was INCREDIBLY unimpressed by what I learned in the month (1 whole month) I spent in a Villari Shaolin Kempo Karate school many years ago. But I’m not going off saying Japanese styles are ineffective based on that nor am I saying Karate is ineffective based on that because a month in ONE style does not make me an expert or a judge.

RANT OVER

Good rant. And one I agree with totally.

 

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Breath Xue, breath. I know he transgressed, but he's not ready to receive the Rod of Correction over the head. At least not this time.

 

[Rabu]

I think you got a decent answer to your question.

Think of the body, when upright fighting, as divided at the waist. Legs below, hands above.

Thats really general. But for upright fighting, the legs defend the waist and down better than dropping a hand or arm.

Positioning and timing will also offer protection and create openings. Striking to joints and kicking to points on the legs and lower abdomen are normal in the practices I have seen and practiced.

Reality of fighting changes many dynamics from the classroom training regimen. Being grabbed, falling down, slipping and losing balance...practice what you are doing for a while. Make a list of what your questions are. See if you have an older brother or sister in the school who can offer you some guidence as you progress and when you have doubts about techniques.

Remember to make your questions honest, sincere and respectful. Best of luck in your training.

 

[MaartenSFS]

1) 功夫 (Gongfu - "Kung fu") is not a style, nor even a system, but the whole extent of martial traditions in the third largest country in the world. Styles are many and varied. The principles of fighting will not be so different in any region where fighting commonly occurs, assuming that the conditions are similar and that both societies have "evolved" to the same niveau.

2) Modern day MA teaching is lacking in many ways, but it cannot be said that the original styles were also lacking (Unless 3 and 5 apply).

3) Half of Chinese MAs are over-exaggerated and were created mostly to scare off attackers, rather than actually fight them.

4) The original founders of the arts first mastered the foundation training, afterwhich they could generally kick **** with or without the proper techniques.

5) Many styles of martial arts were never all that great to begin with and survived only because of the hype and legend that surrounded them.

6) Hand to hand combat (Sanda) was the last possible choice for any fighter. It was the most low regarded of 18 fighting disciplines that all warriors were to study and aim to master.

7) Modern China has less fighters than other regions. Fighting is frowned upon and studying worshipped. Honour is when your paycheck is higher than your neighbours and you have enough money to bribe the government into having more children and finally moving to another country. There are fighters, but they are by no means the pinacle of Chinese gongfu and have more or less copied other countries' styles because of ESPS (Eastern Sick Patient Syndrome). The rest of them are practising with flimsy swords and martial dancing, which is not to be confused with combat.

8) As far as I am concerned, protecting your balls is nothing more than footwork.

 

[clfsean]

8) As far as I am concerned, protecting your balls is nothing more than footwork.

And there it is folks... the truth is now out!

Move your feet, turn your waist, protect the jewels.

It really gets no simpler than that & in Southern CMA is a basic that is never overlooked or underworked. Move your feet to attack. Move your feet to defend. Move your feet to evade.

Just move your feet...

 

[pete]

... Heck even Taiji blocks the lower body,

curious to why this would be worded so? in my reading it implies that if Tai Chi is doing it, certainly all arts would be... sorta like Tai Chi is the least common denominator, or the absolute minimum in terms of martial application. if i implied too much with this, please explain...

i know that my Tai Chi experience has expanded the usage and improved the application of fighting technques learned in advanced levels of 'other arts', while also exposing new methods within striking, kicking, grappling, and takedown maneuvers. i may be fortunate in this regard, yet i do not think that i am alone in my experience.

pete

 

[Xue Sheng]

curious to why this would be worded so? in my reading it implies that if Tai Chi is doing it, certainly all arts would be... sorta like Tai Chi is the least common denominator, or the absolute minimum in terms of martial application. if i implied too much with this, please explain...

i know that my Tai Chi experience has expanded the usage and improved the application of fighting technques learned in advanced levels of 'other arts', while also exposing new methods within striking, kicking, grappling, and takedown maneuvers. i may be fortunate in this regard, yet i do not think that i am alone in my experience.

pete

Curious that of all the things said in this post and the topic of this post that you pick out this out statement from me to question.

And speaking of your taiji "expanded" experience I am still waiting for an answer as to what that is exactly is and what style you train.

And if you did actually train and understand real taiji there is not much expansion necessay, just a thought

 

[MaartenSFS]

And there it is folks... the truth is now out!

Move your feet, turn your waist, protect the jewels.

It really gets no simpler than that & in Southern CMA is a basic that is never overlooked or underworked. Move your feet to attack. Move your feet to defend. Move your feet to evade.

Just move your feet...

And here I was with the impression that it was common sense. =P

 

[pete]

Curious that of all the things said in this post and the topic of this post that you pick out this out statement from me to question.

pretty much another non-response, huh? without clarifying your words, i can only imply your intent from my initial read.

And speaking of your taiji "expanded" experience I am still waiting for an answer as to what that is exactly is and what style you train.

your web-fu skills are stong, as evidenced on this and other fora. the answers you are looking for are out there if YOU do the work.

And if you did actually train and understand real taiji there is not much expansion necessay, just a thought

here again, you are implying without knowing, and using innuendo and passive aggressive behavior to flame. you obviously do not know me, what i do and how i train, and obviously don't care enough to find out. yet, you make an unfounded assumption based on your lack of knowledge.

if you get a chance, you still may want to explain your position to the title of this thread and original question relative to why you feel the need to say that 'even tai chi' doesn't lack lower body protection...

pete