Chop-Suey Martial Arts

[Scary]

I'm not trying to be critical of Asian TMA's just because I'm a
MAA person, I'm just suspicious of why some people chose to do these
sort of traditional styles, I've concluded that it's mostly because
they're different, but there's more to it than just that!.

What I can't work out is why Karate and TKD as kicking- striking
styles became so popular in the 60s and 70s? Like for example Savate
has been known in western-fighting arts for over 200 years and
Boxing-Wrestling has been in development since before the ancient
Greeks or back to the year dot in the west (A lot longer than Karate or
TKD).
Why this fascination with Oriental MA's at the end of the 20th
century?

My only conclusion is that westerners were drawn to Zen, Buddhist or
Shinto Taoist ideas packaged up with a lot of these systems, it might
be the sense that enlightenment - mysteries of the orient are tied up
in Asian fighting arts?

My experience of some so called TMA's instructors seems to be that in
class they can act holier then thou and in real life are just errant
assholes but then I'm Suspicious of Gurus and Sensei's who set
themselves apart from their students

Looking to the East as far as MA's are concerned seems to be another
aspect of hippie culture, to those who believe they've found some
sort of answer to life by doing 1000's of repetitive moves in Kata is
akin to believing that just going to church every Sunday will save
their souls.

Combat effectiveness becomes like a faith as well, because you do a
hundred katas with Sempai Yogi is it really going to make you a good
fighter?
Even though this Kata based approach has been discredited the zombie
minions of TMA orthodoxy still perform it like some Charlie Chan
riverdance. Why?

It seems that human beings have the need to look elsewhere, to what's
different for answers.
Truth is not good enough not exciting enough just on it's own! It
needs to be embellished with some sort of "Ism", does the fact that
techniques are written in another language make them better?

The answer is "Yes" because when the European instructor parrots
off something in Chinese or Japanese it's more pretentious and has
that appeal of the other, the strange the orient!

We've been feed a diet of Chop-Suey martial arts since the 60s and
it's effected our minds! And many people still buy into this stuff!
Movies perpetuate it as well, if there is enlightenment or revelation
it has to be founded in truth not ritualized oriental mummery.

Scary.

[scottsummers]

I think a lot of it was the kung fu/ general standup movie craze.
People see standup fighting in the movies and obviously it is visually
more entertaining and people would like to be able to do that. There
are also usually more variations of techniques and unusual ones in
standup arts. For instance wrestling has a lot of smothering the
opponent, takedowns, some throws or drops but it kinda looks the same.
Standup you see kicks or punches going into throws or whatnot I think
it just attracted people more. The bad thing about most traditional
schools is not always the techniques or the art itself but that they
dont really practice the applications. Im sure you could make a lot of
the techniques work if you specifically practiced them. BJJ and some
other arts obviously ONLY do applications so you will know if something
works or not doing applications. Plus, you fight how you train. You
cant be expected to extrapolate a technique from a kata if you never
practice bunkai or applications. But still, I think it depends on the
instructor and his teaching style.

Travis

[xiaou2]

Your chopsuey article shows you know so little about
tmas that its not even funny.

While ground fighting has some advantages, there are
times when it just wont work well in practice... like
if 6 people decide to attack you at once.

Im sure theres other examples too.

The thing is.. if you knew some Good tmas, then you
would be a more complete fighter. Not having
to get your clothes dirty for nothing...and being able
to take on many more attackers at once.

These tma's are verying in practicality though.
Like all arts - theres flaws and weaknesses in them. There
is also art and beauty in them as well.

In the case of shaolin kungfu... they are usually more stiff
and predicatable. However, a propperly trained shaolin monk
is nearly industructable! Ever see them do demos where people
kick thier nads full power, and punch them anywhere... and not
a tear, yell, or any reaction to it! Thier power is sick,
skill is sick, knowledge is in the volumes.

Wing Chun, which Ive found is the most practical in real street
fighting... has been arroud for a long time. However - Im not
so sure I consider it a Tma... because it uses some very different
approaches. Yet, it does borrow knowlege from other Tmas.. like
snake and crane. Very fluid, no need for muscle strenght to win,
advanced trapping, use of two or even 3 limbs at once, no
dominent side - equal accuracy, close range power..and much more.

In Chi Na, chinese grapling and joint locking... theres an amazing
number of painfull things they can do to you if they even get one
chance to grab you.

Eagle Claw, has many elements of chi na.. but also has many more
techniques including some great kicking and acrobatics. Very fast
and powerfull.

Tai Chi, while most taught for excercise.. there are versions
of it that are more combat centered. Very good for evasion
of force, redirection, needing little muscle to win techniques.
Added bonus of energy collection, energy projection, healing,
mental clarity and peacfull ballance thru meditation...and more.

Akido, simular to tai chi, but seems to have more throws..
and genrally more combat training.

Tae Kwan Do, while most trained today as a sport.. if done
for combat, its kicks are blindingly fast and very hard to
get close to them. Kicks that are bone shattering & knockout
powerfull.

Karate... im not a fan of as to me it seems too watered down.
Although, in certain japenese places, they train much more
seriously - and one hit from thier kick would be enough to
end things. These guys are also very hard and can take
a severe hit quite easily.

And theres many more sytles and arts that I havnt touched on.

Theres a wealth of information out there that took several
generations to develop. If you ignor that much knowlege, then
you are a fool for sure.

I will also state that many martial artist today are
not what they used to be. In older days training was much
more intense and serious. They were better fighters with more
power, speed, accuracy.

In traditional chinese kungfu for instance... they would have
you stand in a horse stance. They wouldnt train you any more,
untill you could stay in that stance - rock solid - for
like 3hrs! Why? as your legs are your ballance and used to
keep stability and transfer power correctly. Without strong
legs, you are like a leaf blowing in the wind... so any additional
knowledge would not do you any good. Also, teaching anything more
to such a person who wasnt ready - would give the art a bad name
and reputataion when he failed in a fight.

There were such trainings as ballencing and fighting on 6" diameter
posts that were high off the ground. Very essential for ballance
and accuracy.. yet, most will never do this as too many lawsuits
would follow.

Many schools today are based on money. In that regaurd, they
do not enforce stricter progression. So there are lots of
people that do not deserve what they have learned, nor the
rank they achieved. However, not many people would pay a guy
to have them say "stand in horse stance for 3rhs".

Basically what Im saying here, is that just cause you
fought a bunch of TKD guys and won easily dosnt mean that
they are a good representation of the art itself. If they
do not train as hard as the older times and as frequent,
they may do injustice to the very name of thier style.
(this includes instructors and pro fighters)

So in closing, you can choose to believe that the art you
do is flawless.. and that all other stuff is crap. Or, you can
go and do a bit of research and find new techniques to master
from past knowleges... have fun, become a master of many styles,
and be that much more deadly. (and look great in the process! ; )

[Fraser Johnston]

Post by xiaou2
Your chopsuey article shows you know so little about
tmas that its not even funny.
While ground fighting has some advantages, there are
times when it just wont work well in practice... like
if 6 people decide to attack you at once.
Im sure theres other examples too.
The thing is.. if you knew some Good tmas, then you
would be a more complete fighter. Not having
to get your clothes dirty for nothing...and being able
to take on many more attackers at once.
These tma's are verying in practicality though.
Like all arts - theres flaws and weaknesses in them. There
is also art and beauty in them as well.
In the case of shaolin kungfu... they are usually more stiff
and predicatable. However, a propperly trained shaolin monk
is nearly industructable! Ever see them do demos where people
kick thier nads full power, and punch them anywhere... and not
a tear, yell, or any reaction to it! Thier power is sick,
skill is sick, knowledge is in the volumes.
Wing Chun, which Ive found is the most practical in real street
fighting... has been arroud for a long time. However - Im not
so sure I consider it a Tma... because it uses some very different
approaches. Yet, it does borrow knowlege from other Tmas.. like
snake and crane. Very fluid, no need for muscle strenght to win,
advanced trapping, use of two or even 3 limbs at once, no
dominent side - equal accuracy, close range power..and much more.
In Chi Na, chinese grapling and joint locking... theres an amazing
number of painfull things they can do to you if they even get one
chance to grab you.
Eagle Claw, has many elements of chi na.. but also has many more
techniques including some great kicking and acrobatics. Very fast
and powerfull.
Tai Chi, while most taught for excercise.. there are versions
of it that are more combat centered. Very good for evasion
of force, redirection, needing little muscle to win techniques.
Added bonus of energy collection, energy projection, healing,
mental clarity and peacfull ballance thru meditation...and more.
Akido, simular to tai chi, but seems to have more throws..
and genrally more combat training.
Tae Kwan Do, while most trained today as a sport.. if done
for combat, its kicks are blindingly fast and very hard to
get close to them. Kicks that are bone shattering & knockout
powerfull.
Karate... im not a fan of as to me it seems too watered down.
Although, in certain japenese places, they train much more
seriously - and one hit from thier kick would be enough to
end things. These guys are also very hard and can take
a severe hit quite easily.
And theres many more sytles and arts that I havnt touched on.
Theres a wealth of information out there that took several
generations to develop. If you ignor that much knowlege, then
you are a fool for sure.
I will also state that many martial artist today are
not what they used to be. In older days training was much
more intense and serious. They were better fighters with more
power, speed, accuracy.
In traditional chinese kungfu for instance... they would have
you stand in a horse stance. They wouldnt train you any more,
untill you could stay in that stance - rock solid - for
like 3hrs! Why? as your legs are your ballance and used to
keep stability and transfer power correctly. Without strong
legs, you are like a leaf blowing in the wind... so any additional
knowledge would not do you any good. Also, teaching anything more
to such a person who wasnt ready - would give the art a bad name
and reputataion when he failed in a fight.
There were such trainings as ballencing and fighting on 6" diameter
posts that were high off the ground. Very essential for ballance
and accuracy.. yet, most will never do this as too many lawsuits
would follow.
Many schools today are based on money. In that regaurd, they
do not enforce stricter progression. So there are lots of
people that do not deserve what they have learned, nor the
rank they achieved. However, not many people would pay a guy
to have them say "stand in horse stance for 3rhs".
Basically what Im saying here, is that just cause you
fought a bunch of TKD guys and won easily dosnt mean that
they are a good representation of the art itself. If they
do not train as hard as the older times and as frequent,
they may do injustice to the very name of thier style.
(this includes instructors and pro fighters)
So in closing, you can choose to believe that the art you
do is flawless.. and that all other stuff is crap. Or, you can
go and do a bit of research and find new techniques to master
from past knowleges... have fun, become a master of many styles,
and be that much more deadly. (and look great in the process! ; )

I'm giving this a 10 on the Richman scale. It doesn't get any better than
this.

Fraser

[Kevin Lowe]

Post by Fraser Johnston

Post by xiaou2
So in closing, you can choose to believe that the art you
do is flawless.. and that all other stuff is crap. Or, you can
go and do a bit of research and find new techniques to master
from past knowleges... have fun, become a master of many styles,
and be that much more deadly. (and look great in the process! ; )

I'm giving this a 10 on the Richman scale. It doesn't get any better than
this.

I'll second that. Xiaou2 has range, amazing endurance, and a deep
knowledge of traditional trolling techniques which he/she applies
effortlessly to real posts. A troll's troll, if I may say so.

kevin Lowe,
Tasmania.

[Scary]

Post by Fraser Johnston

Post by xiaou2
So in closing, you can choose to believe that the art you
do is flawless.. and that all other stuff is crap. Or, you can
go and do a bit of research and find new techniques to master
from past knowleges... have fun, become a master of many styles,
and be that much more deadly. (and look great in the process! ; )

I'm giving this a 10 on the Richman scale. It doesn't get any better than
this.

I'll second that. Xiaou2 has range, amazing endurance, and a deep
knowledge of traditional trolling techniques which he/she applies
effortlessly to real posts. A troll's troll, if I may say so.

kevin Lowe,
Tasmania.


Yep! I think he's working out well! It's like Ollie Richman returned
from the dead.

Scary.

[Badger North]

Post by Scary
Yep! I think he's working out well! It's like Ollie Richman returned
from the dead.

No way, xiaou has way more range than Richman. He's closer to Victor
I'd say, both in ability and style.

Badger Jones
www.youngforest.ca
"Hard to be a freak when the carnival's not in town." - Chas Clements

[Scary]

Yep! I think he's working out well! It's like Ollie Richman returned

Post by Scary
from the dead.

No way, xiaou has way more range than Richman. He's closer to Victor
I'd say, both in ability and style.

Badger Jones
www.youngforest.ca
"Hard to be a freak when the carnival's not in town." - Chas Clements

Well we certainly are getting our moneys worth, I really like the
Engrish touch in he's writing!

Scary.

[Karim]

Post by Scary
I really like the
Engrish touch in he's writing!

^^^^

Scary, I don't know quite how to put this... ;)

[Scary]

Post by Scary
I really like the
Engrish touch in he's writing!

^^^^

Scary, I don't know quite how to put this... ;)


--
Karim <remove SPAMFREE: krashad at SPAMorbisFREEuk dot com>


Sorry Karim mate im on pain killers and Im also stoned tonight , I know
my spelling is crap I went to art school damit!!!!
What does ^^^^ mean? WOt my Engrish no good but i fite GUD!

Scary =)

[Karim]

Post by Scary
Sorry Karim mate im on pain killers and Im also stoned tonight , I know
my spelling is crap I went to art school damit!!!!

Perfectly acceptable excuses!

Post by Scary
What does ^^^^ mean? WOt my Engrish no good but i fite GUD!

The '^^^^' bit was just pointing out a particular bit (on the line above)...

Post by Scary
I really like the
Engrish touch in he's writing!

^^^^

...and it wasn't the bad spelling, actually, it's just that if you
pronounce that particular bit out loud, a la "I like he's writing" it
sounds very 'Engrish' in itself :-) (We call it Chinglish here, and in my
work dealing with a various clients from Macau, I am very familiar with it!)

[David H. Ellison]

Post by Karim

Post by Scary
I really like the
Engrish touch in he's writing!

^^^^
Scary, I don't know quite how to put this... ;)
--
Karim <remove SPAMFREE: krashad at SPAMorbisFREEuk dot com>
Sorry Karim mate im on pain killers and Im also stoned tonight , I know
my spelling is crap I went to art school damit!!!!
What does ^^^^ mean? WOt my Engrish no good but i fite GUD!
Scary =)

uhmmm... spell check anyone?

(: I'm in Art School :)

[Scary]

xiaou2 I'm not having a go at TMA's at least not exactly in the
way you think. I'm questioning westerner's motivations in choosing
an Asian art and why some styles became popular in the 60s & 70s.
As for you're value judgements re TMA, basically they are what they
are, but what they are not is ultimate fighting systems!

You used that old chestnut of "Multiple attacks" to value some
standup traditional styles and that just doesn't make sense when you
apply logic to it.
Follow this line of logic: If a mixed martial artist can beat a
traditional martial artist in under a minute in a one on one fight what
makes you think that that you could handle 3 or 4 such fighters at the
same time?

Now if you're talking about self-defense in the street against a
bunch of untrained wally's, then maybe you're TMA might give you an
edge but I've yet to see this demonstrated in anything apart from
movies.
You're also concluding that a MAAist can't deal with multiples,
well we certainly train for that scenario and we know our techniques
are 100% effective because we always train real life!

Now I've seen Kung fu practitioners who can do many of those Shaolin
chi tricks, bending spears on their necks, balancing on their heads,
hanging by the neck form trees (the list goes on). Now! The question is
why do these guys who can perform all this remarkable feats get the
crap beaten out of them in MMA fights?
Chop Suey martial arts were shamed and discredited in the early
UFC's, to quote from some other RMA poster
"Did Fred Ettish rolling around in a pool of his own blood teach the
TMA's practitioners nothing?"

People can train TMA's for many reasons apart from just to learn
fighting and that's fine, but to walk the street thinking that they
know the ultimate fighting style is delusional and wrong. In that way
TMA's become a matter of faith or a cult and stops being any sort of
practical means of fighting.

Scary

[xiaou2]

Post by Scary
xiaou2 I'm not having a go at TMA's at least not exactly in the
way you think. I'm questioning westerner's motivations in choosing
an Asian art and why some styles became popular in the 60s & 70s.

To question why people choose asian arts IS to 'go at' them.. as
basically what you are doing is insulting them and telling people
they are useless and why learn them.

Post by Scary
As for you're value judgements re TMA, basically they are what they
are, but what they are not is ultimate fighting systems!

Neither is pure ground fighting.

Post by Scary
You used that old chestnut of "Multiple attacks" to value some
standup traditional styles and that just doesn't make sense when you
apply logic to it.
Follow this line of logic: If a mixed martial artist can beat a
traditional martial artist in under a minute in a one on one fight what
makes you think that that you could handle 3 or 4 such fighters at the
same time?

This is a crap statement. Mixed usually means its watered down... and
training for it is watered down.

IE: you would be mixed if you studied eagle claws hand grab and yet
had ground fighting base.. however, from what I see, the more intensive
training that makes the claw work correct, is not done. Its a weakened
form of it... so really... a true eagle claw guy could easily do much
better.

Im not saying that its impossible that people could devise a
mixed system and make it work well.. but from what ive seen
its all sloppy crap.

All you and many are going by are these stupid "ultimate
fighting" competitions. And in reality, these are not real
good examples.

If reality... if you take 20 minutes to roll arround with a
guy on the pavment... you are not only going to get bashed by
several others.. but cops will have arrived -or worse, people
with guns.

I seriously doubt that 5 competent people attacting a ground fighter
would result in 5 injured attackers. Its not fast enough.

WC however IS. Ive tooken a guy to the ground with a near broken
leg in 1 second flat. No joke.

These UFC things do not have GOOD martial artist go there. Because
unlike some, we have VALUES. We dont like to break peoples legs,
poke thier eyes out, rip into thier groins.. just to proove we
can do it. We know we can do it - and do not feel we have to
possibly permanently injure a person for life in order to proove it.
How would people view such a thing? Not well. At least I do not
see it as good character.

Now, Im not saying ground fighting isnt without its merrits.
If one does trip, slip up...then yes, its gonna be very helpfull...
but do not think that makes it the Ultimate art!

Dismissing hundreads of years worth of knowlege beacause you
havnt seen a true master turn a ground fighters brain to
mush is pathetic. Also pathetic is judging a style merely
based on its lame practitioners. Not everyone is an expert...
even tho they claim to be.

Again, Im not going to say that WC is the ultimate art
either. Each system has some great techniques and advantages.
Some that will knock you into next year... and you wont
even see it comming.

Post by Scary
Now if you're talking about self-defense in the street against a
bunch of untrained wally's, then maybe you're TMA might give you an
edge but I've yet to see this demonstrated in anything apart from
movies.

and would you? Nope, cause it will last only 20 seconds at most.
Faster than any camera guy could set up and caprture - unless they
knew it was going to happen in advance. Other than that, it again,
is based on Morals. Do not harm, unless life is real danger.

Post by Scary
You're also concluding that a MAAist can't deal with multiples,
well we certainly train for that scenario and we know our techniques
are 100% effective because we always train real life!

I somehow doubt you train with mixed styles of multiple attackers...
people that really know what they are doing.

You also are concluding that TMA's wernt founded on real attacks?
Get real. The arts were very well developed against real attackers.
Some modeled after animals even. And these arts were tweaked and
improoved over hundreads of years worth of advancement. What makes
you think your system is both original and more advanced than
100+ years worth of advancement and refinement?!

Post by Scary
Now I've seen Kung fu practitioners who can do many of those Shaolin
chi tricks, bending spears on their necks, balancing on their heads,
hanging by the neck form trees (the list goes on). Now! The question is
why do these guys who can perform all this remarkable feats get the
crap beaten out of them in MMA fights?

Good fighters do not participate in such a ruthless Immoral
practice period. What you see are greedy guys who have limited
at best skills. Not the real deal guys.

You also mention the so called 'tricks' not the real martial
capability and knowledge.

Post by Scary
Chop Suey martial arts were shamed and discredited in the early
UFC's, to quote from some other RMA poster
"Did Fred Ettish rolling around in a pool of his own blood teach the
TMA's practitioners nothing?"
People can train TMA's for many reasons apart from just to learn
fighting and that's fine, but to walk the street thinking that they
know the ultimate fighting style is delusional and wrong. In that way
TMA's become a matter of faith or a cult and stops being any sort of
practical means of fighting.
Scary

The delusive one here is you.

Ive never been tackled by a ground fighter without hitting him
several times in vital areas. Always dizzying them
senceless. And that being a fraction of my full capablity..
and i was only 6ft 165 lbs at that time. Very thin and
not too muscle bound. I didnt even launch my knee breaker,
cause again, I dont like to hurt unless its life or death.

The truth here, is that you know about 1% of anything that
is out there waiting to take you out - that you are not
equipped to handle.

Its sad to see a new generation be so easily fooled.
That and have such low morality standards.

[T]

Post by xiaou2

Post by Scary
As for you're value judgements re TMA, basically they are what they
are, but what they are not is ultimate fighting systems!

Neither is pure ground fighting.

Well, no.

Two points:

First, the mma guys have demonstrated that skill in striking and clinch
is useful.

Second, tools trump skills. A knife beats a purple belt, a gun beats a
black belt.

Post by xiaou2

Post by Scary
You used that old chestnut of "Multiple attacks" to value some
standup traditional styles and that just doesn't make sense when you
apply logic to it.
Follow this line of logic: If a mixed martial artist can beat a
traditional martial artist in under a minute in a one on one fight what
makes you think that that you could handle 3 or 4 such fighters at the
same time?

This is a crap statement. Mixed usually means its watered down... and
training for it is watered down.

Nope, mma is one thing.

What you suggest, studying a bunch of different arts, now that's watered
down.

Post by xiaou2
IE: you would be mixed if you studied eagle claws hand grab and yet
had ground fighting base.. however, from what I see, the more intensive
training that makes the claw work correct, is not done. Its a weakened
form of it... so really... a true eagle claw guy could easily do much
better.
Im not saying that its impossible that people could devise a
mixed system and make it work well.. but from what ive seen
its all sloppy crap.
All you and many are going by are these stupid "ultimate
fighting" competitions. And in reality, these are not real
good examples.

Best available.

Post by xiaou2
If reality... if you take 20 minutes to roll arround with a
guy on the pavment... you are not only going to get bashed by
several others.. but cops will have arrived -or worse, people
with guns.

If he's as good as you, it takes a while. If he's not, it really
doesn't take very long.

Post by xiaou2
I seriously doubt that 5 competent people attacting a ground fighter
would result in 5 injured attackers. Its not fast enough.

Nothing unarmed is.

Post by xiaou2
WC however IS. Ive tooken a guy to the ground with a near broken
leg in 1 second flat. No joke.

I tapped a guy with a guillotine that fast, so what?

Post by xiaou2
These UFC things do not have GOOD martial artist go there. Because
unlike some, we have VALUES. We dont like to break peoples legs,
poke thier eyes out, rip into thier groins.. just to proove we
can do it. We know we can do it - and do not feel we have to
possibly permanently injure a person for life in order to proove it.
How would people view such a thing? Not well. At least I do not
see it as good character.

But bragging about it and encouraging other people to learn how to do it
is okay?

Post by xiaou2
Now, Im not saying ground fighting isnt without its merrits.
If one does trip, slip up...then yes, its gonna be very helpfull...
but do not think that makes it the Ultimate art!
Dismissing hundreads of years worth of knowlege beacause you
havnt seen a true master turn a ground fighters brain to
mush is pathetic. Also pathetic is judging a style merely
based on its lame practitioners. Not everyone is an expert...
even tho they claim to be.

Sure, but if a bjj blue can routinely defeat black belts from other
styles, it's a clue.

Post by xiaou2
Again, Im not going to say that WC is the ultimate art
either. Each system has some great techniques and advantages.
Some that will knock you into next year... and you wont
even see it comming.

Post by Scary
Now if you're talking about self-defense in the street against a
bunch of untrained wally's, then maybe you're TMA might give you an
edge but I've yet to see this demonstrated in anything apart from
movies.

and would you? Nope, cause it will last only 20 seconds at most.
Faster than any camera guy could set up and caprture - unless they
knew it was going to happen in advance. Other than that, it again,
is based on Morals. Do not harm, unless life is real danger.

So your arts is a lot of worthless frilly crap surrounding a core of
ineffably deadly technique too horrifying to use, or even demonstrate,
unless your life is in danger, with no way to mitigate it?

Post by xiaou2

Post by Scary
You're also concluding that a MAAist can't deal with multiples,
well we certainly train for that scenario and we know our techniques
are 100% effective because we always train real life!

I somehow doubt you train with mixed styles of multiple attackers...
people that really know what they are doing.
You also are concluding that TMA's wernt founded on real attacks?
Get real. The arts were very well developed against real attackers.
Some modeled after animals even. And these arts were tweaked and
improoved over hundreads of years worth of advancement. What makes
you think your system is both original and more advanced than
100+ years worth of advancement and refinement?!

Step up.

[Chas]

First, the mma guys have demonstrated that skill in striking and clinch is
useful.

Precisely.
The 'demonstration' is the keyword.
Remember that they didn't allow such fights only a relatively short time ago
(about the length of your lifetime, I suspect). Entertainment by
cable/satellite was unknown. Broadcast TV or movies was about 'it'.
Even the idea of mass marketed books was pretty rare- 'Tegner' was about all
that there was, and if you didn't live close to a practitioner, there were
*few* commercial storefront practice halls.
The unfortunate/wonderful *huge* expansion of availability degenerated *all*
of the arts somewhat-
But don't let it escape your notice that guys have been 'huggin' and puggin'
since Hector was a Lance Corporal.

Second, tools trump skills. A knife beats a purple belt, a gun beats a
black belt.

That's one of the main concerns with establishing skills that don't consider
tools at all.
If I come up on an enemy and enter, not considering that he may introduce a
weapon into the equasion, I make my choices about skeletal posture, angle,
initiation,..... entirely differently from if I know he's been searched,
stripped and we're both going to live through the experience.

Nope, mma is one thing.

Yes; performance art.
The whole idea is a demonstration under formal rules.
Hell, it's right out of Brazilian culture; mitigated macho fighting (and I
say that as a man with a cauliflower face).
When I was a young man, one didn't do such things to one another in
'brawling'. There were Formal Rules (the Cowboy Code). As the culture became
more tolerant of violence, the formal rules have changed.
It comes from men not commonly carrying pistols also. As we've been stripped
of the right to carry any weapon at all, 'disarmed' skills become more
practical.

Post by xiaou2
All you and many are going by are these stupid "ultimate
fighting" competitions. And in reality, these are not real
good examples.

Best available.

And therein lies the trap of believing what the mass media presents.
Entertainment isn't real, ma'am.
Hell, your own thesis negates your idea of 'best available'. Not only do you
yourself practice skills not acceptable in bjj/mma, you admit that the
introduction of even the concept of a weapon steals about the first ten
years of practice from you.

If he's as good as you, it takes a while. If he's not, it really doesn't
take very long.

Bingo.
Lots of winning depends on knowing when the fight started.
I always figure it's when you called my Mom that ugly name and everything
after that was just jockeying for position <g>

Post by xiaou2
I seriously doubt that 5 competent people attacting a ground fighter
would result in 5 injured attackers. Its not fast enough.

Nothing unarmed is.

Well, yeah it is.
There is a skill taught called 'korochok' (the fighting of one against
many). There's independent verification of it in Draeger's book on the
fighting arts of the archipelago. I've seen demonstrations of it as refined
to a skill as well.

Post by xiaou2
WC however IS. Ive tooken a guy to the ground with a near broken leg in
1 second flat. No joke.

I tapped a guy with a guillotine that fast, so what?

so timing is very important, neh?

Post by xiaou2
How would people view such a thing? Not well. At least I do not
see it as good character.

But bragging about it and encouraging other people to learn how to do it
is okay?

Yes.
You mistake the difference between 'martial skill' and 'martial art'.
I teach a number of things that'll give you cold chills.
They're presented in the context of a cultural artifact; knowledge for it's
own sake- so it won't be lost to posterity lest it be needed in the future.
There is a whole moral kind of thing that has emerged over the history of
the relationships between men that kill one another as a profession rather
than a necessity.

Sure, but if a bjj blue can routinely defeat black belts from other
styles, it's a clue.

Yup; but as Inigo Montoya said; I don't think that means what you think it
means.

So your arts is a lot of worthless frilly crap surrounding a core of
ineffably deadly technique too horrifying to use, or even demonstrate,
unless your life is in danger, with no way to mitigate it?

Well; yeah.
<g>
Seriously, it's a strong point of contention between hyper-traditional
practitioners and more indulgent styles. Old-timers feel that any
demonstration or mitigation for sport dilutes the art. It's expression
(buah- the fruit of practice) is never 'actualized' without actual hazard.
The 'kambang' (flower of practice) is what you see done in what look like
dances and such.

.....What makes

Post by xiaou2
you think your system is both original and more advanced than 100+ years
worth of advancement and refinement?!

Step up.

from ambush, at a time of their choosing, armed as they may come, with an
agenda that you know nothing about.
or do we have to wear speedos and get searched?

[T]

Post by Chas

First, the mma guys have demonstrated that skill in striking and clinch is
useful.

Precisely.
The 'demonstration' is the keyword.
Remember that they didn't allow such fights only a relatively short time ago
(about the length of your lifetime, I suspect). Entertainment by
cable/satellite was unknown. Broadcast TV or movies was about 'it'.
Even the idea of mass marketed books was pretty rare- 'Tegner' was about all
that there was, and if you didn't live close to a practitioner, there were
*few* commercial storefront practice halls.
The unfortunate/wonderful *huge* expansion of availability degenerated *all*
of the arts somewhat-

Degenerated is a pretty loaded word....

Post by Chas
But don't let it escape your notice that guys have been 'huggin' and puggin'
since Hector was a Lance Corporal.

Sure; wrestling's older than rock fu.

Post by Chas

Second, tools trump skills. A knife beats a purple belt, a gun beats a
black belt.

That's one of the main concerns with establishing skills that don't consider
tools at all.

I agree.

Post by Chas
If I come up on an enemy and enter, not considering that he may introduce a
weapon into the equasion, I make my choices about skeletal posture, angle,
initiation,..... entirely differently from if I know he's been searched,
stripped and we're both going to live through the experience.

Nope, mma is one thing.

Yes; performance art.

Sport, I think.

Post by Chas
The whole idea is a demonstration under formal rules.

Sport, not demo.

Post by Chas
Hell, it's right out of Brazilian culture; mitigated macho fighting (and I
say that as a man with a cauliflower face).
When I was a young man, one didn't do such things to one another in
'brawling'. There were Formal Rules (the Cowboy Code). As the culture became
more tolerant of violence, the formal rules have changed.
It comes from men not commonly carrying pistols also. As we've been stripped
of the right to carry any weapon at all, 'disarmed' skills become more
practical.

I carry pretty much what I'd carry if I were free, I think; though I'd
probably trade in the pumps for streetsweepers. I'd miss that *sound*,
though; that's a deterrent.

Post by Chas

Post by xiaou2
All you and many are going by are these stupid "ultimate
fighting" competitions. And in reality, these are not real
good examples.

Best available.

And therein lies the trap of believing what the mass media presents.
Entertainment isn't real, ma'am.

Sport is real.

Post by Chas
Hell, your own thesis negates your idea of 'best available'. Not only do you
yourself practice skills not acceptable in bjj/mma, you admit that the
introduction of even the concept of a weapon steals about the first ten
years of practice from you.

Absolutely, sure; distinguishing between unarmed violence and violence
is key.

Post by Chas

If he's as good as you, it takes a while. If he's not, it really doesn't
take very long.

Bingo.
Lots of winning depends on knowing when the fight started.
I always figure it's when you called my Mom that ugly name and everything
after that was just jockeying for position <g>

Post by xiaou2
I seriously doubt that 5 competent people attacting a ground fighter
would result in 5 injured attackers. Its not fast enough.

Nothing unarmed is.

Well, yeah it is.
There is a skill taught called 'korochok' (the fighting of one against
many). There's independent verification of it in Draeger's book on the
fighting arts of the archipelago. I've seen demonstrations of it as refined
to a skill as well.

Well, anything is if the 5 guys just stand there.

5 fighters, I doubt it a lot.

Post by Chas

Post by xiaou2
WC however IS. Ive tooken a guy to the ground with a near broken leg in
1 second flat. No joke.

I tapped a guy with a guillotine that fast, so what?

so timing is very important, neh?

Sure; which doesn't address the force disparity problem at all.

Post by Chas

Post by xiaou2
How would people view such a thing? Not well. At least I do not
see it as good character.

But bragging about it and encouraging other people to learn how to do it
is okay?

Yes.
You mistake the difference between 'martial skill' and 'martial art'.
I teach a number of things that'll give you cold chills.
They're presented in the context of a cultural artifact; knowledge for it's
own sake- so it won't be lost to posterity lest it be needed in the future.
There is a whole moral kind of thing that has emerged over the history of
the relationships between men that kill one another as a profession rather
than a necessity.

Sure, but if a bjj blue can routinely defeat black belts from other
styles, it's a clue.

Yup; but as Inigo Montoya said; I don't think that means what you think it
means.

So your arts is a lot of worthless frilly crap surrounding a core of
ineffably deadly technique too horrifying to use, or even demonstrate,
unless your life is in danger, with no way to mitigate it?

Well; yeah.
<g>
Seriously, it's a strong point of contention between hyper-traditional
practitioners and more indulgent styles. Old-timers feel that any
demonstration or mitigation for sport dilutes the art. It's expression
(buah- the fruit of practice) is never 'actualized' without actual hazard.
The 'kambang' (flower of practice) is what you see done in what look like
dances and such.

.....What makes

Post by xiaou2
you think your system is both original and more advanced than 100+ years
worth of advancement and refinement?!

Step up.

from ambush, at a time of their choosing, armed as they may come, with an
agenda that you know nothing about.

So you're claiming it works on surprised outgunned outnumbered helpless
opponents. Wow....

Post by Chas
or do we have to wear speedos and get searched?

If it doesn't work on a trained sober ready equally-armed opponent, what
makes you think it's any good? Beating an unarmed frail drunk to death
with a baseball bat is not an adequate demonstration of the martial
utility of baseball, dude.

[Chas]

Post by T

Post by Chas
The unfortunate/wonderful *huge* expansion of availability degenerated
*all* of the arts somewhat-

Degenerated is a pretty loaded word....

Look at the practice schedule in the 'old days' and what passes for practice
presently.
Is there another word that describes it more precisely?

Post by T

Post by Chas
Yes; performance art.

Sport, I think.

Yes; performance art.

Post by T

Post by Chas
The whole idea is a demonstration under formal rules.

Sport, not demo.

What do you think is the difference?

Post by T

Post by Chas
Entertainment isn't real, ma'am.

Sport is real.

Only within it's designated parameters.
'Arm-wrestling' is 'sport'- and done for 'entertainment' (or there wouldn't
be all those crowds you see). It's not 'martial art', even though it says
'wrestling' in the name.

Post by T

Post by Chas
There is a skill taught called 'korochok' (the fighting of one against
many). There's independent verification of it in Draeger's book on the
fighting arts of the archipelago. I've seen demonstrations of it as
refined to a skill as well.

5 fighters, I doubt it a lot.

so did Draeger, until he saw it.

Post by T

Post by Chas
from ambush, at a time of their choosing, armed as they may come, with an
agenda that you know nothing about.

So you're claiming it works on surprised outgunned outnumbered helpless
opponents. Wow....

It defends against that condition- as well as takes advantage of it.
That's a seminal difference between 'sport' and 'not-sport'.

Post by T
If it doesn't work on a trained sober ready equally-armed opponent, what
makes you think it's any good?

You're seldom presented with a trained sober ready equally-armed opponent on
a clean mat after being searched with mitigated technique being allowed.

Post by T
Beating an unarmed frail drunk to death with a baseball bat is not an
adequate demonstration of the martial utility of baseball, dude.

Is that your idea of what happens in a fight with an attacker bent on
killing you?

Chas

[T]

Post by Chas

Post by T

Post by Chas
The unfortunate/wonderful *huge* expansion of availability degenerated
*all* of the arts somewhat-

Degenerated is a pretty loaded word....

Look at the practice schedule in the 'old days' and what passes for practice
presently.
Is there another word that describes it more precisely?

Efficient? Turning your hands to rock is pretty pointless if you have a
rock handy.

Post by Chas

Post by T

Post by Chas
Yes; performance art.

Sport, I think.

What do you think is the difference?

A resisting opponent.

Post by Chas

Post by T

Post by Chas
Entertainment isn't real, ma'am.

Sport is real.

Only within it's designated parameters.

Sure.

Post by Chas
'Arm-wrestling' is 'sport'- and done for 'entertainment' (or there wouldn't
be all those crowds you see). It's not 'martial art', even though it says
'wrestling' in the name.

Agreed; some rule sets generalize to the 5R337 better than others.

Post by Chas

Post by T

Post by Chas
There is a skill taught called 'korochok' (the fighting of one against
many). There's independent verification of it in Draeger's book on the
fighting arts of the archipelago. I've seen demonstrations of it as
refined to a skill as well.

5 fighters, I doubt it a lot.

so did Draeger, until he saw it.

Post by T

Post by Chas
from ambush, at a time of their choosing, armed as they may come, with an
agenda that you know nothing about.

So you're claiming it works on surprised outgunned outnumbered helpless
opponents. Wow....

It defends against that condition- as well as takes advantage of it.
That's a seminal difference between 'sport' and 'not-sport'.

In the sense that the sportsmen are more likely to be trained, sober,
armed (depending on the sport), et cetera? Sure.

Post by Chas

Post by T
If it doesn't work on a trained sober ready equally-armed opponent, what
makes you think it's any good?

You're seldom presented with a trained sober ready equally-armed opponent on
a clean mat after being searched with mitigated technique being allowed.

That does not address the question. If it only works on the
disadvantaged, it's worthless. If it doesn't work on people
approximately as good as you, study something else. If it doesn't work
when you're outnumbered and outgunned... welcome to the real world.

Post by Chas

Post by T
Beating an unarmed frail drunk to death with a baseball bat is not an
adequate demonstration of the martial utility of baseball, dude.

Is that your idea of what happens in a fight with an attacker bent on
killing you?
Chas

What, the weak unarmed drunk dies? Yeah.

[T]

Post by Chas

Post by T

Post by Chas
from ambush, at a time of their choosing, armed as they may come, with an
agenda that you know nothing about.

So you're claiming it works on surprised outgunned outnumbered helpless
opponents. Wow....

It defends against that condition- as well as takes advantage of it.
That's a seminal difference between 'sport' and 'not-sport'.

So it works when you're outnumbered, outgunned, and surprised, but not
when you're ready and evenly matched, gotcha.

[JS2]

Post by T

Post by Chas

Post by T

Post by Chas
from ambush, at a time of their choosing, armed as they may come, with
an agenda that you know nothing about.

So you're claiming it works on surprised outgunned outnumbered helpless
opponents. Wow....

It defends against that condition- as well as takes advantage of it.
That's a seminal difference between 'sport' and 'not-sport'.

So it works when you're outnumbered, outgunned, and surprised, but not
when you're ready and evenly matched, gotcha.

Sure, didn't you ever watch The Princess Bride?
BTW, if you haven't, pick it up...

-JS2

[Fraser Johnston]

Post by JS2

Post by T

Post by Chas

Post by T

Post by Chas
from ambush, at a time of their choosing, armed as they may come, with
an agenda that you know nothing about.

So you're claiming it works on surprised outgunned outnumbered helpless
opponents. Wow....

It defends against that condition- as well as takes advantage of it.
That's a seminal difference between 'sport' and 'not-sport'.

So it works when you're outnumbered, outgunned, and surprised, but not
when you're ready and evenly matched, gotcha.

Sure, didn't you ever watch The Princess Bride?
BTW, if you haven't, pick it up...

I think it is the official movie of RMA.

Fraser

[Badger North]

On Wed, 11 May 2005 09:07:43 +0800, "Fraser Johnston"

Post by Fraser Johnston
I think it is the official movie of RMA.

"There's a shortage of perfect breasts in the world, and it would be a
shame to ruin yours."

Badger Jones
www.youngforest.ca
"Hard to be a freak when the carnival's not in town." - Chas Clements

[T]

Post by Badger North
On Wed, 11 May 2005 09:07:43 +0800, "Fraser Johnston"

Post by Fraser Johnston
I think it is the official movie of RMA.

"There's a shortage of perfect breasts in the world, and it would be a
shame to ruin yours."
Badger Jones
www.youngforest.ca
"Hard to be a freak when the carnival's not in town." - Chas Clements

Get a room, you two. ;-)

[Scary]

First, the mma guys have demonstrated that skill in striking and clinch

is useful.


Second, tools trump skills. A knife beats a purple belt, a gun beats a

black belt.

Putting aside this idea that we should all be wearing protective wizard
amour at all times, is it you're conclusion that combat pistol and
automatic firearms practice is the ultimate martial art?
And how much skill does it require?

So what happens if you don't have a gun, knife, sword, axe or
tactical nuclear weapon on you when you need to defend yourself.
Isn't that the point of empty-handed training? T? (If that is
you're real name!)

Scary

[T]

Post by T
First, the mma guys have demonstrated that skill in striking and clinch
is useful.
Second, tools trump skills. A knife beats a purple belt, a gun beats a
black belt.
Putting aside this idea that we should all be wearing protective wizard
amour at all times, is it you're conclusion that combat pistol and
automatic firearms practice is the ultimate martial art?

Some spelling errors are too cute to fix. ;-)

If you take the word 'martial' seriously, I'd say that indirect
artillery kills more people on the battlefield than everything else
combined.

For civilian SD... shotgun for home defense, handgun for every-day carry.

Post by T
And how much skill does it require?

Require? A little.
Reward? You can keep getting faster and more accurate for a long time.

Post by T
So what happens if you don't have a gun on you when you need to defend yourself?

First, slap yourself on the forehead for being an idiot. Then, BJJ.

Post by T
Isn't that the point of empty-handed training? T? (If that is
you're real name!)

Yep; for those times you're naked in an empty room.

If it's not empty, hit him with the chair or the TV, you know?

[Scary]

Putting aside this idea that we should all be wearing protective
wizard

Post by Scary
amour at all times, is it you're conclusion that combat pistol and
automatic firearms practice is the ultimate martial art?

Some spelling errors are too cute to fix. ;-)

Yep! look under cute in the dictonary thats me =D
L'amour est une chose effrayante!

Scary.

[Badger North]

Post by Scary
T? (If that is
you're real name!)

It is - I've met her 19 older siblings.

Badger Jones
www.youngforest.ca
"Hard to be a freak when the carnival's not in town." - Chas Clements

[Love*Strudel]

In the case of shaolin kungfu... they are usually more stiff
and predicatable. However, a propperly trained shaolin monk
is nearly industructable! Ever see them do demos where people
kick thier nads full power, and punch them anywhere... and not
a tear, yell, or any reaction to it! Thier power is sick,
skill is sick, knowledge is in the volumes.

I've seen circus freaks do similar things doesn't make them good
fighters
As for Shaolin monks being indestructible? Why aren't they dominating
UFC and Pride Fights??
I'm sure the Shaolin temple could use the money, they could but a new
Buddha statue or something!

Wing Chun, which Ive found is the most practical in real street
fighting... has been arroud for a long time. However - Im not
so sure I consider it a Tma... because it uses some very different
approaches. Yet, it does borrow knowlege from other Tmas.. like
snake and crane. Very fluid, no need for muscle strenght to win,
advanced trapping, use of two or even 3 limbs at once, no
dominent side - equal accuracy, close range power..and much more.

If you enjoy rabbit punching someone with almost not lateral movement
please do train Wing Chun!
You don't need muscle strength to win because it doesn't bloody
work!

In traditional chinese kungfu for instance... they would have
you stand in a horse stance. They wouldnt train you any more,
untill you could stay in that stance - rock solid - for
like 3hrs!

And this is useful in a real fight why? look I'm sure standing in horse
stance till the cows come home will give you strong shapely legs. but
has anyone anywhere ever seen anyone out side of a motion picture use
horse stance in actual combat and win?

Tae Kwan Do, while most trained today as a sport.. if done
for combat, its kicks are blindingly fast and very hard to
get close to them. Kicks that are bone shattering & knockout
powerfull.

SNORK! TKD kicks have to be the most theatric overly telegraphed kicks
ever to be paraded as a martial art! They are so big, theatrical and
telegraphed that a blind retard in a wheelchair could get past
them!SNORK! TKD kicks have to be the most theatric overly telligrathed
kicks ever to be praded as a martial art

So in closing, you can choose to believe that the art you
do is flawless.. and that all other stuff is crap. Or, you can
go and do a bit of research and find new techniques to master
from past knowleges... have fun, become a master of many styles,
and be that much more deadly. (and look great in the process! ; )


Listen you deluded little man! He never said what he did was flawless
or that all TMA were crap he said that many people overlook weaknesses
on incongruities in oriental systems because they're Asian and
therefore a bit different and popular culture regarding "The mystic
fighting Arts of the East" have so confused most civilians so they
really don't know what a real fight is.
I've actually had people call my school asking to learn how to jump
through the air like in "The Matrix".


Lov Anna.

[xiaou2]

Post by Love*Strudel
If you enjoy rabbit punching someone with almost not lateral movement
please do train Wing Chun!
You don't need muscle strength to win because it doesn't bloody
work!

maybe not for you. worked great for me. its called training
seriously!

Post by Love*Strudel
In traditional chinese kungfu for instance... they would have
you stand in a horse stance. They wouldnt train you any more,
untill you could stay in that stance - rock solid - for
like 3hrs!
And this is useful in a real fight why? look I'm sure standing in horse
stance till the cows come home will give you strong shapely legs. but
has anyone anywhere ever seen anyone out side of a motion picture use
horse stance in actual combat and win?

Horse stance is not a move to win a fight. This shows how little you
know.
The strong legs = better ballance, so can not be tooken down.
Also, if one does get kicked by such a strong leg - one will NOT
recover from it.

Post by Love*Strudel
SNORK! TKD kicks have to be the most theatric overly telegraphed kicks
ever to be paraded as a martial art! They are so big, theatrical and
telegraphed that a blind retard in a wheelchair could get past
them!SNORK! TKD kicks have to be the most theatric overly telligrathed
kicks ever to be praded as a martial art

Again, you know so little. A good fighter can move his legs so fast,
that you can barely see them. They will hit you before you get into
range... and then when you are stunned, they will do the telegraph
kick to your head and take it off. However, since you are stunned
by the 'jab' kick - you wont have time to block it.

Btw - watch Drunken Master II (Return of the drunken master) by
Jackie Chan. The one bad guy twords the end had legs so fast
and powerfull that its scarry.

A friend of mine said he used to fight a guy whos kick was so
fast, that it would hit his lead Gaurd hand - before he could pull
it back.. and it would numb the gaurd arm, so was useless. Then the
kicker guy would easily get in past the defense. I believe the
guy did wushu. My freind knows 7 different sytles.

Post by Love*Strudel
Listen you deluded little man! He never said what he did was flawless
or that all TMA were crap he said that many people overlook weaknesses
on incongruities in oriental systems because they're Asian and
therefore a bit different and popular culture regarding "The mystic
fighting Arts of the East" have so confused most civilians so they
really don't know what a real fight is.
I've actually had people call my school asking to learn how to jump
through the air like in "The Matrix".
Lov Anna.

Well, im not exactly little.. but hey... whatever.

I think he did very much so say that tmas were useless.. just not
directly. And this post is full of it.

I do agree that some tmas are better than others.. and yes, each
does have some weaknesses to them. Every style does.

However, many things that appear to be weaknesses are also
things that are to blame for incorrect teachings, and
from poor students not training hard enough, and doing things
incorrectly,

As for people looking to asians for martial arts, maybe
its because they are the fathers of martial arts in genral..
with HUNDREADS of years worth of experience and knowledge.

Todays fighting does differ in some respects as people
have no morales today.. so some things that tma's teach will
not always work. However, theres a lot of stuff that does
indeed work.

Theres also a lot of stuff you never see, but that doesnt
mean it dosnt exist.

If people called you up about matrix 'flight' moves...
most likely they were joking.. or they
were inbred : P lol

Do a search for a 9meg wushu file on the fileshare networks.
Theres 3 guys.. and the vid is in black and white.. but they
even suprised me as to what they do... as really, hardly
looked possible.

They had jump heights of like 7ft clearences from bottom
to floor. The arcrobatics are like that of the matrix - yet
they can actually do them! Quite awesome indeed! ^_^


Luv
Steve

[Scary]

They had jump heights of like 7ft clearences from bottom
to floor. The arcrobatics are like that of the matrix - yet
they can actually do them! Quite awesome indeed! ^_^


Luv
Steve

So are you saying Wushu guys can fly? Do they jump down from 7th
clearances of up to that high?
Or does someone simply just reverse the film?
Joking aside: So they can jump 7th feet! I'm sure it's an impressive
physical feat but in the context of a fight it seems like a waste of
energy to me.
The money question is can any of them beat Bob the Beast Sapp using
Wushu?

Scary.

[JS2]

Post by xiaou2
They had jump heights of like 7ft clearences from bottom
to floor. The arcrobatics are like that of the matrix - yet
they can actually do them! Quite awesome indeed! ^_^
Luv
Steve
So are you saying Wushu guys can fly? Do they jump down from 7th
clearances of up to that high?
Or does someone simply just reverse the film?
Joking aside: So they can jump 7th feet! I'm sure it's an impressive
physical feat but in the context of a fight it seems like a waste of
energy to me.
The money question is can any of them beat Bob the Beast Sapp using
Wushu?

Actually, the world high jump record is 8 feet, and thats using
techniques like the flop where your center of mass actually
never rises above the bar. And you're telling me they had
people who had 7 foot vertical with their feet, which would
translate into about a 11 foot high jump? Or did I
misunderstand what you're claiming? If so, why doesn't
the Chinese track team sign these folks up ... color me
skeptical. I'd be more likely to believe they can parry
bullets with their hands ... the physics is easier.

-JS2

[u***@hotmail.com]

Post by JS2

Post by xiaou2
They had jump heights of like 7ft clearences from bottom
to floor. The arcrobatics are like that of the matrix - yet
they can actually do them! Quite awesome indeed! ^_^
Luv
Steve
So are you saying Wushu guys can fly? Do they jump down from 7th
clearances of up to that high?
Or does someone simply just reverse the film?
Joking aside: So they can jump 7th feet! I'm sure it's an

impressive

Post by JS2

Post by xiaou2
physical feat but in the context of a fight it seems like a waste of
energy to me.
The money question is can any of them beat Bob the Beast Sapp using
Wushu?

Actually, the world high jump record is 8 feet, and thats using
techniques like the flop where your center of mass actually
never rises above the bar. And you're telling me they had
people who had 7 foot vertical with their feet, which would
translate into about a 11 foot high jump? Or did I
misunderstand what you're claiming? If so, why doesn't
the Chinese track team sign these folks up ... color me
skeptical. I'd be more likely to believe they can parry
bullets with their hands ... the physics is easier.
-JS2

In one of the Bruce Lee movies, when he confronts a bunch of bad guys,
he scares off the last one standing by jumping up and kicking out a
light bulb in the ceiling!

However, for the sober minded, I note that the bulb was a flourescent
tube-bulb, hanging from the ceiling. Perhaps 6, or 6.5 feet up? He
jumped up and twisted in the air - his upper body was level and his
kicking foot angled up. Very agile. But I doubt if his center of
gravity was even 5 feet up (1.5 meters for those who don't use Yankee
math).

I have seen old martial artists who were scary, even spooky, but I've
never seen any of them jump farther or longer, run faster, or lift more
than a competitive college athlete.

Kermit

[Scary]

Actually, the world high jump record is 8 feet, and thats using
techniques like the flop where your center of mass actually
never rises above the bar. And you're telling me they had
people who had 7 foot vertical with their feet, which would
translate into about a 11 foot high jump? Or did I
misunderstand what you're claiming? If so, why doesn't
the Chinese track team sign these folks up ... color me
skeptical. I'd be more likely to believe they can parry
bullets with their hands ... the physics is easier.

I'm not claiming that at all! Xiaou-cow is:

"They had jump heights of like 7ft clearences from bottom
to floor. The arcrobatics are like that of the matrix - yet
they can actually do them! Quite awesome indeed! ^_^
Luv
Steve "

Actually I'm a bit incredulous about it.

Scary.

[JS2]

Post by JS2
Actually, the world high jump record is 8 feet, and thats using
techniques like the flop where your center of mass actually
never rises above the bar. And you're telling me they had
people who had 7 foot vertical with their feet, which would
translate into about a 11 foot high jump? Or did I
misunderstand what you're claiming? If so, why doesn't
the Chinese track team sign these folks up ... color me
skeptical. I'd be more likely to believe they can parry
bullets with their hands ... the physics is easier.
"They had jump heights of like 7ft clearences from bottom
to floor. The arcrobatics are like that of the matrix - yet
they can actually do them! Quite awesome indeed! ^_^
Luv
Steve "
Actually I'm a bit incredulous about it.
Scary.

Sorry Scary, bad clipping on my part, I knew it was
Xiaou's claim ... though I admit I'm waiting for his
explanation. My bet is that he stands by his claim,
maintaining that olympic high jumpers don't have the
strength or technique of his masters.

-JS2

[Scary]

Sorry Scary, bad clipping on my part, I knew it was
Xiaou's claim ... though I admit I'm waiting for his
explanation. My bet is that he stands by his claim,
maintaining that olympic high jumpers don't have the
strength or technique of his masters.

-JS2

Actually Xiaou"s attitudes regarding Kung Fu are quite common I've
noticed on forums other than RMA!
He's explanation as to why certain physical feats (both Chi and
Theatrical) which are not actual fighting prove that certain Asian
styles are superior?.
Also this explanation that superior Kung Fu stylists don't take part
in Maa's fight's because they are too pure to lower themselves to
fight for money or even bragging rights is also a commonly dusted off
old chestnut with these guys.
Outside of RMA when I voiced some ideas that put doubt on the
legitimacy of some TMA's claims it caused many abusive replies and
threatening emails.
Hypocritical considering these guys are claiming to be so peaceful and
superior.

Scary.

[xiaou2]

Post by Scary
Actually Xiaou"s attitudes regarding Kung Fu are quite common I've
noticed on forums other than RMA!
He's explanation as to why certain physical feats (both Chi and
Theatrical) which are not actual fighting prove that certain Asian
styles are superior?.
Also this explanation that superior Kung Fu stylists don't take part
in Maa's fight's because they are too pure to lower themselves to
fight for money or even bragging rights is also a commonly dusted off
old chestnut with these guys.
Outside of RMA when I voiced some ideas that put doubt on the
legitimacy of some TMA's claims it caused many abusive replies and
threatening emails.
Hypocritical considering these guys are claiming to be so peaceful and
superior.
Scary.

So you think killing a few people is Ok to do if its to proove
that you can do it with your technique? How sad is that.

While surely there are those who do know how to hit
you so youll never be the same again... many are peacefull
and wouldnt dare use it. However, there are young people
in these arts that may in fact take you up and show you
what they can do to you - foolish, but still, may do it.

Btw, If I didnt say 'something Like 7ft' then I appoligize..
but maybe its so anyway. I cant really tell, cause who knows
how tall these guys are. All i can say, is that your jaw
will drop to the floor as mine did, after seeing this video.

http://www.xiaou2.homestead.com/xiaou2.mpeg

(9.5 megs)

I only have limited bandwidth, so i actually hope too many people
do not kill it all. Not that im really using it for much..

Whoever gets one and has more bandwidth, please post it elsewhere
and post a link here. Much apprecated.

I have many other Wild videos.. anything from wushu to wc, to
unique rare seen weapons vids, that ive collected over time. I could
possibly pop them up on a fileshare group later if there is interest.

also, check out www.bilang.com for some other cool 'trick' vids.


Ohh, rename the file to Wushu Sampler. I forgot to do that.

[Scary]

So you think killing a few people is Ok to do if its to proove
that you can do it with your technique? How sad is that.

I don't recall saying anything like that, or are you suggesting that
Wushu fighters are so deadly that in an open competition death would be
the result? I'd imagine that if these guys are so deadly and skillful
they could temper their fists of fury so as to product a victory
without needless bloodshed!

While surely there are those who do know how to hit
you so youll never be the same again... many are peacefull
and wouldnt dare use it. However, there are young people
in these arts that may in fact take you up and show you
what they can do to you - foolish, but still, may do it.

I'm sure if a boxer hits me it would hurt! It's just logical that
specialists at striking would have the strongest punch. I've fought
Kung Fu stylists they don't hit as hard as Boxers or even Kickboxers.

I'm quite sure in a well managed Maa's fight no one would get
killed.

Scary

[xiaou2]

Post by xiaou2
So you think killing a few people is Ok to do if its to proove
that you can do it with your technique? How sad is that.
I don't recall saying anything like that, or are you suggesting that
Wushu fighters are so deadly that in an open competition death would be
the result? I'd imagine that if these guys are so deadly and skillful
they could temper their fists of fury so as to product a victory
without needless bloodshed!

Never said that about wushu. the wushu was in regaurds to
matrix style moves done for real. Watch the video. Spill your
opinion. Quite amazing stuff!

Post by xiaou2
I'm sure if a boxer hits me it would hurt! It's just logical that
specialists at striking would have the strongest punch. I've fought
Kung Fu stylists they don't hit as hard as Boxers or even Kickboxers.

You havnt fought 'good' kungfu stylists. People who are not
lazy and train a technique to ultimate perfection for over
a years time. Many people today, do not have that dedication,
but, that is what the style is all about. They wont work, if
you do not do the required training and put in the maximun
effort to perfect the skills and muscles.

When a guy hits you in the chest from 1" distance - thru
a 4" thick phonebook, and your entire chest burns like
it had gasoline poured on it - then lit on fire! and
it burns that intensely for 4hrs long! Then you know
a true strikers power. Ive been fortunate to take such
a hit from a master striker. The pain was well worth
knowing it could be so damn powerfull.

I also have another friend who knows 7 kungfu styles...
and his strikes were absolutely sick. He showed me a
tiger move, that with 3 successive strikes (2 are setups)
would take a persons jaw right off thier head.
(and no, i trusted this one - no demo thanks!)

Post by xiaou2
I'm quite sure in a well managed Maa's fight no one would get
killed.
Scary

You do not know much about real kungfu.. else you
wouldnt say that.

If a 350lb wrestler hulk comes charging at me..
(180lbs built like a twig) I will never win by
using merely passive moves.

Thats like trying to stop a wild tiger with your
bare hands.

The only way Id win, is to take him down with
leathal strikes.. or strikes that leave him left
with permanent damage the rest of his life
(ie: cant ever walk the same again, or brain damage)

Time is a big factor. When you play with a tiger,
your gona eventually get scratched. So, best to end
it right away before that happens.. and in a way
that the tiger will not arise to attack again.

Anything else is just bogus crap. Its not realistic.

Its bad enough that they allow arm break in UFC...
that to me is just plain wrong.. but imagine the
rest of the possible injuries if they were allowed?!
No morales... its sickening.

My idea for a competiton is totaly different, but
most would not like it. If a wc guy places his leg
right above a guys knee.. he dosnt have to kick, but
the round is stopped, and he win that bout. Same
goes for other leathal strikes like elbows to the spine.
Protective eyewear would be worn, so eye gouges and
rakes could be simulated and scored. (you cant fight
well when your eyes are filled with tears and on fire)

And there would be several rounds... that way, you can
say that 80% of the time... this fighter would have won...

Ground fighters have like 40 seconds to execute on the gound
before have to restart standup. As in reality, you just may
not have that kinda time.

Other features would be multiple attackers per figher.. thus
you see how well a fighter does against many others.

Of course, this will never happen because people are not
really into the truth. Theyd rather believe that thier
style is the best. And the fighters do not like to
admit that say.. a leg stomp would stop them... so they
will not join.

The reality though, is this type of thing would be
very usefull to see what truths there are vs many
falses.

I may start something like this someday.. but for now,
its just an idea in waiting.

[GreenDistantStar]

"xiaou2" <***@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:***@24.24.2.165...
clipped

Post by xiaou2
You havnt fought 'good' kungfu stylists.

I have. Your point is?

clipped

Post by xiaou2
When a guy hits you in the chest from 1" distance - thru
a 4" thick phonebook, and your entire chest burns like
it had gasoline poured on it - then lit on fire! and
it burns that intensely for 4hrs long! Then you know
a true strikers power. Ive been fortunate to take such
a hit from a master striker. The pain was well worth
knowing it could be so damn powerfull.

Sounds mighty YB to me. The power of suggestion. You must be very gullible
indeed.

Post by xiaou2
I also have another friend who knows 7 kungfu styles...
and his strikes were absolutely sick.

Fully sick, eh dude? <sticks fingers in throat>

He showed me a

Post by xiaou2
tiger move, that with 3 successive strikes (2 are setups)
would take a persons jaw right off thier head.

LOFL!!!

Post by xiaou2
(and no, i trusted this one - no demo thanks!)

Whew, just as well, eh? A no-demo is always the best proof of anything,
isn't it?

Post by xiaou2

Post by Scary
I'm quite sure in a well managed Maa's fight no one would get
killed.
Scary

You do not know much about real kungfu.. else you
wouldnt say that.

Are you related to Oliver Richman?

Post by xiaou2
If a 350lb wrestler hulk comes charging at me..
(180lbs built like a twig) I will never win by
using merely passive moves.

Wrestlers don't 'come charging' which would suggest you have never faced
one. This explains much.

Post by xiaou2
Thats like trying to stop a wild tiger with your
bare hands.
The only way Id win, is to take him down with
leathal strikes.. or strikes that leave him left
with permanent damage the rest of his life
(ie: cant ever walk the same again, or brain damage)

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!! OMG!!!!!!

Post by xiaou2
Time is a big factor. When you play with a tiger,
your gona eventually get scratched. So, best to end
it right away before that happens.. and in a way
that the tiger will not arise to attack again.

You've got a thing for tigers, haven't you?

Post by xiaou2
Anything else is just bogus crap. Its not realistic.
Its bad enough that they allow arm break in UFC...
that to me is just plain wrong.. but imagine the
rest of the possible injuries if they were allowed?!
No morales... its sickening.

You have no idea what you are talking about, do you?

Post by xiaou2
My idea for a competiton is totaly different, but
most would not like it. If a wc guy places his leg
right above a guys knee.. he dosnt have to kick, but
the round is stopped, and he win that bout. Same
goes for other leathal strikes like elbows to the spine.
Protective eyewear would be worn, so eye gouges and
rakes could be simulated and scored. (you cant fight
well when your eyes are filled with tears and on fire)
And there would be several rounds... that way, you can
say that 80% of the time... this fighter would have won...
Ground fighters have like 40 seconds to execute on the gound
before have to restart standup. As in reality, you just may
not have that kinda time.
Other features would be multiple attackers per figher.. thus
you see how well a fighter does against many others.
Of course, this will never happen because people are not
really into the truth. Theyd rather believe that thier
style is the best. And the fighters do not like to
admit that say.. a leg stomp would stop them... so they
will not join.
The reality though, is this type of thing would be
very usefull to see what truths there are vs many
falses.
I may start something like this someday.. but for now,
its just an idea in waiting.

This is a 9.0 on the Richman Scale and, dare I say it, songworthy perhaps?

I can feel a challenge coming on, or a Deathmatch.

Scary vs Xiaou The Kung Fu Tiger.

Scary by arm-bar or bitch-slap 0:26 Rnd 1

GDS

[Scary]

He showed me a

Post by xiaou2
tiger move, that with 3 successive strikes (2 are setups)
would take a persons jaw right off thier head.

LOFL!!!

Hi GDS sorry you couldn't make it to class we'll get around to it
some time, as for Xiaou he's been giving us GOLD!! the mans a legend!
"Slow walking! Jive Talking!

He's descriptions of anatomically impossible tiger claw strikes reminds
me of that stomach plug punch from "Gung Pow Enter the Fist"

If a 350lb wrestler hulk comes charging at me..

Post by xiaou2
(180lbs built like a twig) I will never win by
using merely passive moves.

Wrestlers don't 'come charging' which would suggest you have never
faced
one. This explains much.

Post by xiaou2
Thats like trying to stop a wild tiger with your
bare hands.
The only way Id win, is to take him down with
leathal strikes.. or strikes that leave him left
with permanent damage the rest of his life
(ie: cant ever walk the same again, or brain damage)

I hear were you're coming from Xiaou, but resent history doesn't seem
to back you up.
I would say that professional boxers could theoretically kill someone
or brain damage them, although it would be a freak occurrence.
In the past I've trained Kyokushin so I know what it's like to be
struck in the body by guys who also can break baseball bats with their
shins and bricks with their fists. (It's still a trick that doesn't
translate always into fighting skill)
Even experiencing that I still say Boxers hit harder and better, and a
grappler still can beat them unless they know a bit of grappling!
Now I have never seen a Kung Fu stylist who can strike better that a
Boxer, and Dim Mak touch of death is a load of unscientific hoodoo!
So if deadly strikes is the answer! Where are all the dead and crippled
Bjj, Judo, MT, Boxing and Wrestling (MAA) guys?

Scary.

[xiaou2]

Post by xiaou2
If a 350lb wrestler hulk comes charging at me..

Post by xiaou2
(180lbs built like a twig) I will never win by
using merely passive moves.

Wrestlers don't 'come charging' which would suggest you have never faced
one. This explains much.

umm, i meant grappler. or really, any much larger person who tries
to bully his way into you.

Post by xiaou2
I hear were you're coming from Xiaou, but resent history doesn't seem
to back you up.

So the past info, happenings, experiences and knowledges collected
are then nullifed because nobody today has gone out and took
someones life with a series of deadly techniques? (within your
short lifespan time) Come on!

You honestly think that kungfu back in the days invented were made
for fun? These skills were the weapons of the day back then.. like
todays gun.. or f-16 fighter jets..ect. They were researched
and used, and killed and injured many. There were no 'cops'
out there in the wilds.. so kungfu was a nessessary way of life... and they
trained it Seriously... unlike today. There were also many secrets,
because if a man knew something too deadly, he could basically go arround
taking out entire villages and nobody could stop him.

Post by xiaou2
I would say that professional boxers could theoretically kill someone
or brain damage them, although it would be a freak occurrence.

again, more push force than explosive force. if boxers did explosive
forece punches.. there would be only 1 round... and maybe 10 seconds at
that.

Post by xiaou2
In the past I've trained Kyokushin so I know what it's like to be
struck in the body by guys who also can break baseball bats with their
shins and bricks with their fists. (It's still a trick that doesn't
translate always into fighting skill)

Breaking bats - they break at the thin end. Its also not that
impressive. Its just a conditioned area and only limited
force needed. Try breaking a pressure treated 2*4.

And bricks are even easier to break. I did this on my first
try with no experience. Bricks are more pourous than stone...
and they crumble fracture appart. Heck, a 2*4 is stronger
than the brick in that regaurd.

Again, these are tricks based on push force (and conditioning)
as well.

Ive fought hard style karate guys, and thier stikes didnt
impress me. surely as much as the JKD guy with the 1" punch to my
chest. Id never Ever got hit that hard in 5 yrs of sparring
multiple styles and instructors... never in my life had I
felt so much pain for so long.

Post by xiaou2
Even experiencing that I still say Boxers hit harder and better, and a
grappler still can beat them unless they know a bit of grappling!
Now I have never seen a Kung Fu stylist who can strike better that a
Boxer,

Your not finding good examples then.

and Dim Mak touch of death is a load of unscientific hoodoo!

There are many unexplained thing out there yet to be prooven
by science, but do exist and do work. While I do not know it
dim mak does in fact work as Ive heard things.. I will never
say that it does not or can not. Its a possibility... like
everything else. To rule out a possibility is to make a
judgemnet without evidence, and that, is not correct
truth-finding.

Post by xiaou2
So if deadly strikes is the answer! Where are all the dead and crippled
Bjj, Judo, MT, Boxing and Wrestling (MAA) guys?
Scary.

Again, if you know you can kill a person within a second worth of
time.. does that mean you use it to proove it? That is poor morality.
You only use that in a true life and death situation.

My first Sifu told us a story.. when he was walking in chicago at
night.. and 3 guys started to follow him. He soon turned arround
and warned the guys that he didnt want any trouble. He
had his uniform coat on as well... and i guess that only made
them want to go take him down.

He did a quick chop finger eye strike to the first guy.. and the
guy fell to the ground. The rest ran away. The guy needed to be
carried away in an ambulace.

Teacher looked at his finger, and part of the guys eyeball was under
his fingernail.

He mentioned to Never use this technique unless life and death.

This is but a more non serious, but permanent injury. There
are much worse things capable of... and all not in good taste
to do to another human for ego, pride, boasting, proof..ect.

Did you get the wushu vid yet?

http://www.xiaou2.homestead.com/xiaou2.mpeg

Also, go to http://www.swiftwingchun.org/

And to the video section. Some of his exapmles are poor, as his
student do hooks all wrong. And some of the vids arnt that good...but,
there are some that will blow your mind. His speed is insane... maybe
10 movements in 2 seconds. Slow down some of the fast ones, and go
frame by frame to see what you missed.

(thers 3 pages)

thats my first sifu

[Fraser Johnston]

Post by xiaou2
My first Sifu told us a story.. when he was walking in chicago at
night.. and 3 guys started to follow him. He soon turned arround
and warned the guys that he didnt want any trouble. He
had his uniform coat on as well... and i guess that only made
them want to go take him down.
He did a quick chop finger eye strike to the first guy.. and the
guy fell to the ground. The rest ran away. The guy needed to be
carried away in an ambulace.
Teacher looked at his finger, and part of the guys eyeball was under
his fingernail.

Obviously a story. I've tried to cut open an eyeball with a scalpel and it
was damn hard work.

Fraser

[Karim]

Post by xiaou2
There were also many secrets,
because if a man knew something too deadly, he could basically go
arround taking out entire villages and nobody could stop him.

I remember as a child sitting on the veranda in my home village of
Shrewsbury, when who should turn up but old "Phoenix Eye" Jones. His
eyebrows were bigger and hairier than anyone's I'd ever seen, so I knew
his techniques would be deadly. Sure enough, he managed to kill almost
the entire village with his damnable Double Phoenix Eye style; his only
justification being an evil laugh and some muttered words about "what his
father did to me in the woods ten years ago".

I quickly ran to the neighboring village to fetch Ian Smith, who luckily
was tutored in the Shadow Eagle Claw, the only technique known that could
beat the Double Phoenix Eye. They had a showdown in the town square, in
front of the Esso station, and luckily "Phoenix Eye" Jones was killed
before he could murder any more innocent villagers. Unfortunately, his 9
year old son was with him, and escaped... in the direction of the Shaolin
Temple! I expect "Eagle Claw" Smith will be getting a visit in about ten
years time...

[JS2]

Post by Karim

Post by xiaou2
There were also many secrets,
because if a man knew something too deadly, he could basically go
arround taking out entire villages and nobody could stop him.

I remember as a child sitting on the veranda in my home village of
Shrewsbury, when who should turn up but old "Phoenix Eye" Jones. His
eyebrows were bigger and hairier than anyone's I'd ever seen, so I knew
his techniques would be deadly. Sure enough, he managed to kill almost
the entire village with his damnable Double Phoenix Eye style; his only
justification being an evil laugh and some muttered words about "what his
father did to me in the woods ten years ago".
I quickly ran to the neighboring village to fetch Ian Smith, who luckily
was tutored in the Shadow Eagle Claw, the only technique known that could
beat the Double Phoenix Eye. They had a showdown in the town square, in
front of the Esso station, and luckily "Phoenix Eye" Jones was killed
before he could murder any more innocent villagers. Unfortunately, his 9
year old son was with him, and escaped... in the direction of the Shaolin
Temple! I expect "Eagle Claw" Smith will be getting a visit in about ten
years time...

Yes, but the Shadow Eagle Claw can be neutralized by the Triple Hairy
Eyeball. Ian Smith better hope that young Jones isn't spending time with
the
monks of Lake Not-So-Placid, who've perfected that technique.

-JS2

[Badger North]

Post by xiaou2
You honestly think that kungfu back in the days invented were made
for fun? These skills were the weapons of the day back then.

No, back then, they used these things called "weapons". You might
want to do some research on that.

Badger Jones
www.youngforest.ca
"Hard to be a freak when the carnival's not in town." - Chas Clements

[xiaou2]

Post by Badger North

Post by xiaou2
You honestly think that kungfu back in the days invented were made
for fun? These skills were the weapons of the day back then.

No, back then, they used these things called "weapons". You might
want to do some research on that.
Badger Jones
www.youngforest.ca
"Hard to be a freak when the carnival's not in town." - Chas Clements

not every average joe had a weapon on him. such things probably
would have costed a decent amount... as it takes a lot of time and
effort to forge them. also, its not like you
take your Kwan Do everywhere you go.

And finally, what happens when you get disarmed? Youd be
screwed without a martial art knowledge. Weapon training in
itself was also a must. Youd never weild a sword effective
agaisnt a skilled trained martial arts swordsman.

weapon training was taught with a martial art. I do not
believe that any schools back then taught Only a weapon
alone. They were much smarter than that.

[I can't believe it's not a Badger!]

Post by xiaou2

Post by Badger North

Post by xiaou2
You honestly think that kungfu back in the days invented were made
for fun? These skills were the weapons of the day back then.

No, back then, they used these things called "weapons". You might
want to do some research on that.
Badger Jones
www.youngforest.ca
"Hard to be a freak when the carnival's not in town." - Chas

Clements

Post by xiaou2
not every average joe had a weapon on him. such things probably
would have costed a decent amount...

You're kidding, right?

I mean, heck, Staffs, Spears, and Clubs are among the most common
weapons available. *EVERYONE* had them if they wanted them.

Post by xiaou2
as it takes a lot of time and
effort to forge them.

Apparently not enough to prevent every adult male from owning a knife.

Post by xiaou2
also, its not like you
take your Kwan Do everywhere you go.

Sez who? Knives, clubs, and staffs, travel pretty easy.

Post by xiaou2
And finally, what happens when you get disarmed?

1) You don't get disarmed all that often. Pretty rarely for that
matter.

2) You die.

Post by xiaou2
Youd be screwed without a martial art knowledge.

Against another guy with a weapon or a group, you're screwed anyway.

Post by xiaou2
Weapon training in itself was also a must.

Because weapons were the norm.

Post by xiaou2
Youd never weild a sword effective
agaisnt a skilled trained martial arts swordsman.

BWA-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Post by xiaou2
weapon training was taught with a martial art.

Weapon training *IS* a Martial Art, even in the absense of unarmed
training.

Post by xiaou2
I do not
believe that any schools back then taught Only a weapon
alone. They were much smarter than that.

Weapon training always came first and was more important. Training
unarmed against a weapon is what you do because it's better than crying
like a little girl while you're gutted.

Peace favor your sword (IH),
Kirk

[JS2]

Post by xiaou2
weapon training was taught with a martial art. I do not
believe that any schools back then taught Only a weapon
alone. They were much smarter than that.

Except for every army in recorded history? Weapons beat
empty hands, and serious fighters learned that a long time
ago. Still true today; if you really, really have to defend
yourself, a gun is your best bet. Some empty hand is useful
if you think you're going to be in bar fights and the like,
but if you're thinking of self defense its gun, or if you
can't carry, knife.

-JS2

[Robert Low]

Post by xiaou2

Post by Badger North
No, back then, they used these things called "weapons".

not every average joe had a weapon on him. such things probably
would have costed a decent amount...

That's a good point. The way some people talk, you'd
thing sticks grew on trees or something.

--
Rob

[I can't believe it's not a Badger!]

Post by Robert Low

Post by xiaou2

Post by Badger North
No, back then, they used these things called "weapons".

not every average joe had a weapon on him. such things probably
would have costed a decent amount...

That's a good point. The way some people talk, you'd
thing sticks grew on trees or something.

My nomination for Post of the Day.

I know it ain't the most original but it just plays into this
discussion *SO* perfectly.

Peace favor your sword (IH),
Kirk

[Robert Low]

Post by I can't believe it's not a Badger!

Post by Robert Low
That's a good point. The way some people talk, you'd
thing sticks grew on trees or something.

I know it ain't the most original

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

[T]

Post by Robert Low

Post by I can't believe it's not a Badger!

Post by Robert Low
That's a good point. The way some people talk, you'd
thing sticks grew on trees or something.

I know it ain't the most original

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

If it ain't broke, hit it with a bigger rock.

[Badger North]

Post by xiaou2
not every average joe had a weapon on him. such things probably
would have costed a decent amount... as it takes a lot of time and
effort to forge them. also, its not like you
take your Kwan Do everywhere you go.

Nope, but there's a wide variety of common civilian weapons, and tools
pressed into service as weapons. Empty hand fighting is at best, a
village amusement during a festival, and at worst, what you do before
getting your own weapon.

Post by xiaou2
And finally, what happens when you get disarmed?

Doesn't happen very often, and if it did, you died.

Post by xiaou2
weapon training was taught with a martial art. I do not
believe that any schools back then taught Only a weapon
alone. They were much smarter than that.

Yeah, like the Chinese army. Funny how empty hand training wasn't
such a big deal for them.

Badger Jones
www.youngforest.ca
"Hard to be a freak when the carnival's not in town." - Chas Clements

[I can't believe it's not a Badger!]

Post by xiaou2

Post by Scary
I hear were you're coming from Xiaou, but resent history doesn't seem
to back you up.

So the past info, happenings, experiences and knowledges collected
are then nullifed because nobody today has gone out and took
someones life with a series of deadly techniques? (within your
short lifespan time) Come on!

Lots of people doing lots of stuff and most of it easily documentable
and available for reference. Welcome to the Information Age.

Post by xiaou2
You honestly think that kungfu back in the days invented were made
for fun? These skills were the weapons of the day back then.. like
todays gun.. or f-16 fighter jets..ect. They were researched
and used, and killed and injured many. There were no 'cops'
out there in the wilds.. so kungfu was a nessessary way of life... and they
trained it Seriously... unlike today. There were also many secrets,
because if a man knew something too deadly, he could basically go arround
taking out entire villages and nobody could stop him.

Oh my...

Where to start?

"Back in the day" they used weapons. Rocks, Clubs, Spears, Swords,
Slings, Knives, Bows, etc. These were "like todays gun". They also
would frequently wear armour. The Phalanx and Military Formation were
the "f-16 fighter jets" not bare-haned Kung Fu.

And there usually was law enforcent of some sort anywhere there were
people congregating.

And about this "something too deadly, he could basically go arround
taking out entire villages and nobody could stop him." Um.....
BWA-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Any small group of people can easily gang up an pulverize someone
fighting empty handed. And God forbid that these villagers might use
garden trowls, rakes, shovels, and hoes on the poor unarmed dude.
Toast.

I haven't decided if you're just a very clever troll, quite young and
inexperienced, a clueless newbie fed on a straight diet of Kung Fu
flims, or just really, really stupid.

Whatever the case, you're certainly entertaining RMA.

Peace favor your sword (IH),
Kirk

[Evil Shaman]

Post by xiaou2

Post by xiaou2
You honestly think that kungfu back in the days invented were made
for fun? These skills were the weapons of the day back then.. like
todays gun.. or f-16 fighter jets..ect. They were researched
and used, and killed and injured many. There were no 'cops'
out there in the wilds.. so kungfu was a nessessary way of life...

and they

Post by xiaou2
trained it Seriously... unlike today. There were also many secrets,
because if a man knew something too deadly, he could basically go

arround

Post by xiaou2
taking out entire villages and nobody could stop him.

Oh my...
Where to start?
"Back in the day" they used weapons. Rocks, Clubs, Spears, Swords,
Slings, Knives, Bows, etc. These were "like todays gun". They also
would frequently wear armour. The Phalanx and Military Formation were
the "f-16 fighter jets" not bare-haned Kung Fu.
And there usually was law enforcent of some sort anywhere there were
people congregating.
And about this "something too deadly, he could basically go arround
taking out entire villages and nobody could stop him." Um.....
BWA-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Any small group of people can easily gang up an pulverize someone
fighting empty handed. And God forbid that these villagers might use
garden trowls, rakes, shovels, and hoes on the poor unarmed dude.
Toast.

No,no,no...the kung fu man doesn't have to actually fight the entire
village, although he probably could. All he has to do is make his way to
town center and then using "True Explosive Power" strike the ground. The
resulting shockwave will easily destroy the village.

Bryce

[T]

Post by Scary
I would say that professional boxers could theoretically kill someone
or brain damage them, although it would be a freak occurrence.

Well.

In the ring against another fighter of similar size and skill, it's a
freak occurrence.

[T]

Post by JS2
Actually, the world high jump record is 8 feet, and thats using
techniques like the flop where your center of mass actually
never rises above the bar. And you're telling me they had
people who had 7 foot vertical with their feet, which would
translate into about a 11 foot high jump? Or did I
misunderstand what you're claiming? If so, why doesn't
the Chinese track team sign these folks up ... color me
skeptical. I'd be more likely to believe they can parry
bullets with their hands ... the physics is easier.
"They had jump heights of like 7ft clearences from bottom
to floor. The arcrobatics are like that of the matrix - yet
they can actually do them! Quite awesome indeed! ^_^
Luv
Steve "
Actually I'm a bit incredulous about it.
Scary.

If you translate 'bottom' as butt instead of soles of feet it's a lot
more plausible.

[Scary]

Listen you deluded little man! He never said what he did was flawless
or that all TMA were crap he said that many people overlook weaknesses
on incongruities in oriental systems because they're Asian and
therefore a bit different and popular culture regarding "The mystic
fighting Arts of the East" have so confused most civilians so they
really don't know what a real fight is.
I've actually had people call my school asking to learn how to jump
through the air like in "The Matrix".


Lov Anna.


You should have say "Yes" but it takes 20 years to master the Matrix
jump, thats what all the rest of those bastards do!

Scary.

[WannabeSomeone]

Post by Love*Strudel
I've seen circus freaks do similar things doesn't make them good
fighters
As for Shaolin monks being indestructible? Why aren't they dominating
UFC and Pride Fights??
I'm sure the Shaolin temple could use the money, they could but a new
Buddha statue or something!

Shaolin monks are not supposed to kill people with their Kung Fu to make
money in UFC, especially killing gay people in "Pride" fights are strictly
"no no's" in Buddhism.


Wannabe
=======

[Love*Strudel]

Shaolin monks are not supposed to kill people with their Kung Fu to
make
money in UFC, especially killing gay people in "Pride" fights are
strictly
"no no's" in Buddhism.

Wannabe
=======


While it's true that love means different things to different people
even the love that dare not speak it's name, you'll be saddened by how
many people even Shaolin monks think it includes shiny objects.

***@NNABE-MEE? Anna
==============

[T]

Post by WannabeSomeone

Post by Love*Strudel
I've seen circus freaks do similar things doesn't make them good
fighters
As for Shaolin monks being indestructible? Why aren't they dominating
UFC and Pride Fights??
I'm sure the Shaolin temple could use the money, they could but a new
Buddha statue or something!

Shaolin monks are not supposed to kill people with their Kung Fu to make
money in UFC, especially killing gay people in "Pride" fights are strictly
"no no's" in Buddhism.

You'd think that if they were actually good they could win without
killing people; mma guys can.

[T]

Post by xiaou2
While ground fighting has some advantages, there are
times when it just wont work well in practice... like
if 6 people decide to attack you at once.

This is true.

The implication that, say, wing chun works just fine against six guys,
on the other hand, is hilarious.

Post by xiaou2
The thing is.. if you knew some Good tmas, then you
would be a more complete fighter. Not having
to get your clothes dirty for nothing...and being able
to take on many more attackers at once.

You'd be worse, having spent time on inefficient practice instead of
rolling.

Post by xiaou2
These tma's are verying in practicality though.
Like all arts - theres flaws and weaknesses in them. There
is also art and beauty in them as well.

This *might* be a hint, albeit not the one x is suggesting; muay thai,
wrestling, bjj are acquired tastes.

Post by xiaou2
In the case of shaolin kungfu... they are usually more stiff
and predicatable. However, a propperly trained shaolin monk
is nearly industructable! Ever see them do demos where people
kick thier nads full power, and punch them anywhere... and not
a tear, yell, or any reaction to it! Thier power is sick,
skill is sick, knowledge is in the volumes.

<Inigo Montoya> You keep using that word. I do not think it means what
you think it means. </IM>

Post by xiaou2
Wing Chun, which Ive found is the most practical in real street
fighting... has been arroud for a long time. However - Im not
so sure I consider it a Tma... because it uses some very different
approaches. Yet, it does borrow knowlege from other Tmas.. like
snake and crane. Very fluid, no need for muscle strenght to win,
advanced trapping, use of two or even 3 limbs at once, no
dominent side - equal accuracy, close range power..and much more.

Illusory range, pitiful coordination, et cetera.

Post by xiaou2
In Chi Na, chinese grapling and joint locking... theres an amazing
number of painfull things they can do to you if they even get one
chance to grab you.

Ah yes, the 'hold still, check this out' school of grappling.

Post by xiaou2
Eagle Claw, has many elements of chi na.. but also has many more
techniques including some great kicking and acrobatics. Very fast
and powerfull.
Tai Chi, while most taught for excercise.. there are versions
of it that are more combat centered. Very good for evasion
of force, redirection, needing little muscle to win techniques.
Added bonus of energy collection, energy projection, healing,
mental clarity and peacfull ballance thru meditation...and more.

Doesn't help with the spell-checker, though....

Post by xiaou2
Akido, simular to tai chi, but seems to have more throws..
and genrally more combat training.

I do wonder if partner kata practice might be at least slightly more
useful than solo kata practice.

Post by xiaou2
Tae Kwan Do, while most trained today as a sport.. if done
for combat, its kicks are blindingly fast and very hard to
get close to them. Kicks that are bone shattering & knockout
powerfull.

One of the things the kick guys don't seem to acknowledge about range...
if you're touching me (with your foot, a kick, you know?) then I'm
touching you - close enough to grab at least that leg.

Post by xiaou2
Karate... im not a fan of as to me it seems too watered down.
Although, in certain japenese places, they train much more
seriously - and one hit from thier kick would be enough to
end things. These guys are also very hard and can take
a severe hit quite easily.
And theres many more sytles and arts that I havnt touched on.
Theres a wealth of information out there that took several
generations to develop. If you ignor that much knowlege, then
you are a fool for sure.

Can't study everything.

Post by xiaou2
I will also state that many martial artist today are
not what they used to be. In older days training was much
more intense and serious. They were better fighters with more
power, speed, accuracy.

Right, records in all the other sports in the world go up and up and
up... only the fighters have gotten lazy.

Post by xiaou2
In traditional chinese kungfu for instance... they would have
you stand in a horse stance. They wouldnt train you any more,
untill you could stay in that stance - rock solid - for
like 3hrs! Why? as your legs are your ballance and used to
keep stability and transfer power correctly. Without strong
legs, you are like a leaf blowing in the wind... so any additional
knowledge would not do you any good. Also, teaching anything more
to such a person who wasnt ready - would give the art a bad name
and reputataion when he failed in a fight.

Squats work way better for strengthening the legs.

Post by xiaou2
There were such trainings as ballencing and fighting on 6" diameter
posts that were high off the ground. Very essential for ballance
and accuracy.. yet, most will never do this as too many lawsuits
would follow.

Not if you roll. ;-)

Anyway, what's the benefit to being high up? Balance on posts two inches
off the ground.

Post by xiaou2
Many schools today are based on money. In that regaurd, they
do not enforce stricter progression. So there are lots of
people that do not deserve what they have learned, nor the
rank they achieved. However, not many people would pay a guy
to have them say "stand in horse stance for 3rhs".
Basically what Im saying here, is that just cause you
fought a bunch of TKD guys and won easily dosnt mean that
they are a good representation of the art itself. If they
do not train as hard as the older times and as frequent,
they may do injustice to the very name of thier style.
(this includes instructors and pro fighters)
So in closing, you can choose to believe that the art you
do is flawless.. and that all other stuff is crap. Or, you can
go and do a bit of research and find new techniques to master
from past knowleges... have fun, become a master of many styles,
and be that much more deadly. (and look great in the process! ; )

Experiment trumps research. MMA is very suggestive.

[u***@hotmail.com]

Post by Scary
I'm not trying to be critical of Asian TMA's just because I'm a
MAA person, I'm just suspicious of why some people chose to do these
sort of traditional styles, I've concluded that it's mostly because
they're different, but there's more to it than just that!.
What I can't work out is why Karate and TKD as kicking- striking
styles became so popular in the 60s and 70s? Like for example Savate
has been known in western-fighting arts for over 200 years and
Boxing-Wrestling has been in development since before the ancient
Greeks or back to the year dot in the west (A lot longer than Karate or
TKD).
Why this fascination with Oriental MA's at the end of the 20th
century?

When I was a kid in the 50s, no non-Asian North American *knew of any
Asian martial arts except judo (because Teddy Roosevelt had studied
it). A "judo chop" was a knife hand to the back of the neck - all the
spies in the movies knew that move - and so did every kid. Then Yankees
and other countries' WWII vets started coming back from Japan with
stories of a new group of fighting arts: karate. This was *way cooler
than Japahese wrestling (Hey; no one had actually ever *seen judo).
James Bond movies started showing karate, with all its exaggerations
and sterotypes in the 60s. We all wanted to learn karate then. (This
was followed shortly after the US-Korean war with TKD.) Luckily, before
I got pulled into that, I saw Bruce Lee as Kato, the Green Hornet's
chauffeur. Kewl!

When I moved to California, I rejected several kung fu schools and
found a traditional art devoted to fighting. I don't know many people
who seemed motivated by Eastern philosphy. Maybe a few.

Post by Scary
My only conclusion is that westerners were drawn to Zen, Buddhist or
Shinto Taoist ideas packaged up with a lot of these systems, it might
be the sense that enlightenment - mysteries of the orient are tied up
in Asian fighting arts?
My experience of some so called TMA's instructors seems to be that in
class they can act holier then thou and in real life are just errant
assholes but then I'm Suspicious of Gurus and Sensei's who set
themselves apart from their students

My first kung fu teacher just had us call him "Al".

Post by Scary
Looking to the East as far as MA's are concerned seems to be another
aspect of hippie culture, to those who believe they've found some
sort of answer to life by doing 1000's of repetitive moves in Kata is
akin to believing that just going to church every Sunday will save
their souls.

I spent maybe 15 minutes a week in class on a form, another 30-60 at
home each week. I spent maybe two hours at home on conditioning, and
10-12 hours weekly in class, hands on, doing freestyle training. Kicks,
punches, throws, chin na. We trained to get back up onto our feet, and
throw our enemy down and stomp whenever possible. Your attacker's
friends would just love for you to try for a "dominant" position
underneath him, while they attack in turn.

<shrug>

I guess the monks, gangsters, and bodyguards of old China just didn't
have the advantage of referees and other sport training methods.

Post by Scary
Combat effectiveness becomes like a faith as well, because you do a
hundred katas with Sempai Yogi is it really going to make you a good
fighter?
Even though this Kata based approach has been discredited the zombie
minions of TMA orthodoxy still perform it like some Charlie Chan
riverdance. Why?

I suspect for most of those arts, it was a way for the teacher to
stretch out two years of material into twenty. But that's just a guess.

Post by Scary
It seems that human beings have the need to look elsewhere, to what's
different for answers.
Truth is not good enough not exciting enough just on it's own! It
needs to be embellished with some sort of "Ism", does the fact that
techniques are written in another language make them better?

Our grandmaster, my teacher's teacher, said that *he didn't have to
learn another language to study fighting; why should we?

Post by Scary
The answer is "Yes" because when the European instructor parrots
off something in Chinese or Japanese it's more pretentious and has
that appeal of the other, the strange the orient!
We've been feed a diet of Chop-Suey martial arts since the 60s and
it's effected our minds! And many people still buy into this stuff!
Movies perpetuate it as well, if there is enlightenment or revelation
it has to be founded in truth not ritualized oriental mummery.
Scary.

I have watched the fads come and go. First karate, then kung fu. Then
ninjitsu. We old timers have seen the signs go down, and be replaced
with the next Way Kewl(tm) art. Then Filipino, now Brazilian JJ & Chen
Taiji (if the books in the local Barnes & Noble are any indication). I
study FMA & Chen; maybe BJJ is good, but because it's faddish there
must be many unqualified people jumping on the bandwagon, yes?

Be cautious about thinking that your current art has all the answers,
or it is the only one that does.

My suspicion? We are developing a world martial art. A friend told me
back in the 80s that California was "the Shaolin Temple of the 20th
century". Now I think the whole world has become the Shaolin temple of
the 21st. It will take a generation or two more, but folks like my
daughter will be studying under teachers who have compared enough notes
that they will all start to look alike. There will be deeper secrets to
learn, but the first stages of training will be universal in
appearance.

Kermit

[Steve]

[snip]A lot of noteworthy comments..[/snip]

I just wanted to say that I really enjoyed reading this post. Many of the
people who decide to share their so-called "wisdom" on these boards have a
complete disregard for grammar and flow. Thanks for not making my eyes bleed
and sharing some insight into the martial arts trends over the years.

Steve

[WannabeSomeone]

Post by Steve

[snip]A lot of noteworthy comments..[/snip]

I just wanted to say that I really enjoyed reading this post. Many of the
people who decide to share their so-called "wisdom" on these boards have a
complete disregard for grammar and flow. Thanks for not making my eyes
bleed and sharing some insight into the martial arts trends over the
years.
Steve

The grammar in chat-rooms can make you kill yourself.


Wannabe
=======

[Scary]

A cool and insightful post, and exactly what I was trying to get
across.

Thx kermit

Scary.

[Chas]

.....It will take a generation or two more, but folks like my
daughter will be studying under teachers who have compared enough notes
that they will all start to look alike. There will be deeper secrets to
learn, but the first stages of training will be universal in
appearance.

Yup-
As another geezer, I saw (participated in) the progression of fads as well.
My own teachers say that the US is producing the finest martial artists the
world has ever known; big, strong, exposed to a multitude of arts that never
even saw one another before.
The MMA crowd thinks they sprang to the fore without a history like Topsy
from the head of Zeus.
The reality is that most of them come out of traditional arts (judo,
jujitsu, muay thai, lots of TKD, Filipino, &tc), and it's the context of
practice that changes, not the essential principles.
What is beginning to emerge with MMA is a systematized way of practice, not
some epiphany of concept.

Chas

[Fraser Johnston]

Post by Chas

.....It will take a generation or two more, but folks like my
daughter will be studying under teachers who have compared enough notes
that they will all start to look alike. There will be deeper secrets to
learn, but the first stages of training will be universal in
appearance.

Yup-
As another geezer, I saw (participated in) the progression of fads as well.
My own teachers say that the US is producing the finest martial artists
the world has ever known; big, strong, exposed to a multitude of arts that
never even saw one another before.
The MMA crowd thinks they sprang to the fore without a history like Topsy
from the head of Zeus.
The reality is that most of them come out of traditional arts (judo,
jujitsu, muay thai, lots of TKD, Filipino, &tc), and it's the context of
practice that changes, not the essential principles.
What is beginning to emerge with MMA is a systematized way of practice,
not some epiphany of concept.

Have you watched those videos yet?

Fraser

[Chas]

Post by Fraser Johnston
Have you watched those videos yet?

Yes- less a couple of segments wherein the codexsomethingsomething.
really enjoyable stuff, thank you again for your very kind hospitality.
I've been finishing off a very difficult project- two years worth of it- and
had not taken the time to make my appreciation known to you.
I certainly wouldn't mean to offend, a matter of priorities and exhaustion.

Chas

[Fraser Johnston]

Post by Chas

Post by Fraser Johnston
Have you watched those videos yet?

Yes- less a couple of segments wherein the codexsomethingsomething.
really enjoyable stuff, thank you again for your very kind hospitality.
I've been finishing off a very difficult project- two years worth of it-
and had not taken the time to make my appreciation known to you.
I certainly wouldn't mean to offend, a matter of priorities and exhaustion.

I'm more interested in your opinion. Everyone looks at everything with a
different set of eyes. I am really interested in what yours saw. Don't
worry about offending me mate. Friends don't offend each other easily. : )

Fraser

[Chas]

Post by Fraser Johnston
I'm more interested in your opinion. Everyone looks at everything with a
different set of eyes. I am really interested in what yours saw.

Well, I've been watching that material since the mid-90's; enjoy it very
much.
What I see work is the same thing that's always worked; huggin' and puggin'.
They're superbly conditioned athletes- it's great entertainment.
As far as fighting as open as they do, nah- as far as observing any of the
rules, nah again.
Did you see the Liddell/Ortiz fight? Neither carries himself like a boxer,
and yet it was 'stand-up' all the way.

Chas

[Fraser Johnston]

Post by Chas

Post by Fraser Johnston
I'm more interested in your opinion. Everyone looks at everything with a
different set of eyes. I am really interested in what yours saw.

Well, I've been watching that material since the mid-90's; enjoy it very
much.
What I see work is the same thing that's always worked; huggin' and
puggin'. They're superbly conditioned athletes- it's great entertainment.
As far as fighting as open as they do, nah- as far as observing any of the
rules, nah again.
Did you see the Liddell/Ortiz fight? Neither carries himself like a boxer,
and yet it was 'stand-up' all the way.

I think they are both highly over rated. Both have very little in the way
of submission skills. Lidell is a pretty good striker but is no pro boxer.
Both have good takedown defences but very little in the way of takedowns.
Ortiz uses knees well from the clinch and is good at pounding people against
the fence.

Fraser

[Chas]

Post by Fraser Johnston
I think they are both highly over rated. Both have very little in the way
of submission skills. Lidell is a pretty good striker but is no pro
boxer. Both have good takedown defences but very little in the way of
takedowns. Ortiz uses knees well from the clinch and is good at pounding
people against the fence.

Odd that they'd be such champions then.

Chas

[Fraser Johnston]

Post by Chas

Post by Fraser Johnston
I think they are both highly over rated. Both have very little in the
way of submission skills. Lidell is a pretty good striker but is no pro
boxer. Both have good takedown defences but very little in the way of
takedowns. Ortiz uses knees well from the clinch and is good at pounding
people against the fence.

Odd that they'd be such champions then.

Yep. But they have mainly fought scrubs. And UFC is second tier. All the
really good guys are in Pride. The money is way better. I was surprised
that Chuck beat Randy but it was a lucky/deliberate eye gouge that decided
that one.

Fraser

[Chas]

......I was surprised that Chuck beat Randy but it was a lucky/deliberate
eye gouge that decided that one.

No wonder they don't allow them.
You'd have thought that a mma guy would just shrug that off and apply a
submission hold.
I guess, all other conditions being equal, eye-gouging is a nice little
trick to know.

Chas

[Fraser Johnston]

Post by Chas

......I was surprised that Chuck beat Randy but it was a lucky/deliberate
eye gouge that decided that one.

No wonder they don't allow them.
You'd have thought that a mma guy would just shrug that off and apply a
submission hold.
I guess, all other conditions being equal, eye-gouging is a nice little
trick to know.

Sure. The problem is that people teach it as a move in isolation and think
it will work against everyone. Randy did shrug it off but it left him blind
on that side and he didn't see the hook that stopped the fight.

Fraser

[Chas]

.....The problem is that people teach it as a move in isolation and think
it will work against everyone.

Never seen it taught that way.

Chas

[Evil Shaman]

Post by Chas

.....The problem is that people teach it as a move in isolation and think
it will work against everyone.

Never seen it taught that way.
Chas

You're different, and much more grounded in reality then some. There are
plenty of places that teach things like eye gouges as the end all, be all of
winning a fight. It's fine as far as it goes, but it's hard to get an eye
gouge on someone who is mounted on top of you, beating your head in.
Nothing wrong with having it in your bag of tricks, but the basic fighting
skills still need to be there to make it work.

Bryce

[Chas]

..... Nothing wrong with having it in your bag of tricks, but the basic
fighting skills still need to be there to make it work.

You can fight harder, or you can fight smarter-

Chas

[u***@hotmail.com]

Post by Evil Shaman

Post by Chas

.....The problem is that people teach it as a move in isolation and think
it will work against everyone.

Never seen it taught that way.
Chas

You're different, and much more grounded in reality then some. There are
plenty of places that teach things like eye gouges as the end all, be all of
winning a fight. It's fine as far as it goes, but it's hard to get an eye
gouge on someone who is mounted on top of you, beating your head in.
Nothing wrong with having it in your bag of tricks, but the basic fighting
skills still need to be there to make it work.
Bryce

Gee. I was always taught to use an eye gouge as just one more strike.
If you connect, he's blind - at least for a second or two. *That's
where your followup strikes come in - elbow to jaw, or kick to knee,
etc. You keep hitting until you know you've won the fight. You don't
*ever just hit, then step back and see what happens. He might pull his
knife and come back in, more cautious but angry.

It would be hard to throw an uppercut to the chin if someone is
mounted on top of you. But I never hear of a chin uppercut being
denigrated in RMA. (This is one situation where hair or finger chin na
might find an application.)

Kermit

[Evil Shaman]

Post by Evil Shaman

Post by Evil Shaman

Post by Chas

.....The problem is that people teach it as a move in isolation and

think

Post by Evil Shaman

Post by Chas

it will work against everyone.

Never seen it taught that way.
Chas

You're different, and much more grounded in reality then some. There

are

Post by Evil Shaman
plenty of places that teach things like eye gouges as the end all, be

all of

Post by Evil Shaman
winning a fight. It's fine as far as it goes, but it's hard to get

an eye

Post by Evil Shaman
gouge on someone who is mounted on top of you, beating your head in.
Nothing wrong with having it in your bag of tricks, but the basic

fighting

Post by Evil Shaman
skills still need to be there to make it work.
Bryce

Gee. I was always taught to use an eye gouge as just one more strike.
If you connect, he's blind - at least for a second or two. *That's
where your followup strikes come in - elbow to jaw, or kick to knee,
etc. You keep hitting until you know you've won the fight. You don't
*ever just hit, then step back and see what happens. He might pull his
knife and come back in, more cautious but angry.
It would be hard to throw an uppercut to the chin if someone is
mounted on top of you. But I never hear of a chin uppercut being
denigrated in RMA. (This is one situation where hair or finger chin na
might find an application.)
Kermit

The biggest problem I have with eye gouges and other such moves is that they
tend to be taught by some as a substitute to basic fighting skills. In
practice they are usually low percentage moves that are suprisingly
difficult to pull off, and while they CAN be effective if done successfully
they don't always have the devestating impact on the opponent that some
might think. I think a person is much better off spending their time
learning the basics such as punching, kicking, defending takedowns, escapes
from bad positions, etc. then learning a whole bunch of "tricks" that can't
be counted on. I would switch things around in your example and use the eye
gouge as the follow up to your other strikes if anything. By all means keep
hitting till you win and hopefully be prepared to defend takedowns and know
what to do if taken down. Nothing wrong with a good uppercut, but like you
said it's hard to do if someone's mounted on top of you.

Bryce

[Fraser Johnston]

Post by Chas

.....The problem is that people teach it as a move in isolation and think
it will work against everyone.

Never seen it taught that way.

Get yourself down to a womens self defense course at the YMCA.

Fraser

[Badger North]

On Wed, 11 May 2005 09:06:42 +0800, "Fraser Johnston"

Post by Fraser Johnston
Get yourself down to a womens self defense course at the YMCA.

I don't think he'd pass the physical.

Badger Jones
www.youngforest.ca
"Hard to be a freak when the carnival's not in town." - Chas Clements

[Chas]

Post by Badger North

Post by Fraser Johnston
Get yourself down to a womens self defense course at the YMCA.

I don't think he'd pass the physical.

Some of *the happiest days of my life* were spent teaching women at the
YWCA, at uni and during the height of the feminist political times.
I used to favor eye-gouges, Buck knives and those little nine-shot .22
revolvers.

Chas

[Robert Low]

Post by Chas
Some of *the happiest days of my life* were spent teaching women at the
YWCA, at uni and during the height of the feminist political times.
I used to favor eye-gouges, Buck knives and those little nine-shot .22
revolvers.

Spot the difference:-

'This eye gouge will stop any assailant.'

'Now, if you eye gouge him and draw your gun
before he recovers, you can...'

:-)

Actually, I've never come across eye gouges as a finishing
technique either, only as something you do to get an advantage
while you follow it up. That said, the one time I got
it done to me---accidentally, I might add---it seemed
pretty fucking effective. If my partner had actually
wanted to hurt me, the period immediately after he
took his toe back out of my eye would have been pretty
much ideal.

[WannabeSomeone]

Post by Chas
Some of *the happiest days of my life* were spent teaching women at the
YWCA, at uni and during the height of the feminist political times.
I used to favor eye-gouges, Buck knives and those little nine-shot .22
revolvers.

What about nut-kicking. You forgot about nut-kicking. It is a well known
move in women's self defense classes.


Wannabe
=======

[JS2]

Post by WannabeSomeone

Post by Chas
Some of *the happiest days of my life* were spent teaching women at the
YWCA, at uni and during the height of the feminist political times.
I used to favor eye-gouges, Buck knives and those little nine-shot .22
revolvers.

What about nut-kicking. You forgot about nut-kicking. It is a well known
move in women's self defense classes.

And taught by people who want women to use low percentage and low
effect moves in case they may want to attack a woman in the future.

-JS2

[T]

Post by JS2

Post by WannabeSomeone

Post by Chas
Some of *the happiest days of my life* were spent teaching women at the
YWCA, at uni and during the height of the feminist political times.
I used to favor eye-gouges, Buck knives and those little nine-shot .22
revolvers.

What about nut-kicking. You forgot about nut-kicking. It is a well known
move in women's self defense classes.

And taught by people who want women to use low percentage and low
effect moves in case they may want to attack a woman in the future.
-JS2

Faking with the knee works great to set up an elbow hook. ;-)

[I can't believe it's not a Badger!]

Post by JS2

Post by WannabeSomeone

Post by Chas
Some of *the happiest days of my life* were spent teaching women at the
YWCA, at uni and during the height of the feminist political times.
I used to favor eye-gouges, Buck knives and those little

nine-shot .22

Post by JS2

Post by WannabeSomeone

Post by Chas
revolvers.

What about nut-kicking. You forgot about nut-kicking. It is a well known
move in women's self defense classes.

And taught by people who want women to use low percentage and low
effect moves in case they may want to attack a woman in the future.
-JS2

That's ridiculous.

No one teaching nut-shots for women's self defense does so with the
express intention of attacking the very women he's teaching later with
the knowledge that "they don't work."

It's ludicrous to even suggest such a motive.

Peace favor your sword (IH),
Kirk

[JS2]

Post by Scary

Post by JS2

Post by WannabeSomeone

Post by Chas
Some of *the happiest days of my life* were spent teaching women

at the

Post by JS2

Post by WannabeSomeone

Post by Chas
YWCA, at uni and during the height of the feminist political

times.

Post by JS2

Post by WannabeSomeone

Post by Chas
I used to favor eye-gouges, Buck knives and those little

nine-shot .22

Post by JS2

Post by WannabeSomeone

Post by Chas
revolvers.

What about nut-kicking. You forgot about nut-kicking. It is a well

known

Post by JS2

Post by WannabeSomeone
move in women's self defense classes.

And taught by people who want women to use low percentage and low
effect moves in case they may want to attack a woman in the future.
-JS2

That's ridiculous.
No one teaching nut-shots for women's self defense does so with the
express intention of attacking the very women he's teaching later with
the knowledge that "they don't work."
It's ludicrous to even suggest such a motive.

Wow, I may have a future as a troll if I choose to go that path.
Actually, the last bit was just intended as a bit of sarcastic humor,
though I stand by my statement that nut kicking is low percentage
and low effect. You can ask your friendly local cop about this
if you have doubts. However, as T said, it can sometimes
get you room for more effective defenses ... makes a good
distraction. But its rarely more than that (unless your attacker
isn't really serious...ie has no adrenaline flowing).

-JS2

[I can't believe it's not a Badger!]

Post by JS2
Wow, I may have a future as a troll if I choose to go that path.
Actually, the last bit was just intended as a bit of sarcastic humor,

'Twas precisely because of your non-trolling history that I took the
statement serious (well, at least semi-seriously). That and I could
see no indication of sarcasm.

<shrug>

Post by JS2
though I stand by my statement that nut kicking is low percentage
and low effect. You can ask your friendly local cop about this
if you have doubts. However, as T said, it can sometimes
get you room for more effective defenses ... makes a good
distraction. But its rarely more than that (unless your attacker
isn't really serious...ie has no adrenaline flowing).

My experience is somewhere in between. It's not "low percentage" but
it's far from garanteed. Men learn *REAL* fast to protect that
sensitive area so it can be hard to hit if it's not set up right.
Further some men can just shrug off or ignore the pain. However, if
you can manage to connect strongly (preferably more than once), then it
can be more than just a distraction. It can give you a "pause" to take
advantage of, loosen grips, cause hesitation, etc.

So, while it's not a bullet-proof technique by any means and should
*NOT* be relied on as a garanteed one-shot fight stopper, it is still a
valuble tool with useful application.

Peace favor your sword (IH),
Kirk

[JS2]

Post by I can't believe it's not a Badger!

Post by JS2
Wow, I may have a future as a troll if I choose to go that path.
Actually, the last bit was just intended as a bit of sarcastic humor,

'Twas precisely because of your non-trolling history that I took the
statement serious (well, at least semi-seriously). That and I could
see no indication of sarcasm.
<shrug>

No one expects the Spanish Inquisition (for the benefit of anyone
who listened to the old Monty Python records). Sorry, I guess I
thought the statement was so over the top that it couldn't be taken
seriously.

Post by I can't believe it's not a Badger!

Post by JS2
though I stand by my statement that nut kicking is low percentage
and low effect. You can ask your friendly local cop about this
if you have doubts. However, as T said, it can sometimes
get you room for more effective defenses ... makes a good
distraction. But its rarely more than that (unless your attacker
isn't really serious...ie has no adrenaline flowing).

My experience is somewhere in between. It's not "low percentage" but
it's far from garanteed. Men learn *REAL* fast to protect that
sensitive area so it can be hard to hit if it's not set up right.
Further some men can just shrug off or ignore the pain. However, if
you can manage to connect strongly (preferably more than once), then it
can be more than just a distraction. It can give you a "pause" to take
advantage of, loosen grips, cause hesitation, etc.
So, while it's not a bullet-proof technique by any means and should
*NOT* be relied on as a garanteed one-shot fight stopper, it is still a
valuble tool with useful application.

No argument there, but I've talked to wendo instructors (is that still
being taught...haven't heard of it lately) who swore it was a can't miss,
works every time attack. It is a good distraction, no doubt.

-JS2

[Badger North]

Post by JS2
No argument there, but I've talked to wendo instructors (is that still
being taught...haven't heard of it lately) who swore it was a can't miss,
works every time attack. It is a good distraction, no doubt.

Heh. The wendo girls were sworn to secrecy not to show their stuff to
guys. As a "don't show your potentially abusive boyfriend how you'd
fight him" it makes sense, but it also had the added benefit of
preventing any guy from saying "that's bogus bullshit."

Badger Jones
www.youngforest.ca
"Hard to be a freak when the carnival's not in town." - Chas Clements

[T]

Post by Chas

Post by Fraser Johnston
I'm more interested in your opinion. Everyone looks at everything with a
different set of eyes. I am really interested in what yours saw.

Well, I've been watching that material since the mid-90's; enjoy it very
much.
What I see work is the same thing that's always worked; huggin' and puggin'.
They're superbly conditioned athletes- it's great entertainment.
As far as fighting as open as they do, nah- as far as observing any of the
rules, nah again.

They'd probably fight a little more conservatively if you had a stick. ;-)

Post by Chas
Did you see the Liddell/Ortiz fight? Neither carries himself like a boxer,
and yet it was 'stand-up' all the way.
Chas

If one of them had fought like a boxer, it wouldn't have stayed
stand-up, he'd've gotten taken down PDQ.

[Chas]

Post by T

Post by Chas
As far as fighting as open as they do, nah- as far as observing any of
the rules, nah again.

They'd probably fight a little more conservatively if you had a stick.
;-)

Or even if they just knew that one another hadn't been searched before
entering the fighting area, which had also been cleaned up.

Post by T
If one of them had fought like a boxer, it wouldn't have stayed stand-up,
he'd've gotten taken down PDQ.

Yes- 'boxing' is just as much a 'sport' as mma- and just as vulnerable to
working from outside the box. If one doesn't respect their restricted
targeting, their skills become far less hazardous to you.

Chas

[Fraser Johnston]

Post by Scary
I'm not trying to be critical of Asian TMA's just because I'm a
MAA person, I'm just suspicious of why some people chose to do these
sort of traditional styles, I've concluded that it's mostly because
they're different, but there's more to it than just that!.
What I can't work out is why Karate and TKD as kicking- striking
styles became so popular in the 60s and 70s? Like for example Savate
has been known in western-fighting arts for over 200 years and
Boxing-Wrestling has been in development since before the ancient
Greeks or back to the year dot in the west (A lot longer than Karate or
TKD).
Why this fascination with Oriental MA's at the end of the 20th
century?
My only conclusion is that westerners were drawn to Zen, Buddhist or
Shinto Taoist ideas packaged up with a lot of these systems, it might
be the sense that enlightenment - mysteries of the orient are tied up
in Asian fighting arts?
My experience of some so called TMA's instructors seems to be that in
class they can act holier then thou and in real life are just errant
assholes but then I'm Suspicious of Gurus and Sensei's who set
themselves apart from their students
Looking to the East as far as MA's are concerned seems to be another
aspect of hippie culture, to those who believe they've found some
sort of answer to life by doing 1000's of repetitive moves in Kata is
akin to believing that just going to church every Sunday will save
their souls.
Combat effectiveness becomes like a faith as well, because you do a
hundred katas with Sempai Yogi is it really going to make you a good
fighter?
Even though this Kata based approach has been discredited the zombie
minions of TMA orthodoxy still perform it like some Charlie Chan
riverdance. Why?
It seems that human beings have the need to look elsewhere, to what's
different for answers.
Truth is not good enough not exciting enough just on it's own! It
needs to be embellished with some sort of "Ism", does the fact that
techniques are written in another language make them better?
The answer is "Yes" because when the European instructor parrots
off something in Chinese or Japanese it's more pretentious and has
that appeal of the other, the strange the orient!
We've been feed a diet of Chop-Suey martial arts since the 60s and
it's effected our minds! And many people still buy into this stuff!
Movies perpetuate it as well, if there is enlightenment or revelation
it has to be founded in truth not ritualized oriental mummery.

I think the blame lies solely in Hollywood. Most people haven't got the
first idea what a real fight looks like.

Fraser

[u***@hotmail.com]

Post by Fraser Johnston

Post by Scary
I'm not trying to be critical of Asian TMA's just because I'm a
MAA person, I'm just suspicious of why some people chose to do these
sort of traditional styles, I've concluded that it's mostly because
they're different, but there's more to it than just that!.
What I can't work out is why Karate and TKD as kicking- striking
styles became so popular in the 60s and 70s? Like for example Savate
has been known in western-fighting arts for over 200 years and
Boxing-Wrestling has been in development since before the ancient
Greeks or back to the year dot in the west (A lot longer than Karate or
TKD).
Why this fascination with Oriental MA's at the end of the 20th
century?
My only conclusion is that westerners were drawn to Zen, Buddhist or
Shinto Taoist ideas packaged up with a lot of these systems, it might
be the sense that enlightenment - mysteries of the orient are tied up
in Asian fighting arts?
My experience of some so called TMA's instructors seems to be that in
class they can act holier then thou and in real life are just errant
assholes but then I'm Suspicious of Gurus and Sensei's who set
themselves apart from their students
Looking to the East as far as MA's are concerned seems to be

another

Post by Fraser Johnston

Post by Scary
aspect of hippie culture, to those who believe they've found some
sort of answer to life by doing 1000's of repetitive moves in Kata is
akin to believing that just going to church every Sunday will save
their souls.
Combat effectiveness becomes like a faith as well, because you do a
hundred katas with Sempai Yogi is it really going to make you a good
fighter?
Even though this Kata based approach has been discredited the zombie
minions of TMA orthodoxy still perform it like some Charlie Chan
riverdance. Why?
It seems that human beings have the need to look elsewhere, to what's
different for answers.
Truth is not good enough not exciting enough just on it's own! It
needs to be embellished with some sort of "Ism", does the fact that
techniques are written in another language make them better?
The answer is "Yes" because when the European instructor parrots
off something in Chinese or Japanese it's more pretentious and has
that appeal of the other, the strange the orient!
We've been feed a diet of Chop-Suey martial arts since the 60s and
it's effected our minds! And many people still buy into this stuff!
Movies perpetuate it as well, if there is enlightenment or

revelation

Post by Fraser Johnston

Post by Scary
it has to be founded in truth not ritualized oriental mummery.

I think the blame lies solely in Hollywood. Most people haven't got the
first idea what a real fight looks like.
Fraser

I liked the fight scene in "The Bourne Identity". Of course, I also
like the fight in "The Quiet Man" :P

Kermit

[Fraser Johnston]

Post by u***@hotmail.com
I liked the fight scene in "The Bourne Identity". Of course, I also
like the fight in "The Quiet Man" :P

I liked the one in Happy Gilmore.

Fraser

[Karim]

Post by Fraser Johnston

Post by u***@hotmail.com
I liked the fight scene in "The Bourne Identity". Of course, I also
like the fight in "The Quiet Man" :P

I liked the one in Happy Gilmore.

"The price is WRONG, bitch!" Pure quality, that fight scene.