KempoTiger

Yes you are. Just because you aren't training in a conventional way doesn't mean you aren't a "martial artist." If someone is telling you, that you're not, buy them a dictionary.

I am not a Bruce Lee fan, nor have i spent an inordinate amount of time reviewing his movies. To me, they're just movies, and in those movies, he was just a martial arts actor. Call it blasphemy, but hey... how many people do you see idolizing Steven Seagal? As many? Less? I wonder if they're going to idolize him 30+ years after his death, and yet he's an 8th degree black belt in aikido AND a successful actor. I do find it interesting though. People have a tendency to hang on Bruce Lee's every word, and yet they've blown off the words of most every other martial artist. The tangent completed, i just wanted to note that Chuck Norris practiced tang soo do, not karate. I seriously doubt the movie you're referring to incorrectly portrayed him as employing karate, but... it's always possible. I mean, those 'were' odd times. As a person and martial artist who has the utmost respect for Bruce Lee, but not a religious worshipping of him I can honestly say that he was more than an actor and pseudo-intellectual. Studying his words really makes you question "traditional" ways of training, and fighting technique. In my opinion his commentary of a Karate punch and Gung-fu punch is really more of a difference between a driving punch, and a snapping punch. To which at this point I would say he's 110% right, only that he missed saying that both types are necessary to be a rounded fighter. Alot of stuff he said I would consider common sense being reworded in a flowery deep sounding philosophical sounding way, such as his comments on being like "water". But hey, give credit where it's due.

Nope, I just made that up right off the top of my head. Did I sound legit? But honestly the reason I say that is just from experience when learning other foriegn languages, and even understanding why certain things are the way they are in english. Listen to the way most masters shout the word "osu." There's always that slight snap to the end of it, almost like the "u" sound.

Do you teach there?

I'm not too familiar with the Tai Chi Yang style... I personally trained in Tai Chi Ch'aun for a brief few month period. From what I learned there we seldom used kicks at all, and if we did they were low strikes used to step into various stances.

The "u" is very short. Almost inaudible. It's the reason we don't elongate the "s" sound to "oossssss". It crops the word nice and short almost like you're saying "oosa!" My take on it at least....

The slow flowing movements can help you incorporate stronger stances and more focus, while you develop handspeed with Wing tsun. Use the two in tangent and you will find yourself much more in tune with yourself as you flow through a series of strikes. Use the Tai Chi training for developing focus more than anything.

In my honest opinion, most mixed martial artists or MA's in hybrid styles such as Kempo are all slowly reaching towards that bruce lee JKD model. Kinda like tearing down unnecessary walls in a house. I do not speak for all Kempo schools, and from what I've heard Villari's is nothing more than a McDojo, and the United Studio's schools have watered down their material and training quite a bit. In my school, I teach my students to find their own way. They learn set techniques and Kata's but the Bunkai for them will change depending on themselves as individuals. Some moves will work for them, some won't. Eventually all of the techniques begin to flow into each other, and the student can begin to flow as a fighter in their own way. In my opinion, the Kung Fu forms we teach aren't as flashy as they would be in a true Kung Fu school, to keep in tune with our mission of practicality. We use them primarily for strengthening of ones stances, as well as helping the student flow more easily and fluidly. But as I said, when I researched and wrote about the history of Kempo, it's not a straight line of lineage with set techniques and forms. It's like an old twisted rope, that twines, breaks away and retwines as long as it goes. A Master in Kempo may branch off with his own system and dojo, but will learn forms and katas from other masters that he will incorporate as his higher ranking material. We may use altered forms and techniques from other systems if the master deems them conducive to making one a more skilled martial artist.

Yes..it's becomming drastically apparent that upon entering these forums my grammar goes completely down the tubes. Every day I look back on my posts and cringe at the typos and nearly nonsensical sentence structure I used Luckily though, you all seem to get the point I was trying to convey, heh. and yes I read your intro...quite an interesting read I suppose we do agree more than I thought...arguments based on nitpicking semantics can be fun though can't they?

Much of it is Kajukenbo derived, much of it came from Chow himself. Also keep in mind, when Villari and Mattera left the Cerio system, they were at a level where they were in a position to create their own techniques and theories. The biggest difference in Kempo from most traditional Martial arts systems is the fact that it is always changing to improve and work more efficiently. A Master 5th degree or higher creating new techniques or kata's isn't exactly a sin within Kempo, and is in fact promoting what makes it so diverse and special. Just like how Bruce Lee taught JKD without set techniques but rather improving theories, Kempo schools branch off and reinvent themselves depending on the Master in charge. To go back to the beginnings of many Eastern US Kempo schools, one can look at the Kajukenbo model, and see how most instructors there are encouraged to teach not set movements but rather with their own flavor for what works with each individual student. Not everyone is the same, and not everything works for everyone. It's the essence of Kempo to evolve

United Studios to the best of my knowledge is under the Cerio system who taught Villari. There is indeed material after black, and it mostly incorporates more advanced versions of the same theories and techniques of lower ranks, as well as numerous Kung Fu forms.

I'd say go for it...but honestly this would probably make me go to church more...I've been looking for an excuse

I never said it was a bad choice, I just feel that a mixed style is a better choice...just my opinion If you take Tai Chi it could greatly compliment your WT training so go for it. My only real advice is to take a system to "compliment" your WT training, not contradict and conflict it.

My reference to the term "tested" implies either having utilized the techniques and theories learned with substantial contact and resistance from a fellow practicioner (not just practicing bunkai on a friend who's going to fall/squirm/and move with your techniques regardless of if you're doing them correctly or not) or have been in more than a few real life fights where you get to see what it feels like to have your adrenaline running, and someone genuinely trying to hurt you. As you can probably tell from my last post, I've been rather disillusioned with the concept of a "black belt" meaning anything more than a fancy piece of cloth that holds my gi togethor. There are far too many martial arts schools that allow students to climb all the way to black belt without ever asking them to do much of anything beyond twirl and dance with loud shouts and heavy breathing. Many classes that incorporate "application", usually end up having a friend throw a punch with light to moderately hard committed power, and then they stand still while the practicioner proceeds to do a flurry of techniques on their opponent standing still. Once you get into a real fight, it becomes quickly apparent that I'd say a good 80-90% of these complicated techniques won't get passed the first two steps before you either knock them down, or they take it and knock you down. And with a false sense of security these what I'll call "softer" students will end up being the ones that find out what the pavement tastes like. Perhaps I'm wrong, because hey my own personal street fighting experience is quite limited as well. But from what I've seen, and what I've heard it all comes down to experience....without it, you're done. Just my thoughts

ive always been told to look at the persons eyes. the eyes give everything away. its the same when i used to play steetball when i was younger in a 1 on 1 situation you look at the persons eyes not at the ball. Ha! thats's funny because I've always been taught, and teach the exact opposite. Always keep your eyes on your opponents chest and AWAY from the eyes. By watching the chest, you have full range of peripheral vision to see which way you're opponent is going to attack. By looking at the face you a) take away part of your ability to watch for hip motion which is the #1 sign that fighters do to project their motion, and b) by looking into the eyes you now allow yourself to enter a realm of mind-games where you're opponent may try to intimidate you, or may glance in different directions decieving you into thinking they are moving in a way which they are not.

Most other martial arts schools use the term Osu or Oos, as a general acknowledgement. For example if you're instructor tells you to go practice your kata instead of saying "yes", you'd take a slight bow and say "Oos!" Or at least in my school we have a courtesy bow to any Black Belt that enters the dojo during training, wherein all the students turn towards the front of the dojo, bow and say "Oos".

My point DD, is that you can name a style whatever you want. JKD is "the way of the intercepting fist", it doesn't mean it's the first time intercepting a strike was done in a style. Wing Chun is Wing Chun, and just because it incorporates heavy emphasis on intercepting doesn't mean that it has the right to those words. Like I said earlier, the name of the style only represents only a glimpse of what you're going to learn. In Karate you learn to fight without weapons...in TKD you learn to use your hands and feet, in Kempo you learn the "way of the fist", and in JKD you learn the way of the intercepting fist. To the best of my knowledge Wing Chun means "Praise Spring", and I don't know if I like this style taking my pagan religion's MO of worshipping spring On a side note, although I've never taken Wing Chun I don't think I've ever seen a WC Martial artist ever use the sidestepping intercepting thrust punch Lee was so famous for. Most WC techniques seem to involve a slight parry with one hand and a simultaneous strike through with the other hand.

hrmm....well if that's the case, then I'd try to find another school that you can train two days a week in and make that your primary style. I would recommend finding something then that compliments your Wing Tsun training in a way that you can incorporate techniques and theories into the other schools class. For that matter I'd say go with a Mixed hybrid type style like perhaps JKD, Kajukenbo (or dare I say Kempo? ) Taking a primarily Japanese style would most likely leave you torn in which way you feel you're body should move so I wouldn't suggest that. The only other thing I could think of would be to take either a regular Jujitsu class to work on grabbing and locking with Wing Tsun as your stand up fighting technique, or actually go all the way and take BJJ to work on ground fighting. Whatever you take, just make sure the two styles are not going to greatly conflict with the theories presented in each other, else you won't develop any skills properly. Jujitsu and BJJ I would recommend only because they don't usually offer either a vast or different striking system to conflict with. Good luck with whatever you choose though.

Be patient when sparring but don't hesistate when it's time to make your move. Like others said, work on your footwork...there's numerous techniques that revolve soley around how you move when you fight that can decieve your opponent into thinking you're going to do something your not. When it comes to punching back, work on intercepting and sidestepping their attack to score quick points under the arms into the ribs, or dropping the hands and lunging forward for chest/face strikes. It's all in the snap, and make sure that you bring your hands immediately on guard after you strike whether you hit or not. Above all, KEEP MOVING oh and...don't expect to win against your instructors just yet Good luck!

Bruce Lee was referring to the benefits of Gung-Fu fluidity giving the martial artist more torque, accompanied by small nearly unnoticeable pops of the arms and wrist to make the arm strike in more of a whipping motion rather than a straight strike. The Japanese focused more on linear power, going along with philosophy of, "The shortest distance between two points etc....." I personally believe that the Gung-Fu (gung-Fu in a generalized term, not any specific style) theory leads one to striking with more power obviously, BUT this does not mean that Chinese martial arts are superior to Japanese Martial arts, for with linear theory the Japanese stylist would theoretically hit the Chinese martial artist first, and that iron bar can still do some hurt, trust me This is why I like Kempo...best of both worlds

Is experienced with the fine art of beating another persons rear and/or face in. You'd be amazed at how awesome an experienced street fighter can be. I'd take a guy that gets into a street fight outside of a bar twice a week over a guy with 15yrs of untested martial arts training any day. A common misconception. Martial arts in themselves do not in fact teach non-violence. Kung Fu systems and schools primarily do because of the nature of it's history, having buddhist monks incorporating such theories of non-violence and the seeking of enlightenment to the art. Most other karate schools regardless of their history in the US tend to also preach such a stance because it makes them more marketable to parents that don't want to send their children to take classes on "how to hurt people." I'm not saying that martial arts instructors don't mean it when they tell you that the best way to win a fight is to not fight at all or something cliche'd like that, but don't confuse Martial Arts true purpose with such invalid conventional wisdom. Martial Arts are arts that help one gain focus, strength, and above all fighting prowess....whether it be for self defense or for fighting a war, that is the supposed end goal of most martial arts systems. Now back to the point at hand...I mean to say you come across someone "trained." This can mean they have extensive experience with a various martial art where the school actually enforced contact and real application, or perhaps a trained boxer. Or perhaps it could just be a guy who gets into ALOT of fights, and has just learned from experience. Regardless of their level or form of training, when you come across someone like this, and they have intent to hurt you, you're going to be in alot of trouble if you're not trained and ready yourself to deal with such a person. 90% of the techniques my style even teaches are to be used against some dolt that's going to be attacking with a straight lunging punch. At the higher ranks we mix it up a bit, and teach different variations of lower rank techniques to make them work off of different kinds of attacks that may come from a more experienced fighter, but in the end we teach mostly self defense against the average shmoe. When you don't get an easy situation where the guy falls for your technques right off the bat, you're going to need to be prepared to complete the task of "outdoing" another person who may be just as skilled as you are in the art of fighting.

another Long Islander? Geesh, you guys are piling up, and I'm not alone anymore Anyway, Welcome!

Well that's what it comes down to. Another instructor I know of what I'll refer to as an unnamed TMA school said that 9/10 students there will be able to sufficiently defend themselves from the average joe/thug/idiot, and will most likely handle that attacker with ease. BUT...in the case one does come across a "trained" fighter, the tables are now suddenly turned assuming the TMA student hasn't trained heavily at all in regards to endurance, or techniques to counter other fighting styles. Get in and out is a great theory that we must all keep in mind, but when you come across that guy that won't let you just walk right through him, and instead does the same thing back to you only with power and aggression, you're gonna be in a whole world of trouble. (I'm not referring to you in particular Smitty, just people in general....already been yelled at twice on here for apparant "inflammatory remarks" )

Shotokan?

Dude...that just made me sad... I hate it when schools get commercialized. Truth be told I believe that's why my Master left Villari to train under Cerio and open his own branch of schools. A year or so ago our school was heading down that watered down, pseudo-commericialized path that seemingly all schools with a chain of locations go down, but luckily the Chief Instructors didn't exactly go along with it. I like to pride myself knowing that my school has some of hardest contact (for the students that want it) and realistic practical teaching out of all of our locations. If you were out here in NY, I'd tell ya to come by. We could always use another sparring/fight partner and a special guest Instructor