ovine king

admittedly, i have changed the debate slightly as instead of looking at learning a martial art specifically, i've turned it into a learning to fight issue. in anycase, the important point is the way in which you practice. learn to fight by fighting or learn to fight by "martial art" methods. One way can be done by itself but the other should involve a portion of the other. In other words, in both methods, there should be an element of the other. If you are going to just fight, then it does no harm to see how other people do it (via online metohds) and giving them a go against your friend. On the other hand, if you are learning in a class, then you SHOULD be also be putting the things you do to proper practice.

the last I heard, wushu was earmarked for 2008 as a demonstration event, as the host nation has a right to request an event to be included such. However, looking at the timetable for the events, it is clear that it isn't part of the schedule. Then again, I've never been too sure whether or not demonstration events are listed with the proper games or if it is an 'outside' thing. guess an e-mail is in order.

interesting. regarding your integrated chow gar mantis and tiger. Does Ip Sifu approve of this move?

but what if your real world training doesn't go beyond the practice of forms and drills? having a live instructor still doesn't automatically make you a better fighter. IF the guy who is looking at everything he can on the internet and testing them for himself with a like minded friend can make it work for him, does it matter if it isn't 100% what it is supposed to be? to me, it is all still rather situational. the majority of people out there who regulary get into fights have no training and yet i'd still put my money on them against the average martial artisit. Why? Frame of reference and environment of practice. As much as I'd like to say that a proper class is going to make you a better fighter, which after all IS what this is about, all too often, this isn't the case. what do you think?

I don't get it. What good are throwing knives or stars or cards in a self defence situation? A guy comes at you with a knife, holds it to your neck and you pull out a star or card? Why not just a knife? The throwing knife? Sure but why not just a normal knife? Nunchaku? How do you carry this on your person that allows it to be easily accessed? A guy comes at you with a knife, you pull out a pair nunchakus and then what? One of the throwing knives or stars or cards? Sure, you throw it at them, let's asume that it cuts them and that he doesn't just lunged at you and stick his knife into your stomach. Now you have an angry bleeding guy with a knife who now has a greater urge to hurt you. None of the things you chose to carry are half as effective at protecting yourself when compared to a simple pepper spray and in the case of the bladed weapons, none of them have any situational advantages over a normal knife. You state that you train in wado-ryu which the last time i checked, doesn't have throwing star/card/knife as part of the curriculum which can only lead me to assume that is something that you have chosen to persue on your own accord. What then is your reason for wanting to learn these things? For defence on the street? Excuse me for not seeing the logic in that.

and where is this place that you train?

let's see. karate kid. daniel. started of trying to learn from books. ended up doing esoteric exercises and lots of other light/non-contact and non stressed drills. the cobra kai, trained full contact, trained to complete exectution of techniques, sparred as a regular part of the class. the non hard sparring guy wins over the more realistically trained guy. my problem with the karate kid films is that they mis-present the nature of martial art training. I say that it is because of karate kid, that we have a lot of unrealistic training in a lot of martial arts schools. someone else here refered to the cobra kai school as being the mcdojo which i think is totally wrong. In today's martial arts training environment, the school that has you doing non-contact esoteric drills and virtually no sparring would be the mcdojo.

have you tried typing in "wing chun dummy plans" into google? that would've been the first thing I'd do.

since when was ninjutsu a chinese style? 30 years of shao-lin experience? what shao-lin? you do realise that shaolin, unless you are refering to a specific fist set, is an umbrella term for a group of styles. these styles, whilst they may bear a resemblance in 'name' (i.e tiger/crane etc etc) to other styles, are nothing like other styles, that's not to mention that what is known these days as shoa-lin kung fu is not much more than wushu (do a search in this forum for more details). give us more details about what it is you are doing and what it is you're looking for and you'll get a better answer from us.

let's be logical here. learning a martial art is for all intent purposes, learning to fight (whether you do so, or the level in which you do so isn't the point here...). By its nature, fighting is a form of interaction with another person. Now let's assume that someone has a good collection of 100% accurate and illustrative videos from which to learn forms from as well as guide in how to dissect the forms. Let's also assume that the person involved has a partner with whom they can practice and test the thing he is learning and he does so on a realistic level (let's for the argument assume that they both are learning at the same time) There is inherently, a greater chance of things that might be misunderstood because of not having a physical example of what things look like/feel like to reference (i.e an experienced teacher). There is also a greater chance of him learning something "wrong" because he is not shown what something is supposed to feel like but as long as he is practicing and testing things properly, he would still find things that work for him and be a competent fighter. Of course, it might not end up being the same as what it is suposed to be that he is learning but if it works, what's the real problem?

to be fair, it was a different time and a different culture and "thug" is probably the only modern(ish) word we have in english that would describe them in general. Also, him being a fighter by nature, if he were not "thuggish" i doubt he would've gotten to the level that he did. Don't forget that in those days, training WAS fighting. As I have said elsewhere on this forum, I may not know shotokan but I am 100% sure that what is practiced today as shotokan is nothing like what Funakoshi practiced. Quicte simply, his methods are simply not suitable and possibly not even permissable in todays society.

Well, you also have to point out that funakoshi said that of karate-DO, not karate-JUTSU. Remember, funakoshi was another of those karate masters who was a well known thug way before he turned wise and "gentle" master.

then again, boxers also have the benift of having gloves on, not to mention that they get hit an awful lot during a match.

I think the biggest problem with trying to compare styles is that the guy doing the style plays such a big part. There are some people, who no matter what style they go and learn and practice, just won't be a good fighter. They might learn to perform that art to a fair degree but it won't make them a fighter. By the same token, there are also those people who could learn pottery and figure out a way to er, potter you to death.... ok bad example but hopefully you get what I mean.

how-ever you do it, recognise that part of that positioning is purely to do with training your general movement and doesn't always equate 100% to what you do in a fight. as cited before in other posts, that chambering can be taken to be the general withdrawing movement be it a pull of their arm or a withdraw from feeling a pull from them. A high extension also gets you working your arm/shoulders more during training and hence working on the "looseness" of your arm/shoulders. the position also does different things to your punch as it acts as a theoritical starting point for your punch.

wing chun is.... funny. I personally don't think that there should be so much emphasis on the forms as being grades. Instead I prefer to teach people more naturally, showing them things be it from first form or third form, or even dummy form, if they get into a situation that can only be answered by that movement. of course, whether or not they do get into a situation that I can't asnwer with sil nim tao is a different matter. For some reason, tan sau seems to answer most wing chun questions. getting back on topic. on average, I've noticed that most schools will place about 3-6 months on first form training, then another 1 to 1+1/2 years on chum kiu, then what-ever is needed until they need biu gee. one thing though, no matter what level you are at, you should be able to spar effectively in a open environment. You don't need biu gee to be good.

i find the lack of proper information given in this thread slightly disturbing. read here for a little more info: http://www.karateforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=23245&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 http://www.karateforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=17030&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

i find it slightly disturbing just how many times it has to be actually said that you should always get proper instruction when it comes to anything even vaguely martial art related.

no offence but you seem to have a bad understanding of the laws in the UK regadring the whole burglar in your home thing. Anyway, in short, it is an offence to carry an ofensive weapon on you in public. Interpreted as neccessary depending on the situation. There is no such thing as a license for nunchaku. Any martial arts school could've told you that, assuming that you actually train in one that is...

100 punches that don't hurt?

this might sound like an obvious answer but if you want to learn how to defend against grappling, you pretty much have to learn to grapple.

pretty much lost? google "gini lau".

i'd like to know where you heard this from.

but how would you block it? a properly executed hook thrown by a boxer is incredibly short range AND the way it travels you will not be able to get a wrap on it as it arcs in front of you i.e there is no straight arm for you to wrap against not to mention that the hook is most probably going to be followed by something else if it misses. straight punch is not always faster than a hook. it might be true that a straight line is the shorter distance but how fast it is is down to the guy punching. don't confuse one truth with another. doesn't quite work like that; a hook is thrown very close to the body with the tow of you at very close distance. it is very hard to tan sau a hook beucase of the too short gap as well the very very short arc. The hook is almost a sideways strike that the tan sau doesn't deal with properly unless you over commit to stopping it with a tan sau which in turn leaves you open on the other side which in turn leads to you playing catch-up. if you insist on trying to catch it, you might be better off shooting a hok bong or even a simple biu sau to just get in the way. what is the first move on your dummy form? in mine, i step to the opposite side and tan sau from under bridge to dummy's outside and do a high palm. can't see this working against a hook because as i said before, if he can execute a hook, i'd be too close to try and step to his outside gate on his aggessive side.

what do you mean lack of yip man line schools in the uk? i can name at least 4 schools in london that are direct from yip man via some of the first generation of his more respected students, if not the student (i.e 1st gen from yip man) himself. where abouts are you; i can probably point you in the right direction. are you specifically looking for yip man line wing chun? one thing though, if you've never had any proper wing chun training, then don't go around saying that you "know basic blocks and strikes" especially when/if you go to a proper class.