Skeptic 2004

Salut. Je ne me rappelle pas beaucoup le francais. Mais, j'essayerai. Comment t'il vous?

This sounds like something I'm sure has been talked about before, but I'm relatively new here so I'll add my two cents. (I'm sure this has been said before, but I'll say it again) In my opinion, before branching out into other styles, one should build a solid foundation in a single style. Building a good foundation in one art first hopefully builds one's ability to think critically about an art; once these thinking skills are mastered, they are easy to apply to other arts. Cross training in other styles is very important in order to understand and appreciate your own foundation (or if you're one of the unfortunate progeny of McDojo to abandon it) and to facilitate your personal MA growth. In Okinawa once many of the old guys had trained under one style in their youth, building a solid foundation, they travelled and trained in something else; many ventured to China to learn other things. However, when cross training, I think people spread themselves too thin when they don't think critically about their MA and become "technique collectors" at best and "technique imitators" at worst. Knowing the techniques from six different styles or being able to imitate a move very well isn't a substitute for critical thinking skills. At one time I was training AKS, BJJ, JKD, and Muay Thai all at once (I had just started training AKS and found a neighboring gym where the other three were being taught daily; I thought it would be a good idea to expose myself to as much as possible...I was young...and stupid...and still am ). Lacking a solid foundation in any of the four and not having developed any critical thinking skills in terms of MA I didn't take away much of anything. To this day I hardly remember anything I learned from any of them. I was spread too thin.

I've been training with a student of Chosin Chibana for about three months now, and I think I'm starting to understand what he's talking about when he refers to kime. He insists that there is kime in the Chibana method of Shorin Ryu (kobayashi). It's not in the Shotokan sense as described by killer miller. I think the main concept of Chibana kime (a term I've just invented) is osae (pressing). Osae is projecting your hara (tanden/dan tien...whatever) toward your opponent. If you've played around with any of the internal arts (tai chi/bagua/hsing-i) it's like being in a state of constant expansion and focusing that expansion forward (sounds pretty cosmic, but I'm trying to tie in my bagua training so cut me some slack). Osae does not stop at your opponent; it goes through your opponent. ...or I could be completely and totally wrong...*shrugs*

I reveal too much of the geek in me with this reply.... If you've ever played Tekken 4, there's a secret movie you can unlock when you beat the game with Jin Kazama. Now, according to the game's nebulous storyline, Jin "unlearned" the Mishima-ryu karate and trained in "traditional karate" (nothing more specific than that from Namco, folks). The movie you unlock shows him doing a kata that looks very much like Pinan/Heian Yondan.

Any movie beginning with "The Wutang Clan presents..."

I'm a big Jet Li fan. I adore Zhang Ziyi. So, when I find out that not only are both of them in Hero but they that they fight each other, I'm as happy as a fat kid in a buffet line. I ordered the DVD from YesAsia.com as soon as I found out about the movie's release in China (only to discover, much to my chagrin, that it was not a DVD but a VCD, and that my copy wasn't exactly "legit." I should have known $10 for an "all region DVD" was too good to be true...I digress). Essentially, I saw the movie long before a trailer was released with Kill Bill. I pop in the DVD...er...VCD, and sit and watch. The movie starts off promising enough, and the Jet Li/Donnie Yen fight has me thinking that this is the best thing since sliced bread. By the end of the fight I'm literally on the edge of my seat, salivating, thinking that this movie was going to be one hour and forty minutes of awesome story and kick a** fights. I guessed wrong. The story was very convoluted and abstract, and nothing really made sense until the end. But, it wasn't one of those, "Oh, I get it. That's cool" kind of sensations at the end of the movie. I think the best way to summarize the sensation at the end is to quote a friend who watched the movie with me: "That was so stupid that I want to punch myself in the face for watching it." If you're familiar with Chinese dramas, big guess to what happens to everyone at the end. I understand wanting to make the fights artistic; however, they start to get a little TOO artistic. The Maggie Cheung/Zhang Ziyi fight was a little too much flying and floating and not enough clashing and banging. The Jet Li/Maggie Cheung fight was actually kind of boring (I know...Jet Li in a boring fight?). The Jet Li/Tony Leung fight was melodramatic. The one artistic fight done right: Tony Leung vs. the Emperor. I'd say it was almost as good as the Jet Li/Donnie Yen fight, but at a much slower pace. Let's not forget the reason why I bought the movie in the first place: Jet Li vs. Zhang Ziyi was well worth the money. My only complaint is that it was TOO short. I don't want to ruin the movie for anyone, but suffice it to say that it's too artsy for its own good. I understand the motivation and the ambition behind the movie; its good intentions oozes out of its pores. However, good intentions does not equal good movie. Watching the movie is like watching a painting, but as about interesting as watching the paint dry. There are a ton of people who liked the movie: I'm not one of them.

Someone mentioned earlier in the thread that they wanted a book on Capoeira. I found the following book very illuminating on the history and tradition of capoeira. Capoeira, Nestor. Capoeira: Roots of the Dance Fight-Game. California: North Atlantic Books, 2002. I think his very first book in english was called The Little Capoeira Book (and as the title suggests, it was a small book, maybe no more than 150 pages). It sold so many copies/people expressed a lot of interest that he wrote Capoeira (a full fledged 340 pages). While I'm not entirely knowledgeable in Capoeira, the bibliography at the end of the book (a full 6 pages in itself) suggests that the book was well researched and gives credence to its legitimacy. It's not too pricey either compared to some other MA books I've purchased.

Fong Sai Yuk I and II (aka The Legend and The Legend II) - Jet Li doing kung fu comedy...he's actually really funny. Wong Fei Hung (aka Once Upon a Time in China) - Jet Li at his best. The Tai Chi Master (aka Twin Warriors) - Jet Li showing off his internal training. There's a number of memorable fights in this one. Michelle Yeoh is awesome. Drunken Master II (aka The Legend of Drunken Master) - Jackie Chan in his prime. Police Story I - the best Jackie Chan movie. Period. Dragons Forever - the best Jackie Chan/Sammo Hung/Yuen Biao matchup ever. Who am I? - the rooftop fight. Watch it. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon - a well done wuxia. House of Flying Daggers - an exquistely well done wuxia...except for the last 5 minutes. Iron Monkey - Donnie Yen is not the main character, but he sure is a scene stealer (especially in the fights). Hero - an ambitious movie that fell flat on its artsy face because of the convoluted story. However, three fights standout as the best I've seen - Jet Li vs Donnie Yen in the beginning, Jet Li vs. Zhang Ziyi in the library (I had been waiting for that moment for a long time), and Tony Leung vs. the emperor (a very beautiful, very artsy fight). A lot of people mentioned The Last Samurai. I have to admit The Last Samurai had three pretty stellar moments: the very first battle in the fog; the first time Tom Cruise had his butt handed to him by Ujio with a wooden sword; and the final battle when Ujio gets knocked off his horse, shoulder rolls, draws his sword, and slices two guys without missing a beat. I rewound the movie about 3 times just to see that part.

They are very careful to acknowledge that what they are doing is teaching "movie-fu" style "martial" arts. I actually went to the website, and watching their demo video, just about every other sentence was, "We teach what people see in the movies." As long their students don't delude themselves into thinking that what they're doing is going to work in a real fight, I'd say that XMA is pretty harmless. Heck, it looks like fun. The only danger that lies in it, I would say, is that your body reacts the way it is trained. If you're so used to doing jump-spinning-flying-dragon-super-flash-tiger-knee-kick attack when someone punches at you in practice, you'll be fighting your body not to do that if someone is punching at you to hurt.

I'm way too young for regrets, but if I had to admit one I would say not being mature enough to accept correction. I got frustrated really easy in my early days and that really hampered my progress for a while (not just the normal frustration that comes with learning something new and not getting the hang of it at first...the super-ticked-off-"f*** you"-mad-at-everyone-and- the-world kind of frustration). Not knowing about the really awesome 7th dan 80 miles away for 3.5 out of the 4 years we were in school wasn't something in my or Shorin Ryuu's control, so I really can't call that a regret. In light of careful thought and my knowledge of organizational politics, I'd call that something else....(Shorin know's what I 'm talking about )

ABSOULTELY NOT. Quality books (and I cannot emphasize that enough) give you concepts to play with in your head. Without an instructor to show you how those concepts work correctly in action and without a guide to sift through all the garbage that gets published, you're doomed to fail.

What, in your (addressed to anyone by the way) opinion, would be the best message to take away from this discussion?

I've had a little bit of a unique experience.... The best instructors I've ever had never charged a dime. I trained at a karate club in college, so we had free use of gym facilities, and the school subsidized purchase of our equipment (gi, pads, weapons, books). Our first instructor didn't charge anything for his time. After our first instructor got a job transfer and had to leave, a second instructor (a Matsumura Orthodox kyoshi 7th dan) volunteered to take over and train us for free. He ran a dojo about 6 miles away in town (and charged roughly $60/month), but drove up to our school two times a week just to work with our club (sometimes at the expense of running class in his dojo). If we wanted more time, he gave us more time...for free. If we wanted to work out anytime in his dojo, he let us do so, once again for free. (The good news is that the school began to pay him after about 2 and a half months of his doing this...so he didn't get the short end of the stick.) My best friend/training partner and I met another kyoshi 7th dan (Shorin-ryu Shorinkan) who also volunteered to train us...for free. When my friend and I flew out to North Carolina to train with one of the most senior people in our system (a Shorin-ryu Shorinkan kyoshi 8th dan), he paid for our hotel room and all of our meals anytime we ate out with him, gave us a key to his dojo to train anytime we wanted during our visit, and arranged a series of private lessons with himself and with his senior students...for free. After I graduated from college and moved out to Hawai'i, I was interested in dabbling a little in the internal arts. While I know very little about the internal arts, I've had enough experience to know a good instructor when I see one. I found a bagua instructor who is very skilled and well respected (I mentioned his name in a store once in Chinatown, and everyone in the store knew who he was). He doesn't charge anything... After a while, I was looking for a place to train traditional karate. Through my best friend who had moved to California I found out about my current instructor who was a "live-in" student of Chosin Chibana. Though my current instructor stopped wearing his rank 20 years ago, in 1965 he was a 6th dan (long but interesting story...). I work out at his dojo whenever possible (he has class every day except Sunday)...for free. Lucky...yes, I am.

Wow....I didn't realize this would generate so much discussion (specifically, I didn't think what I had to say would draw so much attention given my newbie status to these forums). Brickman brings up a very valid point: there is a difference between real fighting and sport fighting. I do not deny the logic of bouncing in a sport scenario (like I've said twice now, I used to do it). I would only argue that the philosophy that has been beaten into me over the years can be applied to both situations with amicable results. In either situation, cutting out unnecessary movement is key. Before I quit tournament training, I experimented with not bouncing. I noticed after I stopped bouncing that I was able to read bouncers a lot more clearly (not to mention I noticed them telegraphing kicks, strikes, or fakes) and interdict them whenever we fought. While the idea didn't take right away, when I began my traditional training, it made sense to me. Bouncing was an unnecessary movement. Perhaps my experience is unique to me...perhaps not. Different strokes for different folks. Brickman also wanted to know how it is that I move now that I don't bounce, and I'm assuming others in the thread may also be curious. Allow me to elucidate. (*Beware...here comes my traditional karate bias*) If you're curious to know how I move sans bouncing (I can hear you all holding your collective breath), I try to move the way I move when I practice kata; to be more specific, I try to move as if I am doing Naihanchi kata (to preempt some smart alecks, no, I don't move side to side like a crab ). Naihanchi practice teaches you when to be rooted and when not to be rooted, how to distribute your weight when and where you need to, but most importantly, how to be light on your feet. I try to practice Naihanchi as much as possible because over the years I have noticed marked body and maneuver control. I'm not exactly "fleet of foot", but I move around pretty quickly in both absolute and relative terms (faster than I did bouncing). Why Naihanchi? Chokki Motobu "walked with Naihanchi", and if you are familiar with karate history or Okinawan folklore, Chokki Motobu was one of the quickest and most nimble fighters of his time - his nickname was "Monkey" for reasons other than how he looked . I'm also trying to incorporate the idea of the imaginary center of gravity espoused in Kiyoshi Arakaki's The Secrets of Okinawan Karate (a highly recommended read for anyone of any style, might I add). Shorin Ryuu, I understand, has actually elaborated on this concept a bit, and since I'm still reading the book, I defer to him if you have questions.

By nature, I'm not a very aggressive individual, and it bleeds over into my fighting. Standing up, I'm a pretty decent defensive fighter, working off the counter and exploiting mistakes. Watching me fight is boring if the other guy doesn't make a move, because I won't make one until he does (*sigh* I know, I should work on being more aggressive and creating opportunities). Not being aggressive also bleeds over into my ground work. I don't have a lot of training in ground fighting, but I've managed to beat everyone I've ever fought on the ground in the last 2 years (except Shorin Ryuu) by not being aggressive (*knocks on wood*). I can't really be an aggressive ground fighter since I don't have a lot of training on the ground. I've been relying on translating bunkai from kata and modifying it to what I would do on the floor. Works so far...(*knocks on wood again*)

Different strokes for different folks I guess... . Allow me to clarify my position a little; I practice traditional karate. I think this might explain my divergence from popular methodology (it will also explain my bias in future posts ). Like I said, I used to bounce, and I perfectly see the logic in doing so...but I've also been shown (painfully, I add) why not to bounce. Between the two methods, I prefer the latter. As Shorin Ryuu said, there is a difference between standing still, being rooted, being double weighted, and being efficient. Those are a little beyond the scope of the thread. I'm not suggesting you don't move (that would be stupid...very stupid); I'm suggesting that you change the way you think about moving. The first step is to cut out unnecessary movement.

Bouncing on your toes qualifies as unnecessary movement... Allow me to illustrate. Suppose you and I are squared off to spar, and you start bouncing on your toes (and further suppose that I'm not going to join you). It's human tendency when you're bouncing to establish some kind of rhythm. Before you kick or punch while bouncing, it's also human tendency to break that rhythm. So, all I have to do is watch you break rhythm to know you're going to do something...that qualifies as telegraphing your intent. It won't matter how fast you move or what you do, your breach of rhythm gives me ample warning. A skilled individual will exploit the daylights out of that, moving slower than you, but still hitting you first (I know from experience, being the "bouncer" getting tagged...). Hence, my earlier "You don't have to move fast to be fast." Bouncing on your toes, I understand, gives you that light and floating feeling (I know...I used to be a "bouncer"), but bouncing requires energy that you could be using more efficiently. There are other ways to establish that light and floating feeling without bouncing...I defer to Kiyoshi Arakaki's The Secrets of Okinawan Karate: Essence and Techniques as one way to accomplish this. If you're into the Chinese internal arts (Tai chi/Bagua/Hsing I), there are other ways. And, there are still others I'm sure. I'm also an advocate of stalwart Masutatsu "Mas" Oyama's philosophy of training really, really, really hard. A small part of the light and floating feeling comes from the nimbleness of your limbs, and AnonymousOne's advice of 1000 times practice helps establish this. Like I also stated, beware of unnecessary movement. If you can't already tell, I really don't like the idea of bouncing...(I've still got love for you though, 1kickKO )

Here is something you might want to consider: you don't have to move fast to be fast. Try reducing any unnecessary movement. It doesn't matter how fast you move, unnecessary movement telegraphs your intent. If you telegraph your intent, your opponent will react. I used to think that moving faster than my opponent was the solution - one of my college friends was a boxer and I liked his motto, "Speed kills." However, I learned that even though I moved faster than some of the people I trained with, I had unnecessary movement and telegraphed what I was going to do. My sparring partners still had the opportunity to react. The other suggestions are valid for building speed into your physiology - the breathing-timing one especially holds true. In addition, I think that if you really want to beat someone to the draw, I'd suggest practicing in front of a mirror, observing any unnecessary movement that telegraphs your intent, and eliminating that movement. Just a thought...

*sighs relief thanks to KSN Doug's pruning* I originally began training sophomore year of high school with my best friend's dad in the American Karate System (AKS) founded by Ernest Lieb. I'm a friend of Shorin Ryu (a frequent poster I see) and trained in Shorin-Ryu for four years with him back in college (subsequently abandoning anything from AKS). We fall under the lineage of Shuguro Nakazato in the Shorin-Ryu Shorinkan branch of Kobayashi Shorin-Ryu. I've never cared for rank (I don't wear it anymore), but if you're curious I'm a shodan...whatever that means. What Shorin Ryu says about the openness of our system is correct, though I am personally open to just about anything that works in real unarmed combat. I'm currently training in Kobayashi Shorin-Ryu under another one of Chosin Chibana's students by the name of Pat Nakata (if you're unfamiliar with our lineage, Chosin Chibana was Shuguro Nakazato's teacher as well). Recently, I've also sort of taken an academic interest in the internal arts. Edit - If you read the earlier version of this, the first paragraph and the analogy have been withdrawn in light of the recent pruning.