Drunken Monkey

hmm, i'm not sure that the 'ga' bit would have been used even in chinese. it's not proper grammar. well, it's actually kinda complicated. when talking about multiples of something, the common part can be ommited. for example, when talking about me and my cousins, you would call us yuen kwok hei, kwok chiu, kwok chi etc etc and omit the yuen bit.

mmm, yes all bow down.....

hmm, aren't you supposed to be almost floating in the way you move in drunken, so your movement is almost natural 'stumbling' like. and if you look at the stepping, you will still see classical chinese stances there, they are just slightly offset to you (in the way that they enter and face). also, drunken style uses a lot more waist movement. this is why it was considered a more advanced set of theories. traditionally, good kung fu meant solid stance, good centre, solid bridges etc etc. part of this meant that your hip unit hardly ever shifts from its position in relation to your spine (lining up the major points and all that...) drunken uses a lot of waist movement meaning that you have to switch from solid hip+lined up structure to 'non-form' (best description i could think of) and back again. this is why it was not really taught until much later in your martial arts because it needed that you have excellent control of your form/structure.

well, that's the main difference between the traditional styles and the more modern ones... the things you mentioned could have been straight out of a wing chun class. or silat class. or muay thai. and y'know, i've had wing chun mistaken for tai chi once....

well, my 'si-hing' is my eder kung fu brother. my 'little brother' would be 'si-dai'. again, just because someone is my little brother doesn't mean he can't whip my *. but yes, my si-hing is one who is at the same level on the family tree as me. the character that jet li/bruce lee played in fist of legend/fury (based on a semi-factual event by the way) was one of the 'youngest' (fifth from top i think) of the senior students. legend has it that he could whoop all of their * which was why he was the one that was chosen to take the little boy away and protect him (not in the film but part of folklore and history/myth.....)

sometimes i don't get what the argument is about. a punch in the gut is a punch in the gut no matter what style you are doing. same goes a kick to the face. if you want to learn to fight, then train to fight using your style. you can be learning the most effective street fighting style in the world and a good fighter who happens to learn tkd can still beat you to the ground.... just because their training includes jumping 540s etc etc doesn't mean that is what they'll do in a fight. when the whole world knows that a good straight forward side kick/front kick will be the simplest way, are they going to try any flash?

just because i like to point this out to people and repeat myself and because i like to point this out and repeat myself.... if you talk about how different styles do things and remove proper names and concerntrate purely on the principles, you will see that we are all learning roughly the same sort of thing.

well, this is one of those things that really bug me. whenever i see someone talking about chinese martial arts and using the term 'master'. it just doesn't work. technically, i can teach wing chun. if i open a school, i can take on the title of 'sifu' (and all of the responsibilty that comes with it (look up the meaning and role of 'sifu' and you'll know what i mean....). that does not mean that i am any sort of 'master'. nor would i like to be called/refered by that title. all it means is that i am teaching wing chun. i can then tell you who my sifu is and from that you can find out who his sifu was etc etc etc and trace the lineage if you so desire if there is something that i cannot answer then you can go to my 'sifu' (your si-gung) or even a si-hing (kung fu brother) of mine (your si-bak: kung fu uncle). notice how none of the terms actual means anything like 'master'.....

and that, is what i call totally misunderstanding what the original words meant.....

this is an example of how the term 'master' has been overused, misused and abused by western society following it's relatively bad translation from chinese. in chinese, the title of master is 'sifu'. all it means is teacher of martial arts (or martial father to be exact in translation) grand-master only means sifu of your sifu. the title is normally used for people who have their own school OR are the recognised inheritor of a style/school. whether or not they are any good is another matter. it just follows the family title way of refering to people. using this terminology AND translated back into english, bruce lee would be my grand-martial-uncle. look at it this way. what does sifu mean? what does sensei mean? are the translations of those terms anything like the dictionary definition of the word 'master'?

hmmm, i'm not sure if 'spar' is what i would want from these people. i would like to see how jackie chan would fight. i would like to see how much bruce lee back then. and the see how much dan inosanto knows now (poor guy, always in his sifu's shadow despite having 30 years extra training than bruce....) i would like to see leung jan, chan wah sum, yip man, wong shun leung and see how wing chun has changed. i would like to see the ten tigers. raelly, i guess i just want to see how they used to fight and compare with what we are taught today.

actually, i would say that a punch can be just as hard, if not harder to 'perform'. there are just more factors involved with executing a punch and because of the speeds involved with punching, there are many more variations. you can step, shift, turn, change punch, collapse into elbow, flow into lock/control, etc etc. a punch is never done by itself with you just standing there. a kick in comparison, is more or less done in isolation (relatively speaking)

well, then to be honest you weren't really expecting a serious take on the japanese gangster/assassin/martial arts/guns/revenge genre were you???

not much to do with crouching tiger. hero is based on a popular comic book in hk and as such has weak, cliched characters, baaad scripts (especially if you're going to be watching the dubbed version) and too many plot holes. if you have not read any of the comics then a lot will be lost on you. in my opinion, too much flash, not enough content. not even yuen biao could save it.

don't forget that as well as being grounded whilst stationary, the really hard part of stance training is learning how to carry your structure without it compromising during stance shifts and steps.... but like all things. one day, you will feel what it's like when it's correct and from then on, you'll have a reference of what good strcture feels like.

it's good that you try to react without thinking too hard about it. keep in mind though, that at the beginning, your movements will be 'sloppy' but that's just because your body is still getting used to what are really not natural movements. this will improve over time as you get sued to the movements. when you first make contact on the receiving end, don't worry too much about blocking/stopping the hit completely. concerntrate on the actual interception. once your interception timing is improving AND your partner has more confidence in entering harder, you then receive harder, adjusting the gap, your stance, angle of interception, structures etc etc. try everything slightly differently. you will then begin to feel when and how things work better for you. i always say try to get rid of the 'block' mentallity and think about it in terms of 'receiving'. it kinda makes more sense. 'block' sounds too immediate. it suggests that your 'block' is final, where i have always been told that the 'block' positions (from the forms) are moments. in free sparring drills, your blocks will constantly be changing from 'blocks' to 'hits'. hope that last little bit made sense. it's a bit late here and i've just been removing the doors of a little model car and my back is killing me....

cos bill was one of his students....

i'm seriously considering it but can't decide between driving up there or just hopping on the train....

if you're punching short then i would say that you're still missing a little bit. you should try your best to close that gap. also, in that situation, it is your opponent's 'job' to receive the hit. if they run away as you put it then they are kinda cheating themselves. it is your duty then, as a fellow member of the calss, to make sure that the next time, they can't run away from the hit! you don't mention the exact drill but when i do the step-in/hit drills, it is up to me how i step in and how many steps i take. generally, the only 'fixed' thing is the hit/s. the stepping is something i have full control over. if i end up short or unbalanced, i know it is all my fault cos my footwork was off.

unlike tai-bo....

or if you prefer, extended family. you might be a member of a particular hung gar school but you'd also part of a larger hung gar clan. get it?

i became argumentative because you were questioning my post in a way that did not take into account what was said in the beginning and the reference of the crane stance as seen in karate kid. when i talked about crane stance, i was talking about the general training stance of one leg up, foot pointing down. it is the one done when performing transitions between stances i.e when you move hanging horse to bow and arrow you can step high into crane. that crane stance is NOT a fighting postition although it does provide cover during the movement. when i was talking about standing there like a pillock, i was talking about tha crane stance as mentioned, from the karate kid. so to answer your question in reference to the crane stance that i was talking about. yes. i am certain that this crane stance is not used a fighting/guard stance. as for your example of crane stance. from i have been taught, it is a way of taking a 'back-step' whilst being able to cover. in other words, it is something you do as a reaction to something being done. i.e it is not something you start off in, rather it is something you move into (once again) momentarily. am i cetain that no one uses your example as a starting stance? no. satisfied?

i think so. a friend sent me the url of a page with lots of games and cartoon avatars. this just happens to be one of the very few that conforms to the limits on avatar on this site. it's been too long since i played the ol' snk games. y'know, have to be honest here. i have to say that i DO know that the character is called geese howard. just don't know the name of the thing he is doing.... it was a choice between this and many, many, hello kitty ones. i think i made the right choice....

get a good oily wood log first. something like teak or maybe red oak would be nice. minimal knots. at least four/four and a half feet in length. if you can get one, let me know and i can send you some plans for one.

just a few questions. when you say 'people in western society' do you mean any person who resides in a 'western society'? do people of eastern origin count? i am born and raised in london but my parents are from hong kong. do i fit into your study? and do you really only mean karate and not other martial arts as well. after all, does it make a difference (or mean anything) if a chinese person who is born and raised in london chooses a chinese martial art over a japanese martial art? i mean, if you asked me why i started martial arts (not karate i should point out) my answer would be because it's a family thing.