Drunken Monkey

we were always taught: an arms an arm, a leg's a leg. doesn't matter if it's coming at you from the south pole, you only have to deal with it when it enters your gates.

well, there is that government sanctioned tai chi set used for competition that's a mash of the different styles... hmm, would you call that one part of the 'wushu'?

but what do you deem neccessary for the art to be complete? how about things other than fighting? how about making sure every (advanced?) student is able to teach? isn't that neccessary for an 'art' to be complete? another little question that came to mind. does having 'more' mean being more complete? is a style that has grappling more complete compared to a style that doesn't or perhaps doesn't need to do grappling? hmmm, dammit, who keeps making me think of these things? my life used to be so simple...

yes we've been through this before. it might be full contact but it has a lot of limits on where you can hit. that's like saying 'yay, i'm allowed to drive at 200mph.... but only on this road that i can't get to'. and since when have you talked about shidokan? if mentioning it's name is talking about it, then most people will have to agree with me when i say you talk more about tekken, wwe, dragonball, and WHEN you enter a competition....

i was always told that you CAN counter while the lock is being put on but once it's on, there's not a lot you an do. i mean, if the guy with the lock on is really out to hrut you with it, he will push the lock until it breaks something...

and in one word, jerry has hit it spot on... you have no idea how many times i hear a 'tai chi teacher' go on and on and on and never mention correctness....

i always thought the seven star was refering to the type of stance you use... (as in the 'gwar bo')

actually i thought hung kuen was 'supposedly' developed by hung hei gung (then something to do with luk ar choi who taught wong kei ying who is wong fei hung's father). well, actually this is all rather shrouded in myth. we're not entirely sure if it is called hung kuen because of the guy's name or if it is because of it's ties with the boxer rebellion ('all brothers under the heavens are called hung'). anyway. back to the tiger and dragon. the two aren't really comparable because they have different intents. the tiger is primarily a 'power' style. like red says, it is ripping and tearing and going through the opponent. the dragon on the other hand is supposed to have an elusive feel; when you attack and he defends with a dragon movement he will 'absorb' your strike. lots of movement (for whipping and grabbing/turning) generated at the waist+hips. * * * as for the ng ying kuen. the movements are named after animals for their intent/essense/philosphy, NOT because of how they look.

but how important is cohesion? i said something to this effect before (something about a bunch of good moves that work in isolation but not together) and i've been thinking about it. to use your example, if you do 'wrestleboxing' you will be learning a 'system' that switches/mixes the styles into an apparent coherent entity. BUT if you take the two separately and are good at both, where does it say that you WOULDN'T be able to switch (between them) when you need to anyway? * * * let's use a different example let's say i do wing chun. but let's also say i decide to take some sort of grappling. what's to stop me from doing one when i'm standing and going to the other when i'm not? the point is i have one mind that works on many levels. not two separate minds, one for wing chun, one for grappling that work independently of each other. i take two separate, very different styles and i use whatever i need. why would i have to (or need to) take a single version that combines the two into a conherent whole? after all, it is ME that uses the moves. anyone understand what i'm trying to get at? * * * S.S mentioned the time factor which plays an important part in this question. anyway... just airing what's been on my mind.

y'know one of the best things is this thing that we're all part of. the idea that there is this one thing that is bigger than the lot of us put together that unites us. we might argue and we mighit call each other names but behind all of that is this sense of kinship. we all study different styles and for different reasons but the point is we are all learning. we learn everyday whether it is in a class, or on the street or here on karateforums, we are learning something new. there aren't many things in the world that can bring together people from as many as three generations, from all backgrounds and from all continents.

from the looks of things, it better than yours..

what???? no NINJAS???? and they call it a samurai movie....

well, savate guys wear some kinda foot wear don't they?

but he said himself that jkd (especially the earlier form of jun fan kung fu) as he trained/taught is really a suit that only he can wear. everyone else has to tailor the suit to fit him/herself. the problem is that a lot of guys try to wear his suit, not realising that it might not fit properly. the 'on guard' position he shows is HIS on guard position which he derived from his wing chun days.

ask a mountain climber how they improve their grip.

oops, seems like i opened the floodgates....

a friend once told me: 'how to tell a good tai chi teacher?' ask him/her why it's done so slowly. if they answer with something that involves the words peace, calm or relaxation, walk away..... if they mention something about 8 principles, think about staying.

how do you win in a ring? knock the other out. how do you win on the street? knock the other guy out. tell me how the ring prevents you from using wing chun to acheive your goal? what do you lose? elbows, kicks to knees/shin-scrapes/maybe biu gee head targets. does that really change the way you do things that much? they are, in my opinion, just the ways to hit. all of the ways to enter, control, trap, pin, unbalance are still available to you. i see no reason why limiting the ways you can hit prevents you from doing the 'basics'. a historical point for you to consider. biu gee (that contains the moves people always go on about...well contains almost all of them...) was often not taught to the majority of students and yet these guys were still expected to win fights.

3 errors in 9 words.... you amaze me every time you type.

there's more than enough information in my post.

i think savate guys kick with the toes but only to certain targets.

but i don't think it's very useful. just so you know, they do fight choreography and make small films. if you like, the move was a stunt.

well, y'know i saw something similar the zero gravity guys did. it was in damn 4. one of the capoeria guys did little jump with an armada and let in spin round twice. anyone see taht bit?

you smell.

well that's one of the arguments i hear all of the time.... if the wing chun guy has to use things like that to win a fight then i would say his wing chun isn't all that great. think about it. three forms. three fundemental moves, 18(ish) derived from them, countless combinations of these, all applicable with different footwork, an entire form of loose techniques on the dummy and you can't win a fight without poking the other guy in the eyes? the same goes for elbows. i'll admit that losing the use of elbows makes things 'slower' but what about the most basic weapon we train with? from day one we use the punch. if you can't spar without using elbows then what does that say about your basic moves?