mantis.style

Just trying to point some of the differences between what is part of the martial art training of some styles and what is part of the religious practice from where the style comes from. Remember that when you talk about these things, they are all linked. To properly channel energy, you have to use "chi". That is the full classical way of describing it. In modern terms, what that means is that to make the most of your punch, you have to use methods that result in the greatest output. Thus, that reperitive grinding arm exercise trains "chi". That long stance standing trains "chi". That throwing and catching heavy bags trains "chi" all for the purpose of maximising the effect of your punch. What you miss when talking about it in english is the very subtle but marked difference between energy/strength and "chi". Then again, to be strictly accurate, in chinese you don't actually say that you train "chi"either. It is merely the name that describes a way of doing things and in some cases, even just goes to describe a feeling. In case you didn't know, the chinese terms for anger has the term "chi" in it. It's use is purely descriptive and metaphorical.

That is exactly my point. If you look at what a lot of proper traditional "chi" exercises that were part of the internal martial arts training, you'll see that the majority of them target very specific muscle groups and/or are plyometric in nature. Meditation isn't strictly part of chi training. It was part of the old taoist/bhuddist ways but that was to do with the religion, not the martial art. When I was practicing my tai chi, my training was pretty much like it was with my wing chun which was pretty much like my mantis. Forms, singular drills, partnered drills, secondary forms, secondary excercises etc etc. The only differences really were in the execution of techniques and the philosophical reasons behind them. In practice, if you took out the poses, you wouldn't know what style it came from.

more reps? that's chi training don't you know....

Maybe I'm confusing your posts with someone else. The thing on my mind though, is why this matters to you. Do you want the attention you feel you are getting? Do you not want the attention? What do you think of the attention? I mean, I said that it's in your head and you reply that you think that it is a small part of it. That infers that you hve thoughts on it already. So what are you thoughts on it?

Again, without meaning any offence, merely stating what I have observed, you seem to me to be someone who has a sort of love-hate relationship with attention. On the one hand, you say you are somewhat unfortable with eye contact and whatnot but then again, you also say that you say "ouch" a lot during class for whatever reason. If you do this during a class, you are bound to get some sort of attention, especially from who-ever it is running the class. But then you pass it off as nothing with your "I'm ok". In what you have said, you are the one who seems overly concerned with what your instructor is doing or where he is looking. As I said before, concerntrate on what you are doing.

I mean no offence but I think this down to something in you. From the posts you have made and from the threads you have started, you are obviously very conscious about how you are, how you perform and how you appear in the martial arts class. If you have this mentality, even if he isn't paying you any attention, you will think he is. All I can say is, don't bother thinking about other people; concerntrate on yourself.

I would say that of the majority of the not-so reputable chinese martial arts clubs out there would use the "not enough chi training" as an excuse for poor teaching. It's so convenient to blame techniques not working on something that is intangible, immeasurable and not even defined.

It's a southern school of mantis.

I want to say though, that I've never been to a school that ever had push-ups as punishment for poor technique. Usually, poor technique would result in me getting hit during sparring anyway so if my technique is poor, I suffer for it anyway. The way I was taught was that the training is hard. We hit for real where and when we can and drills and exercises are supposed to be done to our max. Also in class is where we make the most of having other people of different sizes and skill levels to practice against and not practice forms. If I don't take the time to practice forms outside of that class, it is my own fault for not having good form and hence, my own fault for getting hit when it comes to it. General scenario that I hope explains how it worked for me.

Wing Chun Southern Mantis White Crane Dragon - Short Bridge style Kick-boxing on the side

I'm not saying that you did claim that. I'm only pointing out the disparity between the learning from a book and being taught by someone; the key point the manner in which instruction is given. Again, the thing to remember here is that the question is whether or not you can learn a atyle from books (and videos). The thing is, these things are quite rigorous in their structure and teaching systems and everything tend to follow a pattern for a reason. Unless that book you have follows the typical class, I won't say that you are learning that style. At best, I would say you are copying the style but that doesn't mean you are learning the style, does it? Again, this is from my personal experience from people who I've met who have read a couple of books and copied the simple looking Wing Chun hand and arm positions and said that they're learning wing chun. I don't think I need to explain the rest of the story.

But would you really be learning the martial art? Let's say I watched a hell of a lot of early UFC matches and read every book the Gracies have released on the subject, can I say I learnt BJJ from the Gracies? I've got a few re-prints of Hung Kuen books written by Lam Sai Wing, can I say I learnt Hung Kuen from him? The answer is no. If this answer is no, then how is it possible to say that I learnt BJJ and Hung Kuen at all? Again, sure, there are things you can learn but I wouldn't say you are learning that martial art.

Intrinsically they are not different as martial art = fighting. However, that is not the point in question here. Learning to fight is not learning the martial arts' way of fighting and hence, not learning the martial art. This isn't about quality either. Simple fact is, you are either learnibn a martial art or you are not. Learning means taking instruction from one who knows. Instruction is more than being shown how something. Form is more than what can be shown. Would you say you could've learnt what you have from books and videos? edit:typo

But how often is there really no other option? Let's be honest here, most of the time, when you have no other option it is because you can't afford it; either because you are a kid/student who has no proper income, or you are a kid/student whose parents are against it or the classes that are in your area are too expensive. Put in that context, do you think that the person in any of those situations should be attempting to learn from a book? The problem with learning third hand, which is essentially what you'll be doing because after all, even from video you are going to have to make a lot of assumptions, is that there is just so much you cannot see or more importantly feel. Let's take wing chun because it is the most accessible one out there that I know. You can pretty much learn and copy a version of the form from the videos that are available. You can even learn to perform it to the extent that it looks 100% of what you see in the video. You can even learn how to use the separate movements that make up the form. Pit that person who has learnt and practiced his form from video against the guy who has spent twice the time in a class learning a quarter of that form but with proper instruction. Who will you put your money on? Don't forget that what is being asked here is not if one can learn how to fight from books. What is being asked is if one can learn a martial art from books.

I'm not sure I agree with that. Everytime I've come across a book "student" I found them to be the hardest to train. If I had the choice of untrained student, I'd choose the un-read to the read any day. While there are things you can learn from a book, it isn't training. You can copy what you see in the books but that isn't training either. Put it this way, forms and drills are a part of the training package. If you are "training" from pictures and doing everything by yourself, you are in effect doing a part of a part of a process, not to mention one that requires at least two people for effective progression.

Well, the thing is, you don't teach everyone the same thing. The best you can do is at least take them to the same level of stress/work. If you don't do that then I would be doing you a dis-service. How would I deal with someone like you? The same as everyone else until we get to something that you really can't handle. That way, I would know what you can do, instead of worrying about you not being able to handle it. You have to remember that if you are learning from me, it will be hard anyway because at the end of the day, I want it to work for you. I want you to be able to go out and know, not assume, know that a technique is going to work.

Well, martial arts is not the same as self defence. Self Defence is a whole different and specialised area that might incorporate martial arts in it's teachings but it is only part of it. Martial arts is primarily about learning a fighting style, whether or not you intend to fight. Part of that learning requires you to be strong because after all, just practicing the martial art without getting yourself fit and strong at the same time isn't going to work. At the same time, if let's say we do typically 1000 warm up punches every class and your punches in drills and practices are still sloppy, what else can i do to make your punch better? It wouldn't be as if I haven't made you punch lots of times in the first place. Also take into account that class time isn't or at least shouldn't be the only time and palce where you practice form and technique. If you come into a class and still can't perform properly, you're not only wasting my time and your own, you are also wasting the time of the person who is paired with you. For me, class has always been about teaching and practicing with partners. At home is where most of the training happens. It isn't denying the unfit; you don't need to be fit to copy a movement. 50% of the time, correct execution is enough in a class/compliant drill. If you can't get that then that just means you haven't practiced. What am I supposed to do then? Have yo practice the movement in the class? I don't think that would serve any real purpose either. With a push up though, because it isn't practicing the technique in class, should make you think to maybe practice technique at home more. Whether or not you "get it" is down to how much practice you put into it. Yes it's true that we all potentially start with bad technique but let's be honest here, most techniques are actually simple things to perfom in isolation. Not doing it effectively in a stressed test is something different but we're just talking about form here, right? The type of school makes a huge difference to how you teach and yes, it won't appeal to everyone. Thing is, if you are determined to train them hard, then that says something about your intentions anyway. Put it this way, I wouldn't want someone who doesn't take the time to learn and practice in my class nor would I want them on the street representing me and my school.

no

The initial assumption is wrong. If the school is good, the training is going to be hard anyway. You don't do one technique and be judged on that, you do 100 and then do 100 more. There simply isn't time to perform punishment. Then there's the fact that at some stage, sparring, even light contact will take place, if your technique isn't up to scratch, you will get hit. Sparring is part of training and it is your job to not get hit. It is my job to teach you how to not get hit. If you come to me for training and you can't see that what it is I am doing is for your benefit, then perhaps you shouldn't be here in the first place. Whether or not the school would last long is again based on your preconceptions of what the school is trying to do. If all you want to do is make money then fine, pamper to the wants of the masses. If you want to teach and train people to their full capacity, then it is your job to work them as hard as you can and that means doing whatever it takes to push them. There is one additional thing though. If you are serious about your training, you can never do too many push-ups. Part of my out of school training is a hell of a lot of push ups. In a class, it isn't the push ups that is the punishment, it is the time out from doing what everyone else is doing. In other words, you don't learn. At the same time though, a push up (or 50) will make you stronger and in 90% of the time, it is because you are not strong enough in the right places that lets technique down.

There's a guy in HK with a school Five Animal System that isn't the traditional Five. The core principles are still the same, just that the movements are named slightly differently.

"traditional" based styles that have large organisations: Wing Chun/Ving Tsun/ Wing Tsun/Yong Chun Shotokan TKD Judo Tai Chi (I'm not including the new age health/healing groups) Boxing Muay Thai More modern styles: Generic MMA clubs BJJ Generic Kickboxing (for whatever tournament format in what ever country - then there's the gym clubs)

To us, they're the same thing. You can't practice Iron Shirt, without practicing shock power. You can't train muscles without at the same time training "tendon" strength - inverted commas because it is old school chinese theory. At the same time because of how the things work, it also means you can't train tendon strength without practicing Iron Shirt etc. And the cycle continues.

It is my belief that this is a direct result of focussing too much on the form and indicative of the missing element in modern martial arts training. In my mind, actually sparring and "fighting" is just as important as non-stressed training. For every punch you throw in isolation in class, you should throw one punch in a live session. Training shouldn't just be form work. Lots of form work isn't a replacement for proper sparring.

I was talking about the type of basic training that we did. We have lots of various stepping drills that went through the typical types of steps, shuffles and knee lifts. There was also practice forms that worked on resistance and reaction to effect on our stance. Now these things, while part of training was never stressed as being Wing Chun. I did virtually the same exercises and drills in Hung Kuen as well as Mantis and White Crane. In practice, it was like a modified version of Small Plum Blossom with a live partner.

Tong Long = mantis You've just kinda said: Mantis Southern Mantis.