similarities between styles

[Drunken Monkey]

like it says on the tin.

 

we all know that there are always going to be similarites between styles.

 

some are because of the origins (in the same style),

 

some are because of the time period and the ways of thinking at that point in time,

 

some are because of the environment

 

(explaining why two things from opposite sides of the world could look the same).

 

so this is just a little thread to let you talk about your style and what similarities you have found between it and other styles.

 

or as the case may be, how something looks the same but isn't

 

(you can then explain why/how it is different).

[italian_guy]

In the three styles you see in my profile there are quite large differences. Expecially TCC compared to the others firstly because is the only internal style of the three and also because it is a chinese style.Between Karate and Kickboxing there ara more similarities:some kicking techniques are very similar (front kick side kick, hook kick, spinning back kick) and the other sare slightly different (round kicks expecially low) hand techniques of karate are richer than kickboxing (that has no open hand techniques obviously).

 

There are throws in karate while in kickboxing you find only sweeps and they are not practiced so much.

 

The way we fight is globally quite different, point fighting require some speed and finesse while kickboxing require also endurance and power even if you do only light/moderate contact (like I used to do).

[delta1]

Heck! I'm overwhelmed already! At some level, I can almost allways find similarities between American Kenpo and other systems. Basic principles tend to carry over between arts, but it is what principles the arts focus on, and the concepts used to apply the principles, that makes the arts different.

 

Even betwen Taiji (an 'internal' art) and Kenpo (external), there are a lot of similarities. A lot of the moves can be mixed, and understanding either system helps tremendously in understanding the other. Both initiate movement at the tantien. Both are fast and have flow. Both allow the opponent to defeat himself. Some differences: Kenpo is static- some moves stop, where in Taiji motion never stops. Kenpo uses primarily a 50/50 weight distribution in stances and footwork, where in Taiji this is undesireable (but occurs in transition). Taiji developes internal energy, where some of Kenpo's movements block internal energy flow.

 

Other similarities with different systems are really too numerouse to list. AK has hard and soft, circular and linear, a full arsenal of kicks and strikes, joint locks and counters, and other stand up grappling moves, and some ground work can be extrapolated from the system. Strikes are emphasized much more than grappling, though. But there are AK systems that get much more into joint locks and ground work, and at least one that is very internally oriented. AK also works high/low simultaneously, has sweeps and throws, and defenses for same. Has a lot of distance, zone and centerline control work, demensional control, trapping, ...

 

At this point, I would say we are looking at a universe of possibilities here. Others would just say I'm lost in space! I am, however, late again. See you all later!

[Drunken Monkey]

hmm, two replies.

 

i guess i should've figured that only the old hands would respond to a thread like this....

 

anyway.

 

i think most of you would've heard me say this before but everytime i hear one of the kempo guys talk about their stuff, it always amazes me how much it resembles wing chun.

 

what amazes me is that the similarities seem to begin at the most basic level and just seems to mirror the way we do things.

 

for a start, the way we use forms is more or less identical; that of it being a way to practice a way of moving as opposed to 'fixed' examples of moves

 

(of the classical shaolin ways and other related styles)

 

then there's the way we both train singular moves, slowly building up the level of 'trust' in the efectiveness of the move before applying more pressure and variation and extra 'moves' (as it were).

 

a little further on, the way that we both eventually 'remove' the taught movements and learn to use principles instead.

 

looking at the history of wing chun and kempo i guess there were bound to be similarites (esp with the bruce lee/ed parker link).

 

just out of interest, when did they meet?

 

was it before or after bruce had decided to stop teaching 'pure' wing chun?

[foreveryoung001]

I have trained primarily in Chung Do Kwan TKD, but have also spent about a year at a Tang Soo Do school while I when I first moved into this area. Between the TKD and the TSD, I found only slight differences in the actual application of techniques. The kicks, blocks, punches, were very similar. There were some different theories on weight transfer, body movement, and slight variations in how the technique is thrown, but the TSD instructor never wanted to get into it much. I enjoy the science of the art, and was specifically looking to learn the differences, but either this guy didn't know why he was teaching certain things in certain ways, or he may have felt that since I had my 1st Dan in TKD, that I wouldn't want to change the way I did things....

 

The forms were different. The Chung Do Kwan, has followed the WTF with some other added forms, where the TSD taught the Pyung Ahn forms.

[delta1]

I'd have to look that one up, as I don't remember exactly when it was. But I think it was after Bruce Lee started to diverge from pure WC. As I've said elsewhere on this forum, that mixing of principles and concepts between systems was an emerging philosophy at the time, and there were several great martial artists who were doing this. It's actually allways been done, but not on the same scale as it was after WWII.

 

There are a whole lot of similarities between WC and AK. AK starts you out immediately learning principles and concepts behind the moves. And, like WC, they are drilled untill they are second nature. But our 'singular moves' usually have to be extracted from the techniques. In fact, they were meant to be extracted, then recombined for different situations and applications. Probably somewhat similar to WC, not sure.

 

Our zone theories would relate to WC's gates, and our dimensional control is a natural extension of WC's centerline theory. We trap and redirect a lot, but to start out you are doing more of the hard moves, then you work into softer traping. Both yield to allow the opponent to defeat himself. You could go on and on, and probably never find all the similarities.

 

Some differences I've noted: Wc uses a three point stance in its' kicks. Kenpo tends more to the hard style kick and retract. Kenpo sometimes violates WC's rule of never crossing your own center line. This is one of the things that Bruce Lee pointed out, and Mr. Parker changed a few things in this respect. Mr. Parker was allways learning from other stylists, and encouraged others to do the same. WC focuses more on traping and in close work. AK works at all ranges and tries to achieve a bllance, while still allowing the student to concentrate more in areas he is comfortable with or interested in.

 

I will say this, Kenpoists with a WC background can be a force to be reckoned with!

[Shane]

If a technique use to work on the battlefield then your going to find it in several styles. Its only common sense that your going to see similaritys in some of the martial arts and for many reasons, but one of the main reasons for seeing similar techniques is because most likely it was effective on the battlefield. Ofcourse it not only the techniques that you might see a connection with.

[Drunken Monkey]

"Kenpo sometimes violates WC's rule of never crossing your own center line"

 

something that isn't normally told about wing chun.

 

a large chunk of the third form deals with concepts of what to do when you have crossed your centreline.

 

when training this form, you begin to learn when it might be beneficial to cross your centre.

 

you are told to not cross your centre from the beginning because it isn't safe for the beginner to do so.

 

also, the non-crossing of the centre plays a big part in the knife-work

 

but again, the third form shows you how to regain and maintain the centre.

 

also, crossing your centre brings into play some really off the wall ideas about perceived and false centres.

 

it's a chi sau thing..... not something i've ever done for real, not even in a one hit-break drill.

 

"Wc uses a three point stance in its' kicks"

 

not sure what you mean by this.

 

the wing chun kicks tend to come from or finish with forward motion.

 

i.e a step.

 

but er, that depends on the kick.

 

"one of the main reasons for seeing similar techniques is because most likely it was effective on the battlefield"

 

not many of the martial arts we practice today have ever faced a proper battlefield.

 

also, proper battle field combat normally involved weapons of some sort.

 

the chinese armies used to train almost exclusively in three weapons,

 

the dao (cheap and easy to make and learn), spear and bow+arrow.

 

hand skills was taught but not to the extent of weapons.

 

wiht regards to the chinese styles, the majority of ones we learn today, whilst having a basis in those that might've been taught at times of war, were not actually designed for war purposes.

 

hung gar, choy li fut, mantis (any), eagle claw, wing chun, tai chi and many, many more never saw serious action on a battle field.

 

if i recall correctly, the only chinese style that was known to have been taught to the chinese armies was the original long fist (cheung kuen).

 

but i do get your point.

 

similar moves appear in styles of similar intent beacuse they work and because there is only so much that can be done with the human body.

 

but that's kinda what i wanted to 'chat' about.

 

have you ever come across an article about some other style and thought

 

"hang on, this is what we do too!"?

 

this was started because of the things i've read about kempo.

 

never before have i really had this thought about similarities between wing chun and another martial art.

 

i know of the similarities between wing chun and mantis and tai chi and some of the ideas in other chinese styles but the way things were done were never really that similar.

 

anyway.

 

any more?

[delta1]

"Kenpo sometimes violates WC's rule of never crossing your own center line" something that isn't normally told about wing chun. a large chunk of the third form deals with concepts of what to do when you have crossed your centreline. when training this form, you begin to learn when it might be beneficial to cross your centre.

 

you are told to not cross your centre from the beginning because it isn't safe for the beginner to do so.

Well, I'll be dipped!

 

 

"WC uses a three point stance in its' kicks" not sure what you mean by this. the wing chun kicks tend to come from or finish with forward motion. i.e a step. but er, that depends on the kick.

 

As I understand it, there are three points to the base in a WC kick- your supporting leg and his two legs. The kick is the connection between your base and his. This allows your kick to push through, and keep the forward motion and pressure that WC is noted for.

Edited October 26, 2004 by delta1

[battousai16]

i must say, i've always been a bit surprised by the similarities between hwa rang do and kuk sool won, myself. i think the only real difference is that we have a heavier emphasis on weapons, but it never ceases to amaze me how often i'll point out something about HRD and some KSW guy will say "oh yeah, we do that too".

 

i have found that a lot of our kicking has more in common with muay thai than tae kwon do, but i think a lot of that is simply because we try to adapt for delivering pain than scoring points. i don't mean to sound condescending, i mean just in methods of delivery and follow through, and striking surfaces, sometimes. i've yet to see, however, many other people use their heal as a striking surface for a straight legged spinn kick like we do.

 

aside from that, i've noticed we've "borrowed" some meditation exercises from tai chi, though that may be an instructor thing. and i've yet to see WC really compare to anything, though i have little to know experience with kempo.