Erase Styles

[ovine king]

and in that single post i can tell that you know very little about the origins of chinese martial arts.

 

chinese forms were never about hiding things.

 

it was to record movements in a way that enabled you to practice in an organised fashion.

 

if they didn't want to show you something, they just wouldn't show you.

 

it was never 'a sort of dance'.

 

of course there's the dancing as done in the imperial palaces that were based loosely on martial arts; well, they sometimes had weapons but that's something entirely different.

[1kickKO]

I think it is important to keep the styles up. Of course we are all martial artists, but nonetheless, we are all a different type of martial artist nonetheless. Some may be better at fighting, some at forms, etc...It's like comparing peanut butter and pickles, can't quite do it...but peanut butter and jelly you can. Like Tai chi and karate, two totally different styles that focus on different tasks..tai chi is on inner strength and peace of mind, karate is on outer strength and devastating techniques. So basically, you need a way to recognize both aspects of the arts...each needs a classification..just like foods, if they have everything labeled as "food" at a grocery store and no pictures on the boxes/cans, what are you going to buy?

[ovine king]

tai chi is at the end of the day a fighting art.

 

if you can't fight with it, it ain't tai chi.

 

that is probably the only thing i would like to see; more emphasis on actual use of the styles.

 

how many so called tai-chi guys out there know that they're actually practicing arm breaks, joint locks and throws?

 

if you practice a fighting art but don't know how to fight with it, is it still valid?

[1kickKO]

Of course tai chi is also fighting, but a different "style" of fighting. It focuses on a clear mind, it focuses on smooth and slow movements, a pure body, healing, chi, etc... That's why I think we should still keep our "styles" so to say.

[ovine king]

ooooh, not sure i'd agree with that.

 

tai chi is done slow to begin with only to ensure that you are doing it properly.

 

after you re familiar with it, you don't concerntrate on anything.

 

it isn't about keeping a clear mind, it is, like a great deal of other martial arts out there, about not having to think to react.

 

it is because that tai chi has a very heavy emphasis on body position that you spend longer doing it slowly.

 

the thing is, you can train in the same way in karate.

 

in fact, i'd argue that karate should probably be a lot smoother (tai chi like) than what we see today at the average tournement where clear precise separate techniques are encouraged.

[1kickKO]

I totally agree, when I said it waas slow, I meant in it's original form, I didn't mean when you are practicing it thouroughly, or practicing it as a whole. Karate in the same way can be slow, such as kata, to learn at first, then speed up. But, I'm not going to stray into that as htat's a whole different topic. Basically what I'm trying to get across is that I believe every style has it's own conformities, and that is why they shold remain "styles", or "sytems".

[ovine king]

well, there's also the simple fact that whilst all styles do have their basis on similar if not the same principles, their interpretation and execution of them are different.

 

i'm pretty sure that my idea of a soft deflection is going to be different to a tai chi's soft deflection which is going to be different to how the kempo guy does it etc etc.....

 

styles are grouped and seperated because they, as whole, work by itself.

 

this is a white crane technique, taht is a wing chun techniquq, that is a karate technique.

 

they might not look the same.

 

they might not work in the same way.

 

but

 

they might all be based on the same principle.

 

the 'divisions', as it were, are a good way of noting how the same thing can be interpreted and executed.

[1kickKO]

Exactly, that's pretty much my point. They all have the same task, to block, or punch and inflict damage, or protect one's-self from damage. Styles are just offsets of each other, such as goju-ryu, shorin-ryu, etc etc...But what i'm getting to in the end..is that a style is a style no matter what, it may have the same goal, but different principles, therefore it's ideas and methodologies are different. So, in it's own form, it has it's own ways of doing things, adn that's why we have different styles today,a nd aren't all just called martial artists.

[ovine king]

also, while it's nice and simple to say "tke what works" from all of the styles and have one style made up of bits of others but in reality, you have to relaise that styles' 'flaws' are often addressed by other things in the style.

 

i.e if you take a working technique from one style and ignore the other bits, that one technique might not work with the other bits from other styles that you might've collected.

 

easiest example would be to take the fixed elbow principle and try to apply it to something like yang tai chi with it's 'floating' elbows/arms.

 

both work, but only in the context of its own style.

[Emei89]

chinese forms were never about hiding things.

 

it was to record movements in a way that enabled you to practice in an organised fashion.

 

if they didn't want to show you something, they just wouldn't show you.

 

it was never 'a sort of dance'.

 

It wasn't to conceal it from themselves, does that make any sense at all no think alittle bit. It was to conceal it from thier enemies who would be spying on thier techniques from different schools. I think this whole forum us proof that people from different schools always fight on whose is better. So other school would want to see the techniques of the other so schools would conceal them. Many courtesies or salutations have hidden techniques, and that what i meant by dance. dance may have been the wrong word but it was late. As per saying how i know nothing about chinese martial arts i ask what makes you much morequalified than i?