Fajing on coke cans

A general Q & A forum

Moderator: Scott M. Rodell

tjqinterest
Rank: Frequent Contributor
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:01 am

Re: Fajing on coke cans

Post by tjqinterest » Fri Feb 10, 2012 7:06 am

KungFuPanda1979 wrote:Real masters know exactly what they are capable of

Yes, they know exactly that they could never be so impressive and get same results as in these demos where other person is just standing and letting them to push.
Demos with co-operative oponents show no more than only person`s ability to make such demos.
Person can move very fast while performing demo (or wushu forms/katas). He can hit the target precisely (when it is standing still in one place or moves known way). He can effectively neutralize the attack if he knows how it is coming. This does not prove he can be successful in combat.

tjqinterest
Rank: Frequent Contributor
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:01 am

Re: Fajing on coke cans

Post by tjqinterest » Fri Feb 10, 2012 9:07 am

Why is it so important to ask for proof? Because martial arts are not like car or computer software, where you can detect problems quickly. It takes years of learning before you may understand it does not work. And still masters may tell you that it`s your own fault, you just didn`t learn it well enough.
Therefore we must make sure that martial art teachers really have the fighting abilities.

Maybe it would be helpful to define what do the words like "martial art", "master" and "martial skill" actually mean.

User avatar
J HepworthYoung
Rank: Chang San feng
Rank: Chang San feng
Posts: 276
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 12:19 pm
Location: Sacramento
Contact:

Re: Fajing on coke cans

Post by J HepworthYoung » Fri Feb 10, 2012 2:36 pm

I do not believe that the MMA venue is a good one for testing martial skill.

http://www.yangchengfu.org/
at this site is a mention of Yang Ban-hou fighting:
He watched Ban-hao blind one opponent using the same Kenpo technique we demonstrated; and, another time he paralyzed an opponent using the same Kenpo elbow strike to the back we demonstrated...

Ban-hao used the same Kenpo techniques we knew, but that he was extremely vicious, and after breaking one attacker's arm he chopped the man in the throat, and followed it with an elbow stroke that broke the man's jaw...

the moves were hard and intended to injure.
This is an example of martial skill.
http://www.ufc.com/discover/sport/rules-and-regulations
this is a site with the standard UFC/MMA rules
here are some of the "fouls"

The following acts constitute fouls in a contest or exhibition of mixed martial arts and may result in penalties, at the discretion of thereferee, if committed:
Butting with the head

Eye gouging of any kind

Groin attacks of any kind

Small joint manipulation

Striking downward using the point of the elbow

Striking to the spine or the back of the head

Kicking to the kidney with a heel

Throat strikes of any kind, including, without limitation, grabbing the trachea

Clawing, pinching or twisting the flesh

Grabbing the clavicle

Kicking the head of a grounded opponent

Kneeing the head of a grounded opponent

Stomping a grounded opponent

Engaging in any unsportsmanlike conduct that causes injury to an opponent
Not very martial when it comes down to it.
This list of fouls is a lot like a list of techniques in most traditional martial arts.

Consider Yang Ban-hous moves and then this list.
Martial as a word comes from Mars, the Roman god of war.
War is not sportsmanlike.
MMA is poorly named and is not martial in the true sense of the word.
It is a sport, a fighting sport, but still a sport and as such it is not martial or warlike.
At least this is my opinion and I know a couple MMA people who maintain the same opinion.

KungFuPanda1979
Rank: Yang Chenfu
Rank: Yang Chenfu
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 4:03 pm

Re: Fajing on coke cans

Post by KungFuPanda1979 » Fri Feb 10, 2012 6:43 pm

tjqinterest wrote: Yes, they know exactly that they could never be so impressive and get same results as in these demos where other person is just standing and letting them to push.
Demos with co-operative oponents show no more than only person`s ability to make such demos.
Person can move very fast while performing demo (or wushu forms/katas). He can hit the target precisely (when it is standing still in one place or moves known way). He can effectively neutralize the attack if he knows how it is coming. This does not prove he can be successful in combat.
So the only way to demostrate martial prowess is to go risk jail time or be sued for damages? Please show us how its done, tjqinterest.

Cheers
The Panda

tjqinterest
Rank: Frequent Contributor
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:01 am

Re: Fajing on coke cans

Post by tjqinterest » Mon Feb 13, 2012 4:40 am

There are still plenty if techniques which are taught by taijiquan teachers as very effective tools of throwing, locking, deflecting, avoiding takedowns etc. and which are not in that list of forbidden techniques. Why not to use them in competition?
KungFuPanda1979 wrote:So the only way to demostrate martial prowess is to go risk jail time or be sued for damages
If you say that competitions are not the place to evaluate martial skill, then I have no other choice than to agree this statement. But there is serious problem: This puts us to the position, where we can not criticize any martial art or training method, which is claimed to be only for real fighting for "life and death."

User avatar
J HepworthYoung
Rank: Chang San feng
Rank: Chang San feng
Posts: 276
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 12:19 pm
Location: Sacramento
Contact:

Re: Fajing on coke cans

Post by J HepworthYoung » Tue Feb 14, 2012 2:29 pm

tjqinterest wrote:This puts us to the position, where we can not criticize any martial art or training method, which is claimed to be only for real fighting for "life and death."
This is taken advantage of by many schools which claim to teach "death touch" methods. Allowing them to make (in some cases) somewhat outrageous claims that cannot be safely tested.

Fights can be non-mortal combat, Free fighting practice in Taijiquan is an example of this, though many schools do not practice this.

However when we speak of martial and self defense there is an implication that while friendly and sporting contests do show skills and method they can be undermined by non-sporting techniques like a attacking the eyes, breaking the limbs, crushing the windpipe etc.
So while we can test skill using sporting methods to some degree, we cannot rightly call that martial or self defense, but we can still relate it to self defense skill in many cases.

I've met people who having been told of an application say they can do it and make claims like "I can beat any grappler" because they were told of an application, often one that is said to be fatal and we are right back at the issue of not being able to test/criticize such an approach. But it also seems true in general that statements such as "I can beat any one who does style X" are naive at best.

There is an interesting story about a teacher/chauffeur in Oz, (Australia) who published a book that was titled to the effect of "how to beat any grappler using death touch"... Well a famous member of the Gracie family challenged him after this and the author basically told him that he would not fight unless it was to the death, to which the Gracie (Renzo) replied "Ok"... the author/chauffeur then refused to fight...
:wink:

Not far from here an incident happened recently where a man was hit once in the head by another man, sucker punched as he walked out of a bar. The man who was hit died about a week later from the blow. The man who punched him is being charged with 1st degree murder... how would you protect yourself from such an attack or prevent yourself from harming someone with a similar blow? A single strike can kill in some cases.I neither want to be hurt or hurt others in this manner.

KungFuPanda1979
Rank: Yang Chenfu
Rank: Yang Chenfu
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 4:03 pm

Re: Fajing on coke cans

Post by KungFuPanda1979 » Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:01 pm

I would like a return to the old 'challenge' system, where the combatants sign a death waver, and neither party can be legally prosecuted for any injuries or death that they delt. I have witten drafts of such a waver but legal advice I had been given says that since assult and manslaughter are criminal offenses, no one can be exempt from them even through mutual agreement.
tjqinterest wrote:There are still plenty if techniques which are taught by taijiquan teachers as very effective tools of throwing, locking, deflecting, avoiding takedowns etc. and which are not in that list of forbidden techniques. Why not to use them in competition?
Because it is folly to try and beat athletes at their own field of specialisation. A swimmer may run faster then the average person, but they cannot hope to beat a trained runner. MMArtists train and practise techniques that have been proven to be most effective in winning MMA bouts. If their techniques can easily be overcome by any other competitively legal way, they would've already adapted it.
tjqinterest wrote: If you say that competitions are not the place to evaluate martial skill, then I have no other choice than to agree this statement. But there is serious problem: This puts us to the position, where we can not criticize any martial art or training method, which is claimed to be only for real fighting for "life and death."
Yes, that is precisely correct! People shape martial arts as much as martial arts train people. There are no bad martial arts, just bad martial artists, whether through training methods that are lacking or laziness. We are united here in the belief that taichi, which is generally considered an exercise for the elderly, is actually an effective martial art, when a practitioner is train correctly. So we of all people should not be so quick to judge the martial arts of others, when we ourselves are fighting the same prejudices. Our opinions can only count where we like or don't like certain styles or techniques as a matter of personal taste, but we can't correctly judge their effectiveness in combat. Fighting skill varies greatly between person to person, even within each style. Unconstructive criticisms on the internet where people have no opportunity to practically demonstrate their point are especially offensive:
KungFuPanda1979 wrote:
tjqinterest wrote: What makes you think that you could really do it in competition or in real self-defence situation?
If you're in Australia (hopefully the east coast) I would be more then happy to exchange knowledge with you.
The offer is still open, tjqinterest.
J HepworthYoung wrote: There is an interesting story about a teacher/chauffeur in Oz, (Australia) who published a book that was titled to the effect of "how to beat any grappler using death touch"... Well a famous member of the Gracie family challenged him after this and the author basically told him that he would not fight unless it was to the death, to which the Gracie (Renzo) replied "Ok"... the author/chauffeur then refused to fight...
:wink:
I myself don't like his techniques or teachings, but he is the only person in Australia to give taijiquan a influential voice as a legitimate martial art. He is the closest thing we had in Australia to Scott Randell, and since his passing, there has been no one to take his place as that voice.

Cheers
The Panda

Roland Tepp
Rank: Chang San feng
Rank: Chang San feng
Posts: 107
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 5:34 pm
Location: Tallinn, Estonia
Contact:

Re: Fajing on coke cans

Post by Roland Tepp » Sun Feb 26, 2012 3:38 pm

J HepworthYoung wrote:A lot of people don't even have faith in the art and many with decades of experience complain that they must be missing some secret teaching or aspect because they cannot use it in a martial way,...
In a way, they are mostly right.
The trouble is, that the "secret teaching" they've missed is the simple act of putting the theory of taijiquan into the practice of sanshou.
And in most cases as has been mentioned in this thread many times, the guys teaching the stuff for a health spa excercise have no interest in teaching anything beyond the choreography of the form pickled with some tall tales of chi magic and deep spirituality...
tjqinterest wrote:It`s sad that these masters who really have skill, do not want to face professional MMA fighters.
I can not tell you about the reasonings of other people, so I can not really help you with this question, but for what it is worth here is how I see this - I see it coming down to the simple fact that competing in a such public arena is something of a realm of younger people.

Most of the ones that I know of having such a degree of mastery you seem to be referring to, are well beyond the age limit of typical participants of such fights. They have had their chances on the tournament rings (be that what ever form it took back in their days) long time ago and have no wish to partake in such shows no more.
Roland

Scott M. Rodell
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1364
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:50 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Re: Fajing on coke cans

Post by Scott M. Rodell » Thu Mar 01, 2012 6:31 am

J HepworthYoung wrote:
Scott M. Rodell wrote:I have one serious question for practitioners on taijiquan. Are we going to continue to allow those who lack any real martial skill continue to define our art?
Absolutely not, though they are so prominent that it is no easy task..
Well said brother... you summed up the problems & situation quite well. I know it will be slow going, but we just have to do our best, keep up & confront the out right lies of the many who are seeking to use the art to line their pockets.

All the best in your training, to you & all my martial brothers & sisters.

User avatar
Tashi James
Rank: Chang San feng
Rank: Chang San feng
Posts: 184
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 8:40 pm
Location: 2012 Sydney
Contact:

Re: Fajing on coke cans

Post by Tashi James » Sat Apr 21, 2012 12:33 am

Couldn't agree more with all of you.
"There is nothing that does not become easier through familiarity" (Santideva).

"We become what we do repeatedly. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit" (Aristotle).

tjqinterest
Rank: Frequent Contributor
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:01 am

Re: Fajing on coke cans

Post by tjqinterest » Wed Oct 10, 2012 7:24 am

Roland Tepp wrote:such a degree of mastery
Here comes the same question again and again: What is this "mastery" or "skill", how to define and evaluate it?

Roland Tepp
Rank: Chang San feng
Rank: Chang San feng
Posts: 107
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 5:34 pm
Location: Tallinn, Estonia
Contact:

Re: Fajing on coke cans

Post by Roland Tepp » Fri Oct 26, 2012 5:33 pm

tjqinterest wrote:
Roland Tepp wrote:such a degree of mastery
Here comes the same question again and again: What is this "mastery" or "skill", how to define and evaluate it?
I'm afraid, You misquoted me and by doing it changed the meaning of what I said.

The exact quote in it's full context was following:
Roland Tepp wrote:
tjqinterest wrote: It`s sad that these masters who really have skill, do not want to face professional MMA fighters.
Most of the ones that I know of having such a degree of mastery you seem to be referring to...
So as you can see, I was not making up any mention of "skill" or "mastery" that wasn't in the discussion before. I just pointed out that anyone that I know of who might be described as masters who really have skill (your words exactly) are usually not at the usual age of professional MMA fighters.

(On the second thought, I must admit, maybe the use of the word "mastery" was ill chosenby me - it does have an unfortunate ring of sounding a lot like "undisputed champion - never defeated" from those cheesy kung-fu movies we all love so much)

But as you posed the question, I would really like to know, how would you define masters who really have skill, so we could be on the same page for the discussion?
Roland

tjqinterest
Rank: Frequent Contributor
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:01 am

Re: Fajing on coke cans

Post by tjqinterest » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:04 am

Roland Tepp wrote:masters who really have skill (your words exactly)
Yes, these were my words exactly, but they are not invented by me. We often hear them among people who are interested in taijiquan or other martial arts.
I am not able to define word "master" or "skill".
It can not be measured only by results of competitions, because some famous teachers have fewer competions in their CV than their students have.
It can not be measured only by results of real fights, because these are often not mentioned at all or can not be verified.

And if these results (sports or real life) exist, how were they achieved? If taijiquan techniques/principles were not used, how can it be said that results were achieved because of taijiquan.

If I really have to define master of taijiquan, it would be "someone who uses taijiquan techniques, principles, bodymechanics and structure for neutralizing/attacking and by doing so has been successful against people who practise other martial arts." This sucess should be documented and visible, the best way is video. Demos do not count.

The disadvantage of this definition is that if we demand the videos and critical analysis, we exclude these people who just dont want to have public fights.

But if we don`t demand any proof, we just leave door open for charismatic leaders and manipulators, who put all the responsibility to their followers.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests