Is there a complit Chinese system??

li xiao long · #16 (**permalink**) October 19th, 2004, 07:43 AM

I think we're all getting confused on this thread.

Yes xing yi does have ground fighting - but its not like JJ or aikido. Primarily its about how to fight if on the ground *as in pushed over/thrown off horse/thrown*, with the aim of getting back up on two feet, given what the opponent is doing (i.e. trying to kill you) at the time.

Yes there are similarities - but the purpose was/is never to pin the guy down for 30 seconds, or get him to tap out, or go for a choke.

Its mega hard to explain - but you have to give credit to the purposes of what each owns respective arts were developed for. UFC, a bit of fun - taking different arts and applying them in a semi-similar environment and letting them get on with it, Xing Yi - to defend a country in some godawful wars vs some of the nastiest armies going at that time in potentially unfamiliar surroundings, with the going getting tough, and half a dozen arrows impaled in yer armour...

Hopefully from looking at the purpose of what it was designed for, you can appreciate the differences in how they have developed, and why they may not necessarily compliment or be similar to each other.. hence trying to apply them in an arena type environment doesnt mean that one will be better than the other, just that one is better applied for that environment, by the person, at that time.

Lugaldamhara · #17 (**permalink**) October 19th, 2004, 12:50 PM

“	hence trying to apply them in an arena type environment doesnt mean that one will be better than the other, just that one is better applied for that environment, by the person, at that time.	”

Hmmm.... I keep seeing this idea pop up.
People keep referring to "UFC this and that" and then offer in contrast that "but style X was used on the battlefields of old to defend a country, yadda, yadda, yadda...".

Just because the UFC is a sport and the philosophy behind the way people train for it is geared toward sport does not mean it is inadequate for the battlefield. As a matter of fact, for hand to hand combat it has been proven more effective than any "age old" art that was once used "to defend countries". Taking the MMA philosophy and then adding to it weapons combatives would be the best martial art for any soldiers today or even 2000 years sgo. Just because an art was once used on the battlefield does not mean there is not something better currently.

The sword used to be a really great implement to utilize on the battlefield. Unfortunately, the invention if the firearm has rendered it obsolete.

Peace-
Cam

Spirit Boxer · #18 (**permalink**) October 19th, 2004, 01:26 PM

We should replace tanks with sport cars that would be cool a lot less would be harmed or killed good thinking.

**Nik** · #19 (**permalink**) October 19th, 2004, 01:48 PM

“	Originally Posted By: Lugaldamhara As a matter of fact, for hand to hand combat it has been proven more effective than any "age old" art that was once used "to defend countries".	”

While UFC is an organization/event with a rule set and not a style, I would change that into "MMA consisting of the skills/substyles used successfully in UFC events has not been disproven to be superior to any style/subset". You hardly ever had a noteworthy Taijiquan, Xingyiquan, Bajiquan or Bagua practitioner in there. The proof they are more suitable to fighting than the skill set already proven in UFC of course would have to come from them, and I don't expect it to happen ever.
Just the other way around is a pitfall, like readable at places like "Bullshido" that "qi has been proven to not work" or something - which is crap. A pro fighter with a weight advantage of +80lb beating a small stupid idiot with no training saying he "does San Soooooooo!!!" doesn't say much about how you fare against a 250lb Ma Jiangbao or Chen Xiaowang. Their "Qi" aka muscle strength breaks you in half if they get their hands on you.

As for the "defending country", the country was, successfully, or not, defended with LARGE armies, consisting of riders with sabres and bows, phalanxes of foot soldiers with lances, archers, elephants, war wagoons, etc. Not barehanded fighters doing Xingyi.
H2H fighters or palace guards doing the above mentioned styles have been very successful, fighting under no rules, but this does not mean that someone just "doing their style" beats anyone. Those people trained, like todays premium ones, whole days, for a long time of their life.

li xiao long · #20 (**permalink**) October 20th, 2004, 03:30 AM

“	Originally Posted By: Lugaldamhara Hmmm.... I keep seeing this idea pop up. People keep referring to "UFC this and that" and then offer in contrast that "but style X was used on the battlefields of old to defend a country, yadda, yadda, yadda...". Just because the UFC is a sport and the philosophy behind the way people train for it is geared toward sport does not mean it is inadequate for the battlefield. As a matter of fact, for hand to hand combat it has been proven more effective than any "age old" art that was once used "to defend countries". Taking the MMA philosophy and then adding to it weapons combatives would be the best martial art for any soldiers today or even 2000 years sgo. Just because an art was once used on the battlefield does not mean there is not something better currently. The sword used to be a really great implement to utilize on the battlefield. Unfortunately, the invention if the firearm has rendered it obsolete. Peace- Cam	”

Good point. Though how would going for a pin or submission help on a battlefield these days Have you got any examples of this (am actually quite interested on how they'd do it, since over here in the UK, they do a form of JJ styled JKD which doesnt seem that effective if you know what you're doing)

Surely if we all said 'here have a gun instead' then martial arts themselves would change, albeit to utilise the new bit of kit

Where do you see MMA going Do you think in 10 or 20 years time it'll have absorbed other arts, or just still stuck to octagon styled rings

XVampireX · #21 (**permalink**) October 20th, 2004, 06:50 AM

Lugaldamhara... Thats what you said while we were talking in AIM, see You think MMA are superior, and other arts are inferior, so much to the narrow mindedness...

P.S: There's a thread in kungfumagazine about Tai Chi and Judo, there's someone telling a story of someone against chen xiaowang... quite interesting

li xiao long · #22 (**permalink**) October 20th, 2004, 06:59 AM

I'd just like to say before this turns into a slanging match, that i aint taking sides, and am very interested to continue this comparison with you Cam if this thread gets locked.

**Nik** · #23 (**permalink**) October 20th, 2004, 07:16 AM

Actually he refers to the fact that people claim their "art" is battle field proven, trying to give it a notion it would be superior "on the streets" to "sports arts", while failing to deliver any reference that it was used successfully in a sports event which would allow this.

With my own experiences, some of the conditioning in my arts is superior to sport training, but, it's not "much more effective". It takes time to overcome the head start of people doing the normal practice. It's probably a good idea to combine the practices. Given the long time practice effect on the body strength, tactics could be used effectively in sport fights to literally crush opponents, with no doubt, and not only "on the street". Without this body strength that takes quite some time to develop in substantial amounts, you get crushed because it would not work properly without the strength. Your jamming and plowing would not have the effect it has when delivered with times the strength you have yourself, it would not stop a person with reasonable body strength to shoot in on you, you would be taken down and finished. It's not impossible to see for me.

I am quite confident that this picture would look very different if you HAVE the body strength, but, how many practitioners of today really HAVE this, from enough practice How many "Xingyi practitioners" really DO "miles of Xingyi" four hours in the morning, hand and head stands for half an hour to an hour in the morning, do the Xingyi light body practice that you don't see mentioned anywhere, etc. Up to a moment when such a practitioner steps into a UFC event and wins, you do an art not proven in comparison to other arts.

A good reason why soldiers should learn a good amount of groundfighting (involving knife scenarios) and only some smaller amount of oldfashioned body strength and health preserving practice is, that the former gives the abilities in a short amount of time necessary to soldiers having only a short period of training, while the body strength needed to use the other style takes a LONG time. If you start doing that at 12, fine, if not, it would be late. Groundfighting also doesn't get invalid IF you have the body strength skill to use simple methods of plowing through people, because on slippery ground, on mud, you most likely would never be able to use the grounded power effectively, and land in a ground clinch (or get stabbed or shot, or stab or shoot the other guy first). Of course, for health and endurance reasons, old style strength and qigong procedures would be good for soldiers to keep fit with a minimum of daily practice.

Lugaldamhara · #24 (**permalink**) October 20th, 2004, 03:43 PM

“	Good point. Though how would going for a pin or submission help on a battlefield these days	”

Here is the first pitfall of the misunderstanding.
Why do people automatically assume that MMA is only about pinning someone and submitting them Many of the best kickboxers in the world compete in MMA and MMA contains a high level of striking, not just grappling. The ground fighting is there in case the fight winds up on the ground or in case one guy figures out that the other guy is a better striker than he is, so he will take the fight to the ground to exploit the striker's weakness. In a perfect world, sure, ina battlefield confrontation the objective is to end the confrontation as quickly as possible as cleanly as possible and this usually involves striking. The reality of it is, these skirmishes often DO go to the ground (more times than not) and it;s best to know how to finish from there as well as on the feet. People also assume that to win a fight using grappling takes a long time. This is not so. When one opponent is skilled and the other is not skilled in grappling it can be over even quicker than a striking match.

Do any of you watch the TV show COPS How many times have you seen them use those fancy wristlocks to try and subdue an attacker 99% of those instances wind up on the ground with the perp fighting back and it usually takes 3 or 4 cops to finally control the guy. This tells us 2 things...
1.) Fights WILL go to the ground.
2.) Standing wrist locks are worthless.

So, to answer the question, going for a pin or submission on the battlefield is no more stupid than going for a kick or punch or throw because if it got to that point there had been a great failure. Soldiers carry guns and if they are ever in H2H range something went wrong to begin with. That being said, if it does happen and they depend ONLY on stand up tactics they will be lost if and when the fight DOES go to the ground. It just gives the soldier more options to finish a fight under more varied circumstances... circumstances that he may or may not have control over at any given moment. Why would anyone want to limit themselves by NOT learning to fight on the ground

“	Where do you see MMA going Do you think in 10 or 20 years time it'll have absorbed other arts, or just still stuck to octagon styled rings	”

I don't really understand what you are asking here. Your statement about the octagon styled ring tells volumes of your lack of knowledge and exposure to MMA.

“	Lugaldamhara... Thats what you said while we were talking in AIM, see You think MMA are superior, and other arts are inferior, so much to the narrow mindedness...	”

What is it you seem to be not understanding All MMA is is those other arts mixed together. The whole is better than the sum of its parts. You can eat eggs, or eat flour, or eat butter and sugar, and you may enjoy them, but it's a whole lot more palatable if you mix them together and make a cake.

BTW, great post Nik.

People seem to misundrstand and think that MMA involves something far removed from traditional arts. Not so. It is simply a combining of already existing traditional aspects and practices, discarding the less effective and outdated techniques found in these arts and then streamlining them into a highly effective, high percentage skill set. Everything in MMA can be traced to a parent TMA.

The thing that MMA competitions have helped open our eyes to is the fact that in a real fight, things are ugly, not choreographed. Moves are not slick and polished and things often do not go according to plan. A lot of TMAs perpetuate the mantra of not going to the ground, we won't be taken down, etc. and when they train and spar they never do ground sparring and only spar standing up. Therefore they never experience it. Many of these TMA guys entered a lot of the early MMA events only to find out that if they missed that punch or kick it WAS going to the ground and because they lacked the experience there, they were quickly and easily beaten.

Fact- In a real fight, you can wind up anywhere, regardless of how skilled you or you're opponent are. It's best to be prepared to deal with the situation when the best laid plans of mice and men go out the window.
Also consider this... What if you were faced with a practitioner of your same style except he was more skilled and experienced than yourself. On the battlefield you will die. BUT... if you knew some element that he did not know, grappling, you could take him down into his weaker element and better your chances.

Peace-
Cam

li xiao long · #25 (**permalink**) October 20th, 2004, 04:51 PM

Hey easy with the hostilities! sheesh!

Yes I know jack **** about UFC or pride, other than people climb into an octagon and beat the crap outta each other. This is why im asking your view on what will happen for it in the future, since it is relatively new.

I've not seen the tv show you're referring to, but surely they go to the ground because they cant beat up the guy (which im sure they'd prefer to)

Spirit Boxer · #26 (**permalink**) October 21st, 2004, 12:23 PM

Just give in to your lower self, break the principles of Hsing I and buy a TV then one can understand with perfect clarity. It is a basic psychological rationing of the mind all those "other" martial arts mixed together like that is not the point of each martial art system (Warning limited training in one method will produce delusional states of mind) no one knows jack about MMA…. Wine with that cheese. It is perfectly fine not to understand, not all should or one could take some steps down the evolutionary scale to understand.

Hsing I step down jump into the animals consciousness be the animals use the tactics kill with one blow or multiple strikes fight use elbows as horns fingers as claws palms as paws Dragon and eagle on the ground or in the air but the most important next step goes up the evolutionary scale back to human and above far exceeding MMA training. See I can toot the horn and make stuff up as well.

**Nik** · #27 (**permalink**) October 21st, 2004, 01:25 PM

Killing with a blow is not made up, it could be or is the reality of some. The some who train certain things, and had certain experiences turning them into a animal. Just doing as if you are like one of those doesn't turn you into an animal, and, it's not desirable to go there. You can train long enough to go there, but, it will have a toll. I very well understand someone who, to be blunt, wants to have fun with a hobby, and community, doing a certain part of kung-fu training, same way as others do aerobics, without anyone accusing them of something. It definetly makes them somewhat more capable of defending, and it definetly is good for overall athletics. It's of course not turning you superhuman, but others also bragg way more than they are able. And there is definetly no reason to all the time p*ss at those, accuse them of inferiority, etc. Of course, I can also understand the people doing such "hardcore fighting" who don't like that hobby people tell them their art is superior because ... while lacking at everything.

Lugaldamhara · #28 (**permalink**) October 21st, 2004, 03:29 PM

“	Hey easy with the hostilities! sheesh!	”

Sorry... didn't mean for that to come off sounding hostile. I was being sincere. From the statement I had come to the conclusion that you had not been exposed to a lot of MMA. The only MMA that takes place in an octagonal cage is UFC. There are about 45 other organizations worldwide that use a ring.

Peace-
Cam

fabian_san · #29 (**permalink**) October 21st, 2004, 05:54 PM

“	Just because the UFC is a sport and the philosophy behind the way people train for it is geared toward sport does not mean it is inadequate for the battlefield. As a matter of fact, for hand to hand combat it has been proven more effective than any "age old" art that was once used "to defend countries"	”

Right, MMA's should be effective in battlefields (if there were no firearms LOL). The reason of Chinese people using CMA or TCMA was a matter of cultural approach, which in some cases, like chinese culture, this was as important to fight for as for defending people's lives. Chinese didnt use JMA and Japanese people didnt use CMA, if you use both, and remove all obsolete techniques, you have the basics of MMA.

Cam:
How much weaponry does MMA train regularly I have the idea its not that much, which is an important part for MA study.

“	Why would anyone want to limit themselves by NOT learning to fight on the ground	”

For a lot of standing-up TMA schools this is true, they barely train ground techinques, or no ground fighting at all. My Sensei uses ground techniques to compliment our standing style, and if you study Lama Sam you may attend the JJ class and Sensei says this is good for you, he will not charge you extra

only for your judo-gi. We sometimes do some cross sparring, you may use kicks, blows, punches, takedowns, grappling, etc, etc. If you cant attend JJ class then he will bring those techniques to your class just because ground fighting is as important as your standing up style, the original (Lima Lama) didnt use grappling techniques.

li xiao long · #30 (**permalink**) October 22nd, 2004, 03:32 AM

Its true, I havent had much exposure - but thats more to the legislation in the UK rather than the lack of sports here.

Say you on MSN or yahoo messenger Would love to hook up and chat further about this.