|
Post by GM-Neal on Apr 21, 2006 9:00:42 GMT 8
If there is one Thing i have learned in the Chinese Martial Arts Is the Main Thinking is "No wasted Movements". In to days world of "Flashy" Movements, Kicks and Weapons Movements, the body and the technique is Lost. The Body is using too much energy, with little or NO results. The Teaching of the Shaolin is, if you are going to throw a Hit, make it count. in some forms you can use a number of Strikes in just one movement, each Movement of the body is for some purpose "No Wasted Movement" Do not look {so much Good} doing it, Just do it. A hit can be a Block, and a Block can be a Hit, or a Hit and Block. Any Waisted Movements are a Waist of the Body's "Chi" or energy, which is a BIG NO-NO. Forms Look Great in a "Tournament" setting, but as you know {If you have ever been a Judge} that you have to under stand the Form? what was that Block for, what was that hit or Kick aimed for? Never Ever waste a Body Movement. The Chinese are very Clear on their thinking, in this manner, as I am this can all so be used in Life never waste a Moment or the time in the day, for you can Never Get It BACK.
|
|
|
Post by sifuwhite on Jul 27, 2006 10:37:10 GMT 8
I agree that wasted movements are unnecessary in most self defense situations. As far as the art is concerned, I think that excessive movement in forms and weapons are designed for the flash and entertainment of them. However, they do teah you one important lesson, and that is that if you practice the big movements the little ones come very, very easy.
Sifu White
|
|
|
Post by GM-Neal on Jul 29, 2006 6:20:12 GMT 8
I would have to Agree, Sifu. in todays world of "OH! that looks Net" or Cool it is the big flashily movements that get the Attention of most and brings them in to the School. And i would have to say that not all big movements are "wasted" movements, the "Long" Weapons of the Bo, (Jo) the Broad Sword, Spear, Kwan-do, Three Sectional Staff just to name a few. In some cases the more and bigger the movement the better as long as the movement has a purpose. What is your Opinion?
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Jul 29, 2006 22:01:22 GMT 8
I can only talk in terms of my experience with unarmed techniques. Bigger moves may contain other applications or nuances. For instance today we were working on a drill which used an elbow to parry an oncoming strike. The student could of course just drag the forearm across his face. It would serve the purpose. But if you looked at the arm as a 'bo', the elbow could be made to move much faster than the hand, and can be accelerated into the opponent's wrist. The resultant would be a much harder strike.
Colin
|
|
|
Post by supergroup7 on Jul 30, 2006 11:19:26 GMT 8
I can understand the whole concept of "no wasted movement". However, I believe that one's training reflects their inner goals. If someone is looking for the positive effect of cardio-vascular exercise while they train in their art, they may choose to make the movements louder, and more explosive.
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Jul 31, 2006 12:17:32 GMT 8
I can understand the whole concept of "no wasted movement". However, I believe that one's training reflects their inner goals. If someone is looking for the positive effect of cardio-vascular exercise while they train in their art, they may choose to make the movements louder, and more explosive. I don't know if that's very aligned with the originial intentions of the art. If I had to make a guess, the bigger traditional strikes may have been to accomodate terrain or an increase in the number of opponents or ... or if you're just buggered and don't know where the hell they're coming from. Colin
|
|
|
Post by supergroup7 on Aug 5, 2006 1:40:48 GMT 8
"I don't know if that's very aligned with the originial intentions of the art. " Colin
I like how you placed practical explanations for large movements, Colin.
I'd like to offer the thought that the kata not only helped transfer knowledge, but was also used as a training tool in themselves to build stamina, muscle, balance, and other such physical aspects.
Holding a deep stance is a well-known method of building proper posture, and strengthen leg/stomach muscles. I know that the Sanchin Kata is used in this way in some karate styles.
Would not the larger movements also bring forth that kind of idea for the body?
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Aug 5, 2006 14:01:02 GMT 8
Would not the larger movements also bring forth that kind of idea for the body? Certainly - and I think this is a very important aspect of preparing your body for combat. But many instructors - or the poor one's I've seen - all they focus on is building up brute strength. I guess I'm at a point where I'm looking out for other reasons beyond the status quo for doing what we do. Colin
|
|
|
Post by supergroup7 on Aug 6, 2006 20:22:51 GMT 8
Do you think that there is any merit to the whole philosophy that "if you can kick strong to the head, then a lower kick with have more strength and control?" I have heard this type of idea as an explanation of why we train in huge, loud "wasted energy" movements.
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Aug 6, 2006 20:53:34 GMT 8
In simple terms, of course if you can kick well to the head, kicking someone in the nuts should be easier. But given that many martial artists won't really acquire the kind of skill needed to do high kicks, I would say that the high kick is a very different kind of animal. ANd if you were to focus on practicing high kicks, then your low kicks are going to suffer. In Olympic coaching terms, if you want to do good at a particular move 'X', then you should train in 'X'. I've got a few anecdotal and real live stories which I can share with you to show that if you deviate from this simple rule of thumb, things will go wrong with your game. So no ... if you've got a large move in a traditional system, the large move has got to do something in real life. It could develop other skills or abilities, but it has got to have a purpose in itself. In MA terms - either to destroy or incapacitate the opponent OR to reduce risk to yourself. Colin
|
|
|
Post by supergroup7 on Oct 27, 2006 8:19:45 GMT 8
I can understand the concept that you are presenting here then... In terms of useability would not short, quick direct moves be far better to cultivate rather than large slow moves?
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Oct 28, 2006 12:43:31 GMT 8
I think that this rule of thumb would work well for strikes used in unarmed combat. Also not all things in your kata will be used as a strike. I just practiced a manji-uke takedown today. Beautiful (and done 'large') when executed in the kata, but won't hurt unless you think of the result - the opponent lands on his head. Maybe Sifu Tim would enlighten us to how this works with weapons? Colin
|
|
|
Post by sifuwhite on Oct 29, 2006 5:55:05 GMT 8
When it come to chinese weapons, movements are designed to show the flow of the weapon. So, If I can cut someone with a sword then I should be able to use a stick in the same fashion. However, in the same instance with throwing high kicks. If you can throw one to the head, then you should be able to throw one low that is at the speed of sound. Like in weapons, if I can use long over extended moves in forms, then in real life I am able to use short snappy movement fast and without restriction.
Sifu White
|
|
|
Post by timposynick on Oct 29, 2006 14:39:43 GMT 8
Exactly how we aproach our training Sifu. In class we "over emphasize" our basic technics, mostly the kicks. Our thoughts are that if we can kick with awesome speed and accuracy over our head then when on the street the same kick to the leg or groin or body should be 100 times faster and stronger. The same goes with punching and blocking. Even though our basis is in western boxing for the most part, our punches are executed in class with 100 percent knockout intentions always, and 100 percent speed, at times changing things up to focus on one or the other, in order to keep the learning and physical adaptations moving forward. The punches and blocks are executed to look as though you are just going for broke, with incredible devestation, and yet we constantly discuss during this training, how to modify or adapt the technique to fit the situation. The mind is always kept in the picture when we are training because that is our greatest tool, if we are not thinking at all times on how this technique is working or not working, or fast enough or accurate etc, then the entire purpose of those technics is for naught. Over ephasizing techniques or parts of them in training has been around since the dawn of systemized martial art training. The quality of that training though is only aparent in the knowledge of the student knowing when the technique should be used in its exadurated state or pulled back into its more practical state. This is the tool learned in the mind which gives alot of meaning, and several interpretations to "no wasted movement". For the most part the typical martial arts senario with the long stances and long armed-punches are used for the purpose of training the body to move and execute as one well oiled machine in harmony with the mind. When it comes to utilyzing those techniques on the street that machine being so well-oiled can now adapt the movement to work with efficientcy and accuracy without the exadurated motion because of the mind and body's understanding of each other, and how the technique will work. Thus the martial arts master looks as though his/her techniques has completely become simplified when in combat, and yet it is merely the mind and body woking harmoniously to utilize the years of toil with technique in order to execute effectively to make the out come look as though there is no wasted movement. blah, blah, blah ........... (long-winded bugger) sincerely Canadian windbag
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Oct 29, 2006 14:56:53 GMT 8
Exactly how we aproach our training Sifu. In class we "over emphasize" our basic technics, mostly the kicks. Our thoughts are that if we can kick with awesome speed and accuracy over our head then when on the street the same kick to the leg or groin or body should be 100 times faster and stronger. Nice seeing you here Mr Posynick! My classes emphasize these same two concepts - except the other way around. I prefer to teach my students accuracy first, keeping movements relaxed and focused. We train for power after. Of course each class has exercises to build the body up but the training approach is to ensure that the student can hit a target if he wants to. Damage inflicted improves easily once coordination is down. Colin
|
|