Sanda vs Dacheng fist (thought boxing) 散打vs大成拳

[Bhassler]

Not sure what you're saying, but I'm saying to understand and use " yiquan method ", you must first have martial arts mastery, and at the least high practical expertise. I will readily admit that I believe yiquan as developed by Wang Xiangzhai is hardly a passive skill.

One afternoon in the early 1970s, Frank Foster was directing an outreach performance in a Harlem street with the Jazzmobile program. All welcome. Foster called for a blues in B flat. An aspiring tenor player, with more enthusiasm than musicality, launched into a wild "energy" solo in no discernible key, let alone B flat, swamping everyone else onstage.

Foster stopped playing. "What are you doing?"

"Just playing what I feel."

"Well, feel something in B flat, motherfucker."

[everything]

"feel something in B flat, motherfucker". awesome quote.

Marvin8, thanks for your detailed explanations. It's interesting Jordan talks about jab step. I don't think in football/soccer they call it that, but here's Messi explaining more or less the same feint.


Anyway I brought up Cruyff because all these people (Cruyff, Wang, Jordan, Messi) explain and show and do things as if they are so simple. But even though we can understand that from observation, doing it so simply is so difficult for the rest of us. Messi is literally off every chart. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/li ... mpossible/

At least we can console ourselves that it is fun to even talk about these guys. There are many good reasons spectator sports are much more popular than MA or MMA or IMA. This kind of thing is endlessly fascinating.

[Wanderingdragon]

Kind of says , we can all do fighting, but few will achieve yiquan, as such it extends out to Yiquan cannot be taught, it is a level of skill achieved through tireless committed attention to basic practice and application.

[Steve James]

Well, I think if the Dacheng guy had been a decent sanda guy in the past, he would have done better. For example., if the sanda guy started Dacheng, would he be better able to use?

[Wanderingdragon]

Yes, if you know the history as well as the legend, you will know those that old master Wang taught were already endowed
With martial skill, actually considered by their peers as "high hands", meaning masters in their own right.

[Trick]

Kind of says , we can all do fighting, but few will achieve yiquan, as such it extends out to Yiquan cannot be taught, it is a level of skill achieved through tireless committed attention to basic practice and application.

YQ is not some kind of "result" one are supposed to achieve, it's a practice method.

[Trick]

but I'm saying to understand and use " yiquan method ", you must first have martial arts mastery, and at the least high practical expertise.

That could be said about TJQ, XYQ, Aikido...and so on, but thats not the case. It's of course about once own dedication, focus and willingness. A "Streetfighter" can join a boxing gym and become a world champ, or the punching bag of the gym

[middleway]

I commend the Yi Quan guy for trying. What he has done is provide himself with an amazing platform for growth. I hope he sees the opportunity.

As a wider point, to my eyes in all of these encounters, the traditional arts person seems to be too confident in the superiority of their method and are 'reactive' instead of active. This is something i have seen alot personally too, often born out of the belief that 'What i do is very old and special, masters from the old times were utter badasses!' ... reality, especially in the form of a head kick, can be quite immediate.

you must first have martial arts mastery, and at the least high practical expertise

Everyones focused on the Yi Quan guy but as Ian pointed out, the san da guy is not very good by the looks of things, he certainly would not represent "martial arts Mastery" or "high practical Expertise" When compared to his peers in combat sports. Yet he was able to completely outmatch the Yi Quan practitioner and dominate the encounter.

But it would be really interesting to see how much time the Yi Quan guy has been practicing, vs how much time the San Da guy has. This is the interesting part of the conversation for me.

Nowadays, you are more likely to meet someone with some type of training than ever before. Access to MA is huge and the success of MMA means that alot of people have at least looked at these things. My bouncer friends say that they are now dealing with 'trained' fighters more than when i was working. So getting to profitiancy fast is a real factor and should not be underestimated, if of course, fighting skill is a priority.

Yi Quan has alot to offer outside of purely fighting of course. Maybe the old arts should focus on their other amazing strengths and play down the claims to some martial superiority, simply because they are old. Every time a lowly combat sports practitioner pummels an TMA practitioner things look all the worse for their future, and it they were to die out it would be a shame.

Combatively, the question i always ask myself is, how would Guo Yun Shen fair against a modern UFC champion.... it is an interesting thought.

Chris.

[everything]

This fascination with "it's old" and somehow better is too often taken to the absurd. We see this in sports all the time. Who is the GOAT? Is it Jordan (yes)? Is it LeBron James? Is it Pele? Maradona? Messi?

At least in the sports debates usually people end up agreeing there is no way to know, and assuming something old or something modern is better doesn't necessarily make sense.

So why are people so absurd in MA? Or do we just think they are? Maybe the yiquan guy is intelligently expanding his horizons and not making any assumptions about anything, and we read whatever the hell we damn well please into his intentions.

[Wanderingdragon]

Hopefully, If anything he tested his understanding and took notes.

[Wanderingdragon]

https://youtu.be/rpK37Lsf7XI

Same technique, better understanding

[Steve James]

The difference I notice most in these demonstrations and challenges is that only fighter knows or tries to attack. I don't know about Yiquan, but that controversial TCC v mma bout is an example.

I think the fault of being reactive instead of active, as Chris points out, is clear.

[Tiga Pukul]

What strikes me is that the Yi Quan practitioner has next to no real footwork and using defensive mindset (blocking, deflecting). It seems to me like this is already loosing from the first movement. If you want to play the sparring game at least be proficient at it. If you play more of a 'streetfighting game', as in attacking straight from the first movement, you have to seize that opportunity. I don't see any of that happening. Back to the drawing board. Do you want to defensively respond to attacks of the opponent or immediately attack?

[Wanderingdragon]

If you understand yiquan you know that it is only A strike. Defense and offense are non existant

[Steve James]

Are you referring to the video or do you mean that in Yiquan all movements can be/are offensive and defense? But, I didn't notice effective defense or offense in the video. To me, good offense is also good defense. However, good defense doesn't imply good offense. Offense and defense can be simultaneous. Inevitably, it is about the individuals and their training.