dedicated to the discussion of the chinese internal martial arts of xingyiquan, baguazhang, taijiquan, related arts, and anything else best discussed over a bottle of rum
kreese wrote:So did you or did you not ...
kreese wrote:The rest is opinion ...
kreese wrote: people that can't claim lineage are derisive of it, otherwise you either don't care or or it is very important to you, but in terms of looking for good teachers you look for a verifiable transmission of skills.
kreese wrote: many one-hit wonders are there whose students are just as clueless as anyone else's students. But if generation after generation there are at least a couple guys that get it and maybe even take it a step further, you know that there is something there that's alive, growing, evolving, etc.
kreese wrote: requires a long time, it is not the the result of flitting about here and there and deciding that because your personal expression is different from what you were taught, that all of it is silly, even though you are basically resting on the laurels of tradition to support your own personal expression, which of course everyone has the right to share.
kreese wrote: really made no claims about lineage, either yours or mine, I just include some facts to help you understand where I'm coming from, you are again free to have your own opinion,....
kreese wrote: are an aspiring lawyer because you argue like one, you sidestep morality and talk business. Well business has ethics too, you know. It's not all about what you can get away with legally. You show basically no human emotion, more the attitude of a psychopath.
Michael Babin wrote:
The youtube clip of the two-person drill is no better and no worse than what one sees passed off, out-of-context, as being a useful training drill. What is demonstrated can be useful for any beginner who is studying two-person work as found in many of the internal systems. Sadly, the same methods can also be suicidal in a fight if that's all you can do.
My question is - because it has even the CM. approval - what makes this material so combaty?
Shooter wrote:3 pages on and only Ralteriia and Bhassler have attempted to directly address the ideas..and Gary doesn't even notice or can't be bothered to give legs to the ideas. This thread is worthless
In the words of J.W. Booth; "useless...useless"
Chris McKinley wrote:I'll toss one out. The drill illustrates the concept of blending in three dimensions instead of just two. Hint: if you can't do this in a weapons fight, you're gonna die.
Shooter wrote:Don't read it then. Like bad tv...nobody forces you to watch it
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests