* Internal...

The following typical threads that plague martial arts sites will get moved here if not just deleted: 1 - My style is better than Your style" - 2 - "Internal & External" - 3 - Personal attacks - 4 - Threads that start well, but degenerate into a spiral of nonsense.

Re: * Internal...

Postby D_Glenn on Sat Jul 05, 2014 3:59 pm

bailewen wrote:Glen,

And I find the topic interesting enough and your "theories" worth discussing. Even with the context you have added though, that just makes a "school of thought" and still a long way from "fact".

Change you posting style...or not. It's not big deal to me. I'm just saying that I see where Segs is coming from. His criticism is really not that far out of left field is all.

Ok.

Like I said to Shawn, I will abide, or rather I will try to abide. But I honestly don't know how to even go about it.

Since you brought up 'Bolang Jin', here's an old post from that thread, plus it has some of the other things mentioned. So maybe you can insert some edits that would make it compliant with what you, Finny, and Shawn are asking:

D_Glenn wrote:We can never really know the actual history and the links between the different lineages of Chinese Martial Arts. We can make deductions about the sources but even that is difficult because it relies on finding similar practices and teachings, which because they were martial and for fighting, that it made sense to keep information close to one's heart so you're enemies wouldn't know it, and the material was kept to oral instructions, usually not written down, and the different styles sometimes used their own terminology to describe the same things. So while we can see a very similar end result of the physical practices in the various Chinese martial arts, (as the human body only functions in so many ways), but we only have a few similar connection through the written materials with the other (fairly new; late 1800s) martial styles that had come from the same, older root martial systems.

So, essentially, Baguazhang's only link to other, older martial systems is through Dong Haichuan and we can look at how he took concepts from many different Chinese martial arts and fused them into one cohesive system and because it's based around and upon the Daoist Cultivation practices, which use the Eight Trigrams to describe the cultivation practices, he named his new art after the Eight Trigrams and developed a curriculum that follows the Bagua and uses it to explain many different aspects of his whole martial system.

3、眼神内观注以沉入丹田的内气,心意使此内气沉到会阴穴,由会阴穴向后入尾闾内成片状气流样形态在向后内后臀、腰、背腔壁向上运行至大椎穴咽喉龙、双肩内腔壁向前胸腹内腔壁下行至会阴,此为一周。如此循环往复的修炼,此为“波浪劲”的法式,为乾阳顺行;内气成片状气流样从会阴穴向前少腹、大腹、前胸内腔壁运行至喉咙、向后过双肩内腔壁,沿后背、腰、臀内腔壁下行至会阴,此为一周。如此循环往复的修炼,此为“翻浪劲”的法式,为坤阴逆行。

{The normal cycle of the Daoist internal practices, and in the martial art, we sink energy to the perineum, bring it through the 'Tailbone gate' up through the 'middle gate', up the spine to the 'upper gate', then back down the front, returning to the perineum and dantian. This is the 'Bolang Jin' route and is also called the '乾阳顺行' Qian [Trigram] Yang, 'Moving With'.

The opposite route, going up the front of the abdomen, chest, throat, coming down the spine, etc. is 'Fanlang Jin' and is also called the '坤阴逆行' Kun [Trigram] Yin, 'Moving Against'.}


The structure of Baguazhang's martial system follows the Post-Heaven Bagua Symbol, and a student starts with the 乾卦 Qián Trigram ☰ which consists of simple to complex methods and techniques to strike, throw, grapple, submit, and some basic leg-attacking methods. It's strategies and tactics are also simple to more complex and the 'changes' are more mechanically/ method-based, rather than conceptual/ internally-based. All of it's varied techniques make use of 'Bolang Jin' in combination with the waist to add power to an attack.

The 坤卦 Kūn Trigram ☷ contains all the techniques, strategies, tactics, and 'changes' that make use of 'Fanlang Jin' but it doesn't really contain techniques of it's own as it's just using a 'reversal' of the techniques found in the other Trigram systems and uses 'Fanlang Jin' in combination with the waist to 'remove' (卸 Xie) the power in the opponent's attack. Because it requires a high development of internal cultivation in order to safely do 'Fanlang Jin', the changes and subsequent affect on the opponent is also of a more internal nature; more of a subtle feeling or a concept-based method to change and transform the opponent's attack, which can be immediately followed by an overt attack. Where the Qian Trigram uses continuous, overt attacks to force the opponent to try and change, adapt, transform to your attacks.

Since the Qian Trigram relies on the more natural 'Bolang Jin' the fighting/ martial and cultivation practices can be trained and developed at the same time. Where the Kun Trigram would need several years of daily cultivation practices before doing any of it's techniques.

Baguazhang consists of basic, intermediate, and advanced tactics but the practice(s) to achieve these different skills are essentially the same, as Baguazhang's 'Circle Walking'/ Zhuan Zhang (Turning Palms) is both a basic and advanced, lifelong practice. Plus, it also kills two birds with one stone/ one arrow, two eagles (一箭雙鵰) as it's developing the fighting skills and internal cultivation at the same time (when done properly).

Thanks In Advance

.
User avatar
D_Glenn
Great Old One
 
Posts: 5262
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:04 pm
Location: Denver Colorado

Re: * Internal...

Postby dspyrido on Sat Jul 05, 2014 6:07 pm

D_Glenn wrote:Like I said to Shawn, I will abide, or rather I will try to abide. But I honestly don't know how to even go about it.


Although self improvement and betterment is a wonderful thing - this is still an opinion board & you're entitled to your opinion. If toning down the posts means censoring or dumbing them down to be politically correct then that's not an improvement. So D_Glenn if you don't know how then just keep em coming as is. The others can cry to momma about it but at least the information is getting out there.

Also I've seen a lot of other posters act in a way that is flagrantly stupid & they don't contain anywhere near the same level of information on what are principles of ima (which is why were are here). More often than not they have an irrelevant agenda & are petulant at best. I'd prefer these ones disappear but that is not going to happen so we just keep rolling on.
User avatar
dspyrido
Wuji
 
Posts: 2474
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:03 am

Re: * Internal...

Postby shawnsegler on Sat Jul 05, 2014 6:58 pm

Look, I didn't mean to start a big ole shitstorm with this, and I certainly don't want DGlenn to stop posting or have to dumb down what he posts writing in some different way than he knows how to do.

The specific issues I've had with his posts over the years certainly don't come from his posts on mechanics. It's stuff about bagua history that purports that Xie's YSB somehow has the "most complete" or "most real" way of doing things and that their party line about Bagua's history is the set in stone truth. Also that tends to come with assumptions about what other systems got (through the YSB paradigm/party line/whatever) that simply don't agree with what other lineages have to say about their own history. Examples: GBZ's bagua (which focuses on the lohanquan) somehow didn't get the secret inner door training..that being their (YSB's) animal systems. Or that because Cheng schools use the same 8 character secret as their dragon system that Cheng Ting Hua only got 1/8 or less of the "complete" system which is nonsense and bullshit plain and simple. They obviously have "some" connection since they all come from the same source originally but I've heard wildly different stories from the lineages that I've been in some of those thing about the YSB people. Do I come out and say those things? Of course not, because it's incredibly rude to tell people that something they hold dear and train religiously is somehow different and less than some other branch EVEN IF YOU BELIEVE THAT! If the history was on one side or another it would be different but the fact is that every lineage has their own line on what they were taught and what they have been told is every bit as "valid" as what any other lineage has been told up to and until we get to talk to Dong Hai Chuan, Yin Fu and Cheng Ting Hua in person.


Martial artists always talk shit about each other and the point is that in a modern discussion forum stuff that is obviously hearsay is not appropriate to state without a caveat or just not brought up at all.

If you honestly can't figure out why that would bother some people it's not my job to teach anyone manners, however it should be abundantly clear from the examples I've given you here and in the other thread that all you need to do is if you have something to say about your style and how you learned it that's fine. When it comes into the purview of a lineage outside of your own rather than tell people what their systems history is simply say "in my lineage we think this or were taught this" or something similar. It's not that complicated. I was taking DGlenn at his word (and still am) that he heard me which is why I hadn't said anything else.

FWIW.

Best,

S
Last edited by shawnsegler on Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:10 pm, edited 5 times in total.
I prefer
You behind the wheel
And me the passenger
User avatar
shawnsegler
Great Old One
 
Posts: 6423
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 12:26 pm
Location: The center of things.

Re: * Internal...

Postby shawnsegler on Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:06 pm

Oh, for another quick example. In Robert Smith's original book on Bagua he writes down that "some masters think Yin Fu was taught By Cheng Ting Hua rather than Dong" which is obviously hearsay, and just as obviously bullshit and it's always bothered me. It is, however, the exact same sort of thing I'm talking about and, as rude and untrue as it is, at least Smith says "some masters say" which should show that that's really not good enough but runs on the minimal amount of scandalmongering by throwing in a caveat.

Etc etc etc...martial artists talk shit about other lineages. In the interest of civil discourse however it's nice to not talk shit to about other peoples stuff in print. It's fine to think whatever you want to in private.

Best,

S
Last edited by shawnsegler on Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I prefer
You behind the wheel
And me the passenger
User avatar
shawnsegler
Great Old One
 
Posts: 6423
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 12:26 pm
Location: The center of things.

Re: * Internal...

Postby Finny on Sat Jul 05, 2014 8:10 pm

Doc Stier wrote:Hahaha, D_Glenn! :)

I don't care what anybody says, man, I really kinda like you. ;)


I think most everyone here probably "kinda likes" Devlin - no one has said anything contrary to that?

klonk wrote:I'll say it sometimes if the matter is particularly contentious or people are acting butt-hurt. But in general it is useless waste of electrons to say:

In my opinion it hurts to be hit in the head by a boxer. In my opinion you should keep your guard up and your feet mobile. In my opinion you will need less aspirin it you do this. IMHO, YMMV. ::)


Nice one Klonk - discuss technical aspects of fighting. Clearly your opinion, and easy enough to ignore. Care to follow the topic?

Perhaps read Shawn's post above. The entirety of this discussion about Ds posting style is issues re. history and other lineages.

As I said, I don't do bagua, I don't even give two shits, was just saying I absolutely understand Shawn's point, and the post I quoted seems to be a good example of where he could say "I was told bagua was taught like this in the past..." rather than being so concrete and authoritative.

To be honest I think it's either disingenuous or outright stupidity if, having had that explained several times over the years, he, you or anyone else claims to not understand the difference between offering opinion on MA theory and practice, and making concrete statements re. a particular style's history.

As someone who doesn't study bagua, and a real history buff - I LOVE reading posts about the history of these arts - I just think it needs to be done with some consideration for others. I've seen it happen in the japanese koryu - students pass on bs versions of history that slag off certain lines, with no real understanding of what they're talking about, simply parroting something they've been told.

But in any event, it seems a pretty simple thing to understand. So I'll be out.
User avatar
Finny
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1448
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:16 pm

Re: * Internal...

Postby D_Glenn on Sat Jul 05, 2014 8:39 pm

Finny wrote:As I said, I don't do bagua, I don't even give two shits, was just saying I absolutely understand Shawn's point, and the post I quoted seems to be a good example of where he could say "I was told bagua was taught like this in the past..." rather than being so concrete and authoritative.

To be honest I think it's either disingenuous or outright stupidity if, having had that explained several times over the years, he, you or anyone else claims to not understand the difference between offering opinion on MA theory and practice, and making concrete statements re. a particular style's history.

As someone who doesn't study bagua, and a real history buff - I LOVE reading posts about the history of these arts - I just think it needs to be done with some consideration for others. I've seen it happen in the japanese koryu - students pass on bs versions of history that slag off certain lines, with no real understanding of what they're talking about, simply parroting something they've been told.

But in any event, it seems a pretty simple thing to understand. So I'll be out.

The post about Chuan Zhang (64 penetrating palms) is something that I've explained before. Cheng Ting Hua learned some it. Ma Gui, Ma Weiqi, Yin Fu, Song Changrong, Shi Jidong, essentially everybody who studied with Dong Haichuan was made to learn it. It's kind of like Praying Mantis, as it's seeking fast arm strikes instead of power. The Chuan Zhang that has been passed down, is internal, as all these people were inner door students, and were shown how to then do the internal side of Baguazhang and then add that back into the Chuan Zhang, or intermixed. Baguazhang's specialty is this blend.

The outer door students who only learned just the Chuan Zhang from Dong Haichuan, or Yin Fu, Ma Gui, Shi Jidong, etc. probably just faded away into non-existence. I don't even know of any Yin Fu or Ma Gui styles who only do it externally. All the lineages that exist today have the internal aspects.

In our Yin Fu style of Baguazhang we call the Chuan Zhang the orthodox method, as it's like a standard recipe for how to cook wonton soup. The Animals are unorthodox and are where this standard recipe is then personalized, or your own personal preferences for flavoring are added in and the recipe becomes your own. Then your personal preferences for the flavors of spices is added back into the Chuan Zhang. It's the standard way that Yin Fu people would practice in public so that other schools would only see that 1 posture and simple Chuan Zhang forms, and then try to find ways to defeat it, only not knowing that there is a lot hidden inside of it. Like eating a bowl of, what you think is standard wonton soup, but someone had stirred in a shitload of mustard powder into the soup. :D


.
User avatar
D_Glenn
Great Old One
 
Posts: 5262
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:04 pm
Location: Denver Colorado

Re: * Internal...

Postby klonk on Sat Jul 05, 2014 8:46 pm

Finny wrote:Nice one Klonk - discuss technical aspects of fighting. Clearly your opinion, and easy enough to ignore. Care to follow the topic?

Perhaps read Shawn's post above. The entirety of this discussion about Ds posting style is issues re. history and other lineages.

As I said, I don't do bagua, I don't even give two shits, was just saying I absolutely understand Shawn's point, and the post I quoted seems to be a good example of where he could say "I was told bagua was taught like this in the past..." rather than being so concrete and authoritative.

To be honest I think it's either disingenuous or outright stupidity if, having had that explained several times over the years, he, you or anyone else claims to not understand the difference between offering opinion on MA theory and practice, and making concrete statements re. a particular style's history.

As someone who doesn't study bagua, and a real history buff - I LOVE reading posts about the history of these arts - I just think it needs to be done with some consideration for others. I've seen it happen in the japanese koryu - students pass on bs versions of history that slag off certain lines, with no real understanding of what they're talking about, simply parroting something they've been told.

But in any event, it seems a pretty simple thing to understand. So I'll be out.


I often give my opinions on history. It is not bagua history, because I know nothing about that. But some of the history I do talk about is politically charged or otherwise contentious--usually for going into un-PC areas of interpretation.

I do not fall over myself saying IMHO, YMMV or APIAPT. No need. I link to source materials (links hardly anyone follows, BTW) if what I am saying needs some attempt at substantiation. What you get is my best interpretation of the material before me. If you would like things said your way instead, knock yourself out--and say it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLW6ZM0 ... detailpage

Last edited by klonk on Sat Jul 05, 2014 8:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I define internal martial art as unusual muscle recruitment and leave it at that. If my definition is incomplete, at least it is correct so far as it goes.
User avatar
klonk
Great Old One
 
Posts: 6776
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 11:46 am

Re: * Internal...

Postby Finny on Sat Jul 05, 2014 8:49 pm

I see - cheers for clarifying - do the CTH, Ma Gui etc lines do the chuan zhang still? Are these circle walking practices? Are there any YouTube clips - I'd be very curious to see them
User avatar
Finny
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1448
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:16 pm

Re: * Internal...

Postby shawnsegler on Sat Jul 05, 2014 9:00 pm

I often give my opinions on history. It is not bagua history, because I know nothing about that. But some of the history I do talk about is politically charged or otherwise contentious--usually for going into un-PC areas of interpretation.

I do not fall over myself saying IMHO, YMMV or APIAPT. No need. I link to source materials (links hardly anyone follows. BTW) if what I am saying needs some attempt at substantiation. What you get is my best interpretation of the material before me. If you would like things said your way instead, knock yourself out--and say it.


That's nice. No one was saying anything about you or how you post...so thanks for letting us know how you do things in the non-martial arts related posts you make. We'll take it under advisement.
I prefer
You behind the wheel
And me the passenger
User avatar
shawnsegler
Great Old One
 
Posts: 6423
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 12:26 pm
Location: The center of things.

Re: * Internal...

Postby D_Glenn on Sat Jul 05, 2014 9:08 pm

shawnsegler wrote:Look, I didn't mean to start a big ole shitstorm with this, and I certainly don't want DGlenn to stop posting or have to dumb down what he posts writing in some different way than he knows how to do.

The specific issues I've had with his posts over the years certainly don't come from his posts on mechanics. It's stuff about bagua history that purports that Xie's YSB somehow has the "most complete" or "most real" way of doing things and that their party line about Bagua's history is the set in stone truth. Also that tends to come with assumptions about what other systems got (through the YSB paradigm/party line/whatever) that simply don't agree with what other lineages have to say about their own history. Examples: GBZ's bagua (which focuses on the lohanquan) somehow didn't get the secret inner door training..that being their (YSB's) animal systems. Or that because Cheng schools use the same 8 character secret as their dragon system that Cheng Ting Hua only got 1/8 or less of the "complete" system which is nonsense and bullshit plain and simple. They obviously have "some" connection since they all come from the same source originally but I've heard wildly different stories from the lineages that I've been in some of those thing about the YSB people. Do I come out and say those things? Of course not, because it's incredibly rude to tell people that something they hold dear and train religiously is somehow different and less than some other branch EVEN IF YOU BELIEVE THAT! If the history was on one side or another it would be different but the fact is that every lineage has their own line on what they were taught and what they have been told is every bit as "valid" as what any other lineage has been told up to and until we get to talk to Dong Hai Chuan, Yin Fu and Cheng Ting Hua in person.


Martial artists always talk shit about each other and the point is that in a modern discussion forum stuff that is obviously hearsay is not appropriate to state without a caveat or just not brought up at all.

If you honestly can't figure out why that would bother some people it's not my job to teach anyone manners, however it should be abundantly clear from the examples I've given you here and in the other thread that all you need to do is if you have something to say about your style and how you learned it that's fine. When it comes into the purview of a lineage outside of your own rather than tell people what their systems history is simply say "in my lineage we think this or were taught this" or something similar. It's not that complicated. I was taking DGlenn at his word (and still am) that he heard me which is why I hadn't said anything else.

Could you maybe go back through some of my past posts and dig up where I've said all that (highlighted in red), because I have been going out of my way just to specifically avoid writing anything like that.

I think you read stuff into my posts, and then presume things that aren't even written in them; and then, try to convince other members that I'm the bad guy, and my teacher goes around talking shit about other martial artists, etc. all based on your own imagined yet erroneous inferences.

This is the most frustrating thing, and the reason I'm seriously thinking about giving up posting, is that this is all coming from what you 'think I said', and then since He Jinbao is my teacher, that then ,your own imagined shit talk, is what he's also saying. And you don't even have any quotes, it's just your word that I said a bunch of shit and through guilt by association Jinbao is talking all sorts of shit.

If this was only about me, then that's one thing, but when this starts being distorted into what my teacher said, and possibly affect He Jinbao's reputation, and Dr. Xie's, then that's where it becomes a serious problem.



.
User avatar
D_Glenn
Great Old One
 
Posts: 5262
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:04 pm
Location: Denver Colorado

Re: * Internal...

Postby shawnsegler on Sat Jul 05, 2014 9:20 pm

Look, D...I'm not going to go back and sift through 8 years or whatever of stuff to pick out specifically what you said, and I've never taken anything you've said out of context to make you look like a bad guy. The reason I've got on you about is that it's stuff that really CAN"T be taken out of context like talking shit about GBT's tradition of training the Lohanquan as their main practice and saying stuff like lohanquan was only for the bodyguards at the palace and the innner door students got the animal stuff. And like I said the other day when you were talking about the 8 character thing in Cheng Ting Hua's bagua..dai, ling etc and saying "Cheng Ting Hua" got trained "the dragon" etc, etc, etc.

I've been trying to be mellow about this and like I said just "take you at your word that you'd try and tone it down" or you could not, but if you don't I'll continue to call you out on it because it's bullshit. So DO NOT get up on your hind legs at me now about how you're protecting Dr. Xie and Jinbao's lineage after all the shit you talk.

Nothing I can say here is going to affect their business and if it does it's because of stuff you've said and presented in the way you have. I've never said anything about your teachers skills, only the pushy way you sell your shit..which is TIRESOME.

So lets just let it drop now, huh.

S
Last edited by shawnsegler on Sat Jul 05, 2014 9:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.
I prefer
You behind the wheel
And me the passenger
User avatar
shawnsegler
Great Old One
 
Posts: 6423
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 12:26 pm
Location: The center of things.

Re: * Internal...

Postby D_Glenn on Sat Jul 05, 2014 9:35 pm

[***** DISCLAIMER ***** The following text and post is the sole opinion of forum member D_Glenn. It is not intended to be the opinion, or represent views and/ or theories of anyone other than forum member D_Glenn. ***** END OF DISCLAIMER *****]

Through my ongoing research into Baguazhang some of the things I've figured out: Men Baozhen and Gong Baotian were good friends. Gong Baotian was called Little Monkey but it was a term of endearment, only used by Yin Fu and other close friends as he inherited the monkey system and all the Qing Gong skills. Men Baozhen was about 6'4" and there was no way he could have learned any Qing Gong skills and the whole system that it alone entails.

Song Changrong learned a ton of things but was a really big-boned kid so he specialized in the Bear, this is why there's a huge bear influence in Yizong Gao.

Cheng Tinghua said he only learned 3 Zhangs, and zhang in this context is like quan, in that it represents a fighting system, or literally how to wield a weapon, but he was being modest, and we know he learned the whole dragon system, but he also learned the qilin, and just looking back through all the different forms and stories he also learned the Rooster/ Sparrowhawk but this is a huge amount of information and his skill was great.

So this is where Gao gets some other things like zhan, nian, lian and sui from the Qilin system.

.
Last edited by D_Glenn on Sat Jul 05, 2014 9:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
D_Glenn
Great Old One
 
Posts: 5262
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:04 pm
Location: Denver Colorado

Re: * Internal...

Postby shawnsegler on Sat Jul 05, 2014 9:37 pm

See, there you go. I don't have to look up a thing. You did it again right there.

S
I prefer
You behind the wheel
And me the passenger
User avatar
shawnsegler
Great Old One
 
Posts: 6423
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 12:26 pm
Location: The center of things.

Re: * Internal...

Postby shawnsegler on Sat Jul 05, 2014 9:45 pm

And the above "even with the addenum on top" is still saying things that you have no way of knowing. So did you get those ideas out of your own head or did your teacher tell you those things? If so do you think that might adversely affect what people think about your teacher?

You could just either not mention them, or mention that you heard them as apocryphal stories that you obviously have no way of knowing if they're true or not, but instead you still feel inclined to state them as fact and then just put in quotes that it's your opinion.

Anyway, fuck it. I'm out of this conversation. Stay and post as you wish or not. I don't even know why I care. I was really trying to help you to not look foolish and concentrate on the good part of what you post but you just won't let it lie.

I'm done.

Have a nice day.

S
I prefer
You behind the wheel
And me the passenger
User avatar
shawnsegler
Great Old One
 
Posts: 6423
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 12:26 pm
Location: The center of things.

Re: * Internal...

Postby D_Glenn on Sat Jul 05, 2014 9:46 pm

[***** DISCLAIMER ***** The following text and post is the sole opinion of forum member D_Glenn. It is not intended to be the opinion, or represent views and/ or theories of anyone other than forum member D_Glenn. ***** END OF DISCLAIMER *****]

GBT was an inner door student and learned a bunch of things but the aristocrats inside the palace weren't worthy of that material so they only were taught the baguazhang modified lohanquan, as that was his job, which he took over teaching from Yin Fu, who had taken over teaching it from Dong Haichuan. It's Baguazhang so it's different from regular lohanquan as it has a ton of internal cultivation aspects.

GBT's students outside the palace, may have learned some of that, but his disciples outside the palace were mainly taught the animal stuff and chuanzhang and it's internal aspects.

shawnsegler wrote:The reason I've got on you about is that it's stuff that really CAN"T be taken out of context like talking shit about GBT's tradition of training the Lohanquan as their main practice and saying stuff like lohanquan was only for the bodyguards at the palace and the innner door students got the animal stuff. And like I said the other day when you were talking about the 8 character thing in Cheng Ting Hua's bagua..dai, ling etc and saying "Cheng Ting Hua" got trained "the dragon" etc, etc, etc.


.
Last edited by D_Glenn on Sat Jul 05, 2014 9:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
D_Glenn
Great Old One
 
Posts: 5262
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:04 pm
Location: Denver Colorado

PreviousNext

Return to Been There Done That

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests