middleway wrote:Thanks for sharing
It looks very reliant on the opponent either staying in the same range or retreating, and like it would be highly succeptable to someone entering and closing the distance. Not in my experience, the opponent has to move or get hit. The foot work is designed to put one position with out offering any targets that are in range of the opponent due to the "long arm" For me this worked very good against people who boxed, I would agree not to kick them
It is something i notice with all the long arm styles, enter in and they are completely negated.
Lama, dose have a short hand to supplement the long arm, and also one has to get past the long arm. It's not stationary nor fixed due to the foot work. I had a grappler friend of mine close the distance as you've suggested, I caught him on the way in but stopped my hand not wanting to brake his nose. He paused looked at me then picked me up and threw me out. In hindsight I should have just broken his nose.
I think maybe this is why arts like Dai Xing Yi were so renowned, they would get extremely close and hit with the power of a long arm strike in just an inch or so.
This to me would not be the advantage of using long arm, the advantage is the range, distancing, timing and foot work.
We were experimenting quite a lot, especially when we broke away from the White Crane school, and started our own school (which was eventually merged into David Chin's Hop Gar umbrella). I think I saw a kind of kindred spirit in boxing where the "short hand" was concerned. And I liked the fact that we could put on gloves on, and really pummel each other without getting too messed up. I saw much of boxing's maneuvors as following the same kind of circular ideas we were doing on a more extended platform with the long-arm. I was looking at Bruce Lee's ideas about fencing and boxing, but relative to White Crane. So it there was quite a lot of experimenting we were doing by the time you came along. And Yes, you do have to look at differing "ranges" with regard to long arm/short hand moves. Kicks were effective at the most distant range. short hand is the closest.
But it seemed to me that most non long-arm styles had a kind of dead spot between those two ranges that the long-arm filled. So White Crane had three different ranges -- One for kicks, one for long-arm, one for short hand. If someone was at the longest range... then kick him. If they were at a closer range, then hit him with the long-arm, and if he was close by, use the short-hand.
And of course the footwork (always the footwork) helped to make adjustments in those ranges by not only opening up unique angles, but placing the opponent into the best range. White Crane, as I saw it, was 3 dimensional on many levels, intricate and thought provoking. Like Mr. Long use to say... "Pretty sophisticate."
wayne hansen wrote:I'm not sure what you are saying here windy
Is this an example of good or bad lama
jaime_g wrote:Any decent grappler knows that if his striking opponent has good footwork he is going to take punish until he gets the set-up for the throw.
No one is too worried about that. Sure, you can end with a broken nose, with bruises, and quite piss off...but, if you achieve the throw, it's game over. Then you can return the broken nose and add a few broken bones
Not in my experience, the opponent has to move or get hit. The foot work is designed to put one position with out offering any targets that are in range of the opponent due to the "long arm" For me this worked very good against people who boxed, I would agree not to kick them
Lama, dose have a short hand to supplement the long arm, and also one has to get past the long arm. It's not stationary nor fixed due to the foot work. I had a grappler friend of mine close the distance as you've suggested, I caught him on the way in but stopped my hand not wanting to brake his nose. He paused looked at me then picked me up and threw me out. In hindsight I should have just broken his nose.
This to me would not be the advantage of using long arm, the advantage is the range, distancing, timing and foot work.
middleway wrote:
For clarity, i am simply sayinig that 'long arm' work has limited functionality, not that it is absent of functionality. thanks.
My experience seems to have been very different.
middleway wrote:But you are saying that the long work is combined with short arm work when an opponent closes, so you are essentially in agreement with me.
thanks.
But it seemed to me that most non long-arm styles had a kind of dead spot between those two ranges that the long-arm filled. So White Crane had three different ranges -- One for kicks, one for long-arm, one for short hand. If someone was at the longest range... then kick him. If they were at a closer range, then hit him with the long-arm, and if he was close by, use the short-hand. Mike Staples
he way I see it, it's very simple: A good long-range fighter can take out a short-range fighter before he has a chance to close the distance, while a good short-range fighter/grappler can close the distance on a long-range fighter and take him out first.
Neither fighting style is inherently superior to the other; it's about who's better at applying his chosen style, that's all.
I don't look at things as about MMA vs CMA,
never cared much for MMA but respect its skill sets and those who practice and compete.
My point being that CMA styles developed and exploited things addressing the needs of the time.
In some cases one might question whether what was developed is still relevant and why is it still practiced.
middleway wrote:he way I see it, it's very simple: A good long-range fighter can take out a short-range fighter before he has a chance to close the distance, while a good short-range fighter/grappler can close the distance on a long-range fighter and take him out first.
Neither fighting style is inherently superior to the other; it's about who's better at applying his chosen style, that's all.
Agreed .. to a point! However, and objective analysis of the availble techniuques and tactics in fighting would give us some things that work 'more' and some things that work 'less'.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests