edededed wrote:bagua actually has many kicks (72), so there is a good chance that the turning back kick is one of them, too, although it may look slightly different.
windwalker wrote:Bhassler wrote:
It's not about "purity," it's about everything fitting together such that the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts. Something as simple as weight placement on the foot in foundational stance work can profoundly change everything about the way a person moves. Just grabbing a part from another system that does things differently doesn't work-- someone may come up with something that looks similar or accomplishes the same goal, but it is different. At a superficial level, you can say "so what, if it works?", but when you get to playing at higher levels of force, or with better fighters, or in different environments (street vs sport, etc), then all of a sudden things that didn't make a difference previously can cause failure or get you hurt. I chose my programming example in part because I know John Wang understands computers, so it could be a detailed enough analogy to get the point across, but I also chose it because software works as a system, much like a martial art should. If a person doesn't understand systems thinking at a basic or at least intuitive level, then they don't have the cognitive framework to rationally think about what they're doing when they want to go outside of an existing system and create something new.
If someone just wants to fight, or function in a particular narrow set of circumstances, then it's much easier to mix and match and pick what they want. It takes a broader perspective and actual life experience to understand that success in one tiny area doesn't qualify someone to make generalizations and proclamations about the deeper, broader world.
agree ;)
Mike Staples, a tibetan white crane shifu
http://focusingemptiness.com/index.php/ ... WhiteCrane
summed it up nicely.“A “narrow” system is one that specifies a particular response for a particular attack. So for every possible attack, there is a specific response. And because there are a great many possible attacks, there are also a great may specific techniques to counter them. With “narrow” systems, you have A LOT of techniques — like the proverbial 108 hand techniques, for instance.
A “wide” system has much fewer techniques, but looks to the changes possible for each of them. So for instance, you might only have 5 or 6 basic punches… but many “changes” associated with those punches. See also Baqua, with it’s emphasis on changes.
The way to learn how to use a wide system (like White Crane) is then to gain experience with using the limited number of techniques you have available, in a wide assortment of attacks. In other words, you have to use the techniques in sparring… a lot of sparing… so you can learn how a single punch can be used against multiple attack patterns”
Mike StaplesThe patterns of fist-fighting take their form according to matching the body, hands and steps. Forms may be different, yet their submission to [their] [N]ature is the same. The sameness, which within itself has some differences, still does not lose its sameness.
In this way the rule of the form is well understood.
CHAPTER 10 Functioning
Everything takes its own particular form before it can function. The function of a thing is intangible, but the effect produced is there. Function arises out of form; therefore, the intangible function is the servant of the form, which is concrete.
A wheel one foot in diameter can cover thousands of miles; this is form in function [i.e. the functioning of form]. Those who are skillful in making use of function do not find the effect in form (but in the function itself). .
https://www.baihepai.com/pak-hok-pai-li ... -siu-jong/
Bhassler wrote:If you were to draw a Venn diagram of what Mr. Staples is talking about and what I'm talking about, there would be a little area of overlap and large areas of two circles that don't overlap. Not what I meant at all when talking about a wider perspective, and only a rudimentary view of what constitutes a system.
marvin8 wrote:johnwang's list implies certain styles have a better technique.
Bhassler wrote:they are principle based, ...
johnwang wrote:Bhassler wrote:they are principle based, ...
If a system is principle base (or formless), do you think one can learn "flying side kick" from that system?
Bhassler wrote:
Principle based =/= Formless
This characteristic of a wave as an energy transport phenomenon distinguishes waves from other types of phenomenon. Consider a common phenomenon observed at a softball game - the collision of a bat with a ball.
A batter is able to transport energy from her to the softball by means of a bat. The batter applies a force to the bat, thus imparting energy to the bat in the form of kinetic energy. The bat then carries this energy to the softball and transports the energy to the softball upon collision. In this example, a bat is used to transport energy from the player to the softball. However, unlike wave phenomena, this phenomenon involves the transport of matter.
The bat must move from its starting location to the contact location in order to transport energy. In a wave phenomenon, energy can move from one location to another, yet the particles of matter in the medium return to their fixed position. A wave transports its energy without transporting matter.[
[/quote]A ruler or a pair of compasses can make measurements because each of them has its own particular form.
A form possesses its own nature and thus enables the functioning of itself [by means of the form]. The nature of a pair of scissors is to cut; therefore it takes the form of two blades.
The nature of an axe is to chop; consequently it takes the form of a single edge. All things take their form according to their nature.
A form without its nature is like a ruler without a measurement scale or a weighing machine without its scale, having only their empty forms without [a] functional effect.
windwalker wrote:marvin8 wrote:Those different methods and approaches (e.g., demos, forms) look more similar after getting punched in the face. In MMA, some TMAists evolve to looking similar by necessity (e.g. efficiency, speed, etc)..
Seems only to apply to those who label themselves as CMA artist.
which has been, and is questioned as to why what they trained is not reflected in use.
johnwang wrote:marvin8 wrote:johnwang's list implies certain styles have a better technique.
I will not say that "certain styles have a better technique". I'll say that "certain styles have a better training method".
For example,
- Long fist has better kicking training than Taiji has.
- Taiji has better waist training than …
- Bagua has better footwork training than ...
- XingYi has better punching training than long fist has.
Before I learned martial arts, a punch was just a punch and a kick was just a kick. When I studied martial arts, a punch was no longer just a punch and a kick was no longer just a kick. Now I understand martial arts, and a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick.
A punch is a verb, not a noun and a kick is a verb, not a noun.
Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests