Trick wrote:That’s quite some Orwellian stuff your onto there
Trick wrote:The higher purpose of engaging with resistance is to understand nonresistance.
The high understanding of nonresistance is non fighting.
First, why can't you use simple movements in attack?
"Good-looking punches often cannot hit, punches that hit are not good-looking." Many martial arts enthusiasts have such a consensus.
As for why good-looking punches can't be used, and why good punching does not have to look good.
Guys are often confused and can't figure out whether they didn't practice their kung fu or the teacher taught it wrong.
Second, the strong stress stimulus that cannot adapt to the attack is not a true traditional boxing method
Let's use the above stress theory to talk about the problem of distinguishing true and false traditional boxing.
A few years ago, I said in Fighting: Whether the boxing action is reasonable and effective can be tested by boxing and used in fighting.
That’s not a true story....or ist !?johnwang wrote:A monk spent all his time with a rich person and ignore a poor scholar. The scholar said, "I assume rich or poor should not be concerned by Buddhism." The monk said, "Concern is not concern. Not concern is concern." The scholar slaps on the monk's face and said, "Slap is not slap. Not slap is slap."
[
If good is bad and bad is good, we will confuse ourselves big time.
Trick wrote:That’s not a true story....or ist !?johnwang wrote:A monk spent all his time with a rich person and ignore a poor scholar. The scholar said, "I assume rich or poor should not be concerned by Buddhism." The monk said, "Concern is not concern. Not concern is concern." The scholar slaps on the monk's face and said, "Slap is not slap. Not slap is slap."
If good is bad and bad is good, we will confuse ourselves big time.
wayne hansen wrote:The more you practice a good looking punch the easier it is to deliver an ugly one when needed
johnwang wrote: The world can be turned upside down.
fighting is as simple as "Kill the evil and protect the good".
wayne hansen wrote:The more you practice a good looking punch the easier it is to deliver an ugly one when needed
windwalker wrote:wayne hansen wrote:The more you practice a good looking punch the easier it is to deliver an ugly one when needed
If one takes time to read or have someone translate it.
Took it to mean that "good looking" punches are whats reflected stylistically in the practice
The question asking why "ugly" looking punches the ones not reflecting what is being taught
tend to be more used or effective.
Followed by why is this so?
Rhetorically asking about how to tell "real" training from fake, suggesting some
ways to test for this.
wayne hansen wrote:Only if you don't understand what a good looking punch is
If you think a pretty punch is a good looking punch
To me a good looking punch is one with refined body mechanics
If this is not true why train at all
Why does a boxer punch a bag a million times
windwalker wrote:CMA in general is very unique in that much of what is practiced, is rarely demonstrated in freestyle usage.
Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests