Kano, Judo and Tim Cartmell

Discussion on the three big Chinese internals, Yiquan, Bajiquan, Piguazhang and other similar styles.

Kano, Judo and Tim Cartmell

Postby nianfong on Tue May 13, 2008 8:55 am

Posted by: GrahamBonaparte Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 7:26am
Great post on the Shen Wu forum from Tim. Rings true to me Smiley

In response to:

"When judo was formed, Kano took all the kill aspects of jujitsu out to make it a sport (safe) so in effect watered it down, the contests that took place were for sport, no killing allowed. jujitsu practioners study the whole art not just a portion. it might have been a little different if they were fighting for there lives.
i dont jab at different arts just say what i see, when you turn any art into a sport and train for sport you limit what you do to make it safe and so we see many styles that are a meer shadow of there former glory ie check out half the taiji practioners who have no concept of the fighting art."

He writes:

"The important point to remember about Kano's synthesis and modification of classical Jujutsu is that by removing the more dangerous techniques, thereby allowing for realistic training against resistance and applying a more modern methodology of teaching, his students, many with only a relatively short period of training were able to defeat the best representatives of virtually every other classical style. Why? Because a large portion of the technical repetoire in classical styles include "deadly" techniques that preclude realistic sparring practice. If you don't practice it for real, you can't do it for real.

Virtually without exception, any martial art that claims it's techniques are too "deadly" to practice in a live, fully resistive sparring format will produce students far less capable of actually fighting than styles that include practical techniques and live training, including the combat sports.

Taijiquan is a good example. Originally, the Taijiquan technical syllabus was primarily made up of throwing and standing grappling techniques. There were far less striking techniques and they were of secondary importance. There was no concept of "dim mak" or death touches. The heavy wrestling/grappling emphasis allowed Taijiquan fighters to spar full out, with little fear of infliciting serious injury. The skills developed made them formidable fighters. It's important to realize techniques that can be safely practiced live (throws and joint locks for example) can be used to cause serious injury when applied "for real" against opponents that are unprepared to be thrown and are thrown full force. Joint locks also become debilitating fight-enders when the one applying them does not stop when the receiver signals defeat."


Posted by: nianfong Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 11:27am
QFMFT. tim cartmell rules. thanks for posting this graham.

SC 4evah! Grin

FYI, is a saying in china that supports this.

san (3) nian quan, dang nian jiao

it means "3 years of fist training, is equal to the first year of shuajiao training"
Posted by: Pat Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 12:35pm
Tim nailed it. i am a big fan of that guy and i haven't even met him Grin
Posted by: Rob Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 12:40pm
I agree, that's a good post.

And in that context, what puzzles me is why those Chen style wrestling competitions always get such a lukewarm reception over here. They seem to me a great way to show who's got some actual taiji skill, but usually people just say oh that's not taiji that's wrestling, and dismiss it.

Why is that?



Posted by: charles Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 12:49pm
on May 6th, 2008, 12:40pm, Rob wrote:

And in that context, what puzzles me is why those Chen style wrestling competitions always get such a lukewarm reception over here. They seem to me a great way to show who's got some actual taiji skill, but usually people just say oh that's not taiji that's wrestling, and dismiss it.

Why is that?


Uhm, could it be because that's not taiji that's wrestling? Shocked




Posted by: Rob Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 12:56pm

So taiji has no wrestling?
Posted by: JAB Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 12:57pm
Rob-
As I have always stated, people over here (in the west I presume is what you mean) have no clue what true combatives are in regard to the "internal" martial arts! Taiji is especially poorly represented in this fashion, and perhaps it is the same over "there," as I have never been, only heard stories.
I had learned Taiji and push hands from past teachers, but never pursued it because what they taught was not combative IMO. When I met Tim and became his student I started to learn Sun Taiji, and inquired about push hands. 1/2 an hour later I was wiped out from getting tossed on my ass over and over again! I said "This is different than the PH I have been exposed to." And with a quirky smile Tim states, "I know."
Basically how I was taught PH is wrestling. The highest form of PH IMO. Students come to me and want to learn PH and then I start to wrestle them and they look confused because of the bunk they have been exposed to over "here" is not even remotely close! Now I am not saying any one way is THE way, but I can promise you this....students of mine or Tims will be much more prepared for the realities of modern combatives training for one month with us, than 95% of the others out there training PH and Taiji!
But then again mine is a biased and skewed perspective. What do I know!?
Cheers
Jake Cool
Posted by: Peacedog Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 12:57pm
There's no crying in baseball!
Posted by: Rob Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 1:16pm
Well the terminology certainly throws people sometimes. Those Chen events I was talking about are usually called push hands competitions, but I feel it'd be better to just call it wrestling, and distinguish it from the usual type of p/h, which is obviously a very important part of training in it's own right (in taiji in any case).

Posted by: charles Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 1:41pm
on May 6th, 2008, 12:56pm, Rob wrote:
So taiji has no wrestling?


Of course it does.

EDIT: but not all wrestling is Taiji.

Posted by: Buddy Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 2:25pm

God, Don't let some people on the TCC list get wind of this thread.
Posted by: Rob Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 2:28pm
Well judging by the internet forums, there seems to be a need for something. They say taiji practitioners are holding themselves aloof, they're keeping themselves pure, they don't want to be tested.

It'd be worth promoting and participating in wresting competitions just to stop the whining.

(Even with my terrible level of fitness and with no combat training to speak of, I'll put myself forward for 2 one minute rounds.)
Posted by: Rob Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 2:34pm
Oh I didn't see Buddy's post when I posted. Maybe they're saying something different on the TCC list.
Posted by: nianfong Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 2:41pm
I think buddy is saying the same thing you are, rob Wink
Posted by: Rob Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 3:54pm
on May 6th, 2008, 1:41pm, charles wrote:


EDIT: but not all wrestling is Taiji.




That's a good point, but I think it's something that can only really be discussed AFTER the event, after the bout, when I'm sweating like a pig in my dressing room.

Hopefully my teacher will be there, going over everything that happened, and helping me understand what's what.

It's a learning experience.
Posted by: Rob Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 5:27pm
Yo Nianfong

I just meant my post wouldn't make much sense if someone thought it was a response to Buddy's, since I was talking about attitudes I hear on here/Red Leaves/Chen Wired. (I never go on any other forums Cheesy)

Cheers.
Posted by: Ian Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 6:32pm
on May 6th, 2008, 12:40pm, Rob wrote:
I agree, that's a good post.

And in that context, what puzzles me is why those Chen style wrestling competitions always get such a lukewarm reception over here. They seem to me a great way to show who's got some actual taiji skill, but usually people just say oh that's not taiji that's wrestling, and dismiss it.

Why is that?





Because they tend to stand around a lot and they don't use their legs Grin
Posted by: nianfong Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 6:38pm
as a shuaijiao and taiji practitioner, I can say that the push hands competitions are usually not taiji. and they're not wrestling--they're BAD wrestling.
Posted by: Ian Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 7:02pm
That's what they look like to me.

You get people wearing shuaijiao jackets, using hard grabs, bodies bent forward (persistently. bears no resemblance to either the form or cooperative push hands)... overall it looks like they want to do shuaijiao, not taiji.

But then they stand there in zhongding, displaying hardly any footwork, and they don't use their legs to complete the throws.

So these push hands matches end up looking like perplexing, brute force, non-technical shuaijiao matches, i.e. bad wrestling.
Posted by: charles Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 7:35pm
on May 6th, 2008, 3:54pm, Rob wrote:

It's a learning experience.


Yes it teaches them predominantly how to use brute force against brute force. Whoever is faster, bigger and stronger, and sometimes has the better technique, wins.
Posted by: Rob Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 7:42pm
Well I'm sure everyone can think of a lame taiji wrestling example, but why focus on that? Why focus on the negative?

I'm thinking more of stuff like this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAicu-IPjMw

This isn't an actual competition, but more a lesson in the kind of wrestling I'm talking about. I hope I get a few lessons like this in the weeks leading up to my bout Roll Eyes , not that it'll necessarily do me much good.
Posted by: Rob Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 7:48pm
That post was responding to Ian and Fong. I'll have to get back to Charles' later.
Posted by: charles Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 8:00pm
on May 6th, 2008, 7:42pm, Rob wrote:

I'm thinking more of stuff like this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAicu-IPjMw


That's fine.

In my opinion, there is much more subtle skill displayed here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEll31fqj2M

Posted by: Formosa Neijia Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 8:15pm
on May 6th, 2008, 7:26am, GrahamBonaparte wrote:
Because a large portion of the technical repetoire in classical styles include "deadly" techniques that preclude realistic sparring practice. If you don't practice it for real, you can't do it for real.

Virtually without exception, any martial art that claims it's techniques are too "deadly" to practice in a live, fully resistive sparring format will produce students far less capable of actually fighting than styles that include practical techniques and live training, including the combat sports.


I would be much more convinced of this if Japanese warriors hadn't been cutting each other down for two thousand years without even a hint of practicing kendo.

There are ways for more destructive techniques to be practiced than what is discussed in the quote.

I agree with what Tim says about sports to a certain extent, but this one takes it a bit too far IMO.

Dave C.
Posted by: nianfong Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 11:34pm
uh I believe they actually did use shinai a long time ago. or bokken at the very least, so they'd train without live blades.

wooden/bamboo swords + armor = non-lethal combat at full force.
Posted by: GrahamBonaparte Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 12:30am
on May 6th, 2008, 8:15pm, Formosa Neijia wrote:


I would be much more convinced of this if Japanese warriors hadn't been cutting each other down for two thousand years without even a hint of practicing kendo.

Dave C.


Well, to me it sort of sounds like you're agreeing with him? Those Japanese warriors (ok, that sounds too movie fantasy for me - how about 'soldiers'?) were actually practicing it for real in battles!
Posted by: nianfong Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 12:51am
per wikipedia, shinai have been around since the Edo period:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinai

bokken (bokutoo) have been around since japanese swordsmanship has existed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bokken

both are non-lethal alternatives to the live blade.
Posted by: Eric Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 1:18am
Yes, bokuto were used for training, but there is no equivalent to sparring/wrestling in the old Japanese sword methods.
Posted by: iWalkTheCircle Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 1:33am
on May 6th, 2008, 6:38pm, nianfong wrote:
as a shuaijiao and taiji practitioner, I can say that the push hands competitions are usually not taiji. and they're not wrestling--they're BAD wrestling.


this time in taiwan I pushHands with the national champion PH people....

at standing still PH i lost very badly (feet not allow to move, no head lock, nor pulling).

at moving PH i did OK (OK meanings they push me out the circle a couple times, & I throw him a few times with headLocks).


I do think training PH while standing still is a good drill to built root and learn the basics.....



BUT to do moving TCC PH is kinda point less, why not just do SC.

cheers,
JH =)


Posted by: patrickvoid Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 2:19am
i dont get what kind of pushing hands you guys learned?
the point of pushing hands is, to issue force at the point of contact(the goal of pushing hands).
at the point you and your opponent are touching hands you are in control, if you are friendly your opponent cannot move even an inch. but if you are fighting for your live or in competition, the moment your opponent touches your hand, he is on his ass!
now why is this so hard to do?
because most people neglect STRENGTH training. im talking about whole body strength or structural strength. all the do is soft training, to be soft is neccesary to use whole body strength but alone its useless. a good way to get that kind of strength is working with heavy weapons or static push ups or ZZ with isometric work or very slow and low form training(slow and low that is the tempo;) )
if you work with a partner with the same strategy(just concentre on being soft and finding your opponents center) then its much more easier the get him on the ground or of balance. but if your partner uses strength too then the he literally blocks the way to his center and thats why you see so many people shoving each other around.








Posted by: bartekb Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 3:36am

I do not think push ups utilize coordinated body.
The problem with pushing hand I had was - he moment somebody stiffens using brute strength to oppose he should be smacked straight in the head - he lost his listening ability so it shouldn't be a problem to hit him freely , of course this is forbidden in tuishou so you can be quite successful with it using brute strengthSmiley
This is also why I always hated tuishou, especially done with strangers or people not understanding the purpose. I preferred much more to do it with controlled power palms, knees, elbows.

Posted by: Buddy Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 6:32am
" both are non-lethal alternatives to the live blade."

or not, Musashi comes to mind.
Posted by: wkfung108 Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 7:09am
If you don't think push ups require a coordinated body, you're doing them wrong. Pushups are one of the most underrated exercises out there. IMO, anyone who can get out of bed and walk unassisted should be ripping off a set every day.

I'm not a taiji guy, but it seems to me that if someone stiffens, uses brute force and loses his ability to listen, you can do any number of things to him. Yes, he DESERVES to be smacked in the head, but you should be able to also push or pull him off balance and break his stance, or to otherwise control him.

Barring strikes during pushhands seems to me to be an excellent way to force you to develop skills other than striking. I'd view the restriction as a challenge to myself--a puzzle.

Plus, it probably reduces school liability insurance rates Wink

on May 7th, 2008, 3:36am, bartekb wrote:

I do not think push ups utilize coordinated body.
The problem with pushing hand I had was - he moment somebody stiffens using brute strength to oppose he should be smacked straight in the head - he lost his listening ability so it shouldn't be a problem to hit him freely , of course this is forbidden in tuishou so you can be quite successful with it using brute strengthSmiley
This is also why I always hated tuishou, especially done with strangers or people not understanding the purpose. I preferred much more to do it with controlled power palms, knees, elbows.


Posted by: GrahamBonaparte Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 8:10am
Can you share with us your skill of co-ordinated body push ups? I thought you just kept your torso and legs straight in good form and used your arms....?
Posted by: wkfung108 Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 8:43am
Nothing mystical about it.

To keep your torso and legs straight while in a pushup position, you need to engage a variety of muscles in those areas. To keep them straight while you're actually doing a pushup, you need to coordinate the muscles with the up-down momentum you're generating.

So if you do a pushup, you're already working your whole body, and though I will concede that you shoulders, upper back, and triceps probably get the most obvious benefit, if you take the proverbial 98 lb skinny weakling and have him do nothing but pushups as training over a period of months, at the end, his core and legs will have gotten stronger as well.

A lot of the pushup variants can add to this whole body thing. Prop one (or both) ends on a swiss ball and work the legs and torso and back even more, for example. Or do what I was told is called an "iron cross" pushup (basically, do a pushup, and in the up position, rotate your body along the vertical axis until your chest is facing one side (instead of the floor), your weight is on one extended arm and one leg while the other arm extends toward the ceiling.)

By most or all definitions of "internal," pushups don't qualify as an internal exercise. But it's definitely a whole body/coordinated body exercise. And while pushups might not provide the same benefits that (for example) san ti or silk reeling provide, those exercises won't give you the same benefits that pushups give you either.

on May 7th, 2008, 8:10am, GrahamBonaparte wrote:
Can you share with us your skill of co-ordinated body push ups? I thought you just kept your torso and legs straight in good form and used your arms....?

Posted by: Rob Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 9:18am
on May 6th, 2008, 8:00pm, charles wrote:


That's fine.

In my opinion, there is much more subtle skill displayed here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEll31fqj2M



Hi Charles

I'd leave aside for now the question of subtlty. All that's important for the sake of this argument is that the clip I posted shows actual taiji skills, AND it's competition-style wrestling.

Basically most Chen Village lines seem to agree with that Tim C quote, because they practice this type of wrestling extensively. Why they value it and we don't, I don't really know.

It might be the case that here in the west we're still picking and choosing the bits of the curriculum we like and discarding the rest, instead of really taking it seriously.
Posted by: GrahamBonaparte Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 9:24am
on May 7th, 2008, 8:43am, wkfung108 wrote:
Nothing mystical about it.

To keep your torso and legs straight while in a pushup position, you need to engage a variety of muscles in those areas. To keep them straight while you're actually doing a pushup, you need to coordinate the muscles with the up-down momentum you're generating.

So if you do a pushup, you're already working your whole body, and though I will concede that you shoulders, upper back, and triceps probably get the most obvious benefit, if you take the proverbial 98 lb skinny weakling and have him do nothing but pushups as training over a period of months, at the end, his core and legs will have gotten stronger as well.

A lot of the pushup variants can add to this whole body thing. Prop one (or both) ends on a swiss ball and work the legs and torso and back even more, for example. Or do what I was told is called an "iron cross" pushup (basically, do a pushup, and in the up position, rotate your body along the vertical axis until your chest is facing one side (instead of the floor), your weight is on one extended arm and one leg while the other arm extends toward the ceiling.)

By most or all definitions of "internal," pushups don't qualify as an internal exercise. But it's definitely a whole body/coordinated body exercise. And while pushups might not provide the same benefits that (for example) san ti or silk reeling provide, those exercises won't give you the same benefits that pushups give you either.



I think the confusion lies in what you think the term "co-ordinated body" means, and what that term means to other people, especially the sort you'd find on an Internet forum about internal martial arts.
Posted by: patrickvoid Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 9:33am
do static push ups, and very slow rep push ups.
push ups just working arms is nonsense ultra
they train your arms, neck, back and abs.
what use is whole body strength if your muscles are so weak you cannot push yourself up the floor. even all your muscles together cannot issue enough force to uproot someone on his ass. you have to imagine your body as a chain.
if somewhere is a weak muscle the chain will break



Posted by: wkfung108 Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 9:40am
OK, fair enough.

So for an internal martial artist, what is a "coordinated body"? I assume from your response that there is some meaning beyond "using a large portion, if not all, of your body as an efficient, cohesive unit "?

on May 7th, 2008, 9:24am, GrahamBonaparte wrote:


I think the confusion lies in what you think the term "co-ordinated body" means, and what that term means to other people, especially the sort you'd find on an Internet forum about internal martial arts.

Posted by: patrickvoid Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 9:46am
the power comes from all muscles working in harmony, not for eg. just your shoulder muscles or just your biceps.
Posted by: JessOBrien Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 9:51am
I used to do a lot of push ups. I learned them from the Tang Shou Tao's Fu Hu Gong set. They gotta lotta pushups!!

The downside was that I was making my shoulders kinda stiff. One of my friends was whipping my ass because his arms were so limber and flexible at the shoulder. I had to quit pushups in order to work on letting go of my shoulder tension. It's helped a lot.

Not that you couldn't do pushups and have soft shoulders, but I was unable to do both, at least at that point.

-Jess O
Posted by: charles Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 9:54am
on May 7th, 2008, 9:18am, Rob wrote:
It might be the case that here in the west we're still picking and choosing the bits of the curriculum we like and discarding the rest, instead of really taking it seriously.


Could be.
Posted by: patrickvoid Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 10:08am
on May 7th, 2008, 9:51am, JessOBrien wrote:
I
The downside was that I was making my shoulders kinda stiff. One of my friends was whipping my ass because his arms were so limber and flexible at the shoulder. I had to quit pushups in order to work on letting go of my shoulder tension. It's helped a lot.


Yeah, the secret is to find a harmony between the exercises. I do about 70% the normal internal stuff and 30% exercises that work the structural strength(ZZ, push ups, heavy weapons etc.)
Posted by: strawdog Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 10:30am
How did a post about the value of combative training with a resisting partner become a post about doing push-ups?

Seriously... Roll Eyes
Posted by: JAB Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 10:47am
Because no matter where it goes, EF is still EF brother Wink
Posted by: GrahamBonaparte Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 11:20am
on May 7th, 2008, 9:40am, wkfung108 wrote:
OK, fair enough.

So for an internal martial artist, what is a "coordinated body"? I assume from your response that there is some meaning beyond "using a large portion, if not all, of your body as an efficient, cohesive unit "?



Well there is no one answer to that. Maybe look at the 'what is internal' thread in the main forum but at rough guess I'd say when you say coordinated around here it doesn't mean just using or activating various muscle groups at once, it generally is thought of as using them in harmony in a unified action, say to transmit a wave of force from the foot through the body to the hand in a relaxed manner, say in a push.
Posted by: wkfung108 Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 12:53pm
I have looked at that thread -- and am enjoying it.

But it seems to me that however we define internal, it's not the same as "coordinated." (Why use two words to refer to the exact same concept?)

I'm thinking that (again, regardless of how we define internal), internal body mechanics must involve coordinated body movement; but body movement can be coordinated without being internal. I.e., all internal movements are coordinated movements, but not all coordinated movements are internal movements.

As has been noted, pushups aren't really the point of this thread. So I'll leave it at this: I do believe that many multi-muscle exercises train and require coordinated body control and movement, including the pushup, the deadlift, and most Olympic lifts.

- Kent

on May 7th, 2008, 11:20am, GrahamBonaparte wrote:


Well there is no one answer to that. Maybe look at the 'what is internal' thread in the main forum but at rough guess I'd say when you say coordinated around here it doesn't mean just using or activating various muscle groups at once, it generally is thought of as using them in harmony in a unified action, say to transmit a wave of force from the foot through the body to the hand in a relaxed manner, say in a push.

Posted by: GrahamBonaparte Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 1:19pm
on May 7th, 2008, 12:53pm, wkfung108 wrote:

But it seems to me that however we define internal, it's not the same as "coordinated." (Why use two words to refer to the exact same concept?)



Well, to be fair I did try to explain what I meant without using the word 'internal' Grin

But enough of this, you're right. I'm off to do some press ups instead. Internal ones at that!

My doctors recommend exercise.
Posted by: Rob Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 1:33pm
Anyway, Charles... !

It's interesting to hear your teacher's perspective, but the fact remains this practice is out there in some lines, so ideally people learning the curriculum of those lines should be doing it too . In Chen Xiaoxing's school in Chen Village, for example, even the little kids are doing it and it looks like a lot of fun.


Cheers.
Posted by: bailewen Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 3:25pm
on May 6th, 2008, 7:42pm, Rob wrote:
Well I'm sure everyone can think of a lame taiji wrestling example, but why focus on that? Why focus on the negative?

I'm thinking more of stuff like this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAicu-IPjMw

This isn't an actual competition, but more a lesson in the kind of wrestling I'm talking about. I hope I get a few lessons like this in the weeks leading up to my bout Roll Eyes , not that it'll necessarily do me much good.


Very nice find. Combat applicable. "Real". I don't get the sense that that was a demo dummy at all. Felt more like a real student doing his best to keep his feet under him.

on May 6th, 2008, 8:00pm, charles wrote:


That's fine.

In my opinion, there is much more subtle skill displayed here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEll31fqj2M



Perhaps.

I don't think it so much more subtle. I think it is just more light hearted play than the other one. The first one was more serious training. The second was far less formal and more of an exploration where the first one was a clear demonstration and explanation of a technique.
Posted by: johnwang Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 5:52pm
on May 7th, 2008, 1:33am, iWalkTheCircle wrote:
this time in taiwan I pushHands with the national champion PH people....

at standing still PH i lost very badly (feet not allow to move, no head lock, nor pulling).

at moving PH i did OK (OK meanings they push me out the circle a couple times, & I throw him a few times with headLocks).
I do think training PH while standing still is a good drill to built root and learn the basics.....

BUT to do moving TCC PH is kinda point less, why not just do SC.

cheers,
JH =)

I didn't know standing still PH does not allow "pulling".

If you have dynamic rooting then you don't need static rooting. Being able to stand on snowboard solid still for 30 minutes without moving can not help you to go down that 45 degree slop with 30 miles per hour speed.

Do those national champion PH people know any counters for your head lock?
Posted by: iWalkTheCircle Posted on: May 12th, 2008, 11:11am
on May 7th, 2008, 5:52pm, johnwang wrote:

I didn't know standing still PH does not allow "pulling".

If you have dynamic rooting then you don't need static rooting. Being able to stand on snowboard solid still for 30 minutes without moving can not help you to go down that 45 degree slop with 30 miles per hour speed.

Do those national champion PH people know any counters for your head lock?


after i throw the first guy with maHua chun & headLock, followed by legBlocking....

the 2nd and 3rd student just push me away so i canNot get close for headLock.

i wish i can kick their knee to move in, but this is a unspoken NO-NO in all situations unless it is life/death/MMA.

the students did not know any good counter for a good headLock. The teacher is VERY good, I could not do anyThing to him at all.


Posted by: Rakushun Posted on: May 12th, 2008, 8:21pm
on May 12th, 2008, 11:11am, iWalkTheCircle wrote:

i wish i can kick their knee to move in.


If you wish to kick their knee to move in, you should play with MMA guys. Why play the pushhand game with taijiquan guys who do not train kicking? You should advance to playing with MMA guys where kicking is allowed and welcomed. Have fun! Grin
Posted by: JAB Posted on: Today at 8:19am
Great point bro!
User avatar
nianfong
Administrator
 
Posts: 4448
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2008 10:28 am
Location: SF Bay Area

Re: Kano, Judo and Tim Cartmell

Postby Felipe Bidó on Tue May 13, 2008 9:04 am

Thanks.
“Shut up. Your mouth is like my mother’s vagina; just a hole that disappointments come out of.” - Robert Brockway, Cracked.com
User avatar
Felipe Bidó
Founder
 
Posts: 1192
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 10:08 am

Re: Kano, Judo and Tim Cartmell

Postby CaliG on Tue May 13, 2008 11:31 pm

I used to do a lot of push ups. I learned them from the Tang Shou Tao's Fu Hu Gong set. They gotta lotta pushups!!

The downside was that I was making my shoulders kinda stiff. One of my friends was whipping my ass because his arms were so limber and flexible at the shoulder. I had to quit pushups in order to work on letting go of my shoulder tension. It's helped a lot.

Not that you couldn't do pushups and have soft shoulders, but I was unable to do both, at least at that point.

-Jess O



I think this brings us back to JW's statements on the Kettlebell thread. If you go your max then you will build strength but sacrifice speed.

Mayweather does push ups and I don't think there's anyone in the West with faster hands plus knockout power.

Then again I believe it comes down to training. Mayweather probably has spent more time on the speed bag than most of us have spent training.
CaliG

 

Re: Kano, Judo and Tim Cartmell

Postby CaliG on Tue May 13, 2008 11:32 pm

Getting back to the original post. I agree with the spirit of what Tim is saying.

That essentially TJQ was a very serious martial art.

How or why it changed in China I can't say, but I do know that there are people in China still teaching combat Taiji to this day.

But essentially you could say that today we have 2 taijis one which is strictly a martial art that has health benefits and the other a health exercise with some martial benefits.

It kind of reminds me of something I've heard my Judo teacher say. He was asking us what the difference was between Aikido and Judo, because they essentially have all the same stuff.

He went to say that the only difference is that when you throw someone in Judo it is real, but when you throw someone in Aikido your partner helps you throw them.

I think the problem is, aside from time, it takes a lot more to be a black belt in Judo than it does to be a black belt in Aikido. So a lot of people would rather do Aikido because in Aikido you can feel pretty good about your progress without dealing with the frustrations of reality then you'll encounter in Judo trying to throw a 6 foot plus man weighing 250 pounds who doesn't want to get thrown.
CaliG

 

Re: Kano, Judo and Tim Cartmell

Postby MAFAN on Sat Jun 14, 2008 5:03 am

Kano's 'Kodokan' team that beat the reps from the classical JuJutsu styles in comp to teach the police were all high ranking Jujutsu men recruited by Kano to form his Kodokan.
The 'elevation' of the classical 'clan' arts to a civilised level, suited the revisionist Meiji rule of the time.
I am probably going to get flamed for this, such his life.
Born from an egg on a mountain top.
MAFAN
Santi
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 7:19 am

Re: Kano, Judo and Tim Cartmell

Postby Little Bai on Sat Jun 14, 2008 5:14 am

MAFAN wrote:The 'elevation' of the classical 'clan' arts to a civilised level, suited the revisionist Meiji rule of the time.
I am probably going to get flamed for this, such his life.


I don't see why you should get flamed. True, people tend to think of martial arts history as seperate from the older societies and ways of thinking. But it's also true that martial arts are always connected to the social change going on, which sometimes includes concious political support or limitation. Especially in countries like China and Japan, where martial training has played an important role in the life of many people.
Little Bai
Mingjing
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 4:50 am

Re: Kano, Judo and Tim Cartmell

Postby Bodywork on Sat Jun 14, 2008 5:54 am

I think people tend to overplay their hands to make their point.
Kano recuited experienced jujutsu men to create the kodokan. Who then begin to do systematic randori to perfect their skills.
Thus it was classically learned Kata, from three major existing classical jujutsu scchools that -er-created Judo. These Kata were the techniques which were then perfected in randori in freestyle resistence. The statement of removing deadly kata to make Judo work is more complicated than a simple one liner. Does anyone know what they were? Why they needed to be removed? Can you discuss why a helmut wrap throw (that can be used freestlye I did it to Judokas plenty of time)-will kill you in competition in toew different versions; one breaking the neck one throwing you directly on your head. Or how some hip and knee attacks could cripple you. There are many techniques like this. It does little good to pooh pooh or simply parrot other mens comments with litte understanding or regard for what it truly means simply to sound knowledgable about a topic you really no nothing about because you are teacher of something else with an established name.

As for kata after the young boys parrot their friends cutting up classical or traditional school's "kata" practice. They do so...then go to their next BJJ class and do drills. Which are ...kata.

One last comment is that you can get fooled, and tooled yourself by ONLY doing randori. BJJ and JUdo are not fighting-they are sports What they are-are good training tools for resistive movement. Put them in a ring with fighters and they have not done as well. Its why Rickson left the BJJ behind went to Vale tudo. He knew fighting and strikes could take BJJ apart adn what was coming down the road.

Draeger expressed it better then anyone before or since

Think of a tree
The roots are the life.
the Bark and trunk the transmitter
the leaves the creation and full expression

Roots= Kata
trunk= Randori or crucible
Leaves are the personal techniques perfected

take away anyone part...dead art.
So drill and train,to learn techniques, then pracitice as "live as you can get"
Last edited by Bodywork on Sat Jun 14, 2008 6:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
Bodywork

 

Re: Kano, Judo and Tim Cartmell

Postby MAFAN on Sat Jun 14, 2008 6:13 am

wow, I was quite sure I would be called out and ,, well, flamed to a crisp for stating what I have on reasonable authority to be an accurate account of this transitional period in Japanese martial (civil?) arts.
great to hear others with open minds.
Born from an egg on a mountain top.
MAFAN
Santi
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 7:19 am

Re: Kano, Judo and Tim Cartmell

Postby beegs on Sat Jun 14, 2008 6:38 am

Taijiquan is a good example. Originally, the Taijiquan technical syllabus was primarily made up of throwing and standing grappling techniques. There were far less striking techniques and they were of secondary importance.

article is great,
this i disagree with, as classical taiji was about 50 percent striking and 50 throwing from my research. their is alot of throws, however strikes were of same importance.
beegs
Great Old One
 
Posts: 2005
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 8:34 am

Re: Kano, Judo and Tim Cartmell

Postby Formosa Neijia on Sat Jun 14, 2008 8:01 am

Bodywork wrote:Kano recuited experienced jujutsu men to create the kodokan. Who then begin to do systematic randori to perfect their skills.
Thus it was classically learned Kata, from three major existing classical jujutsu scchools that -er-created Judo.


Hmm...that should lead to an interesting discussion.

Dave C.
Time to put the QUAN back in taijiQUAN. Time to put the YANG back in YANG style taiji.
User avatar
Formosa Neijia
Great Old One
 
Posts: 803
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 4:10 am
Location: Taipei, Taiwan

Re: Kano, Judo and Tim Cartmell

Postby Fubo on Sat Jun 14, 2008 10:10 am

Bodywork wrote:I think people tend to overplay their hands to make their point.
Kano recuited experienced jujutsu men to create the kodokan. Who then begin to do systematic randori to perfect their skills.


Kano studied various forms of traditional Jujutsu and took out the "deadly" techniques and retained the techniques that could be practiced against fully resisting partners, and formalized them with principals he believed to be superior... "HE" created the Kodokan! And "HE" formalized the systematic randori of Kodokan Judo!

The "deadly" techniques were retained in some of the Katas so they could still be practiced and remembered.
Fubo
Wuji
 
Posts: 1286
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:13 pm

Re: Kano, Judo and Tim Cartmell

Postby Fubo on Sat Jun 14, 2008 10:17 am

nianfong wrote:Posted by: GrahamBonaparte Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 7:26am

In response to:

"When judo was formed, Kano took all the kill aspects of jujitsu out to make it a sport (safe) so in effect watered it down, the contests that took place were for sport, no killing allowed. jujitsu practioners study the whole art not just a portion. it might have been a little different if they were fighting for there lives.
i dont jab at different arts just say what i see, when you turn any art into a sport and train for sport you limit what you do to make it safe and so we see many styles that are a meer shadow of there former glory ie check out half the taiji practioners who have no concept of the fighting art."



Lol! I have a dislocated foot, torn off nails, bad shoulder and neck injury and heavily bruised body from Judo competition that says otherwise.

It's easy to feel invincible, powerful and deadly with all the "deadly" techniques when you don't have to prove it against a fully resisting opponent.
Fubo
Wuji
 
Posts: 1286
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:13 pm

Re: Kano, Judo and Tim Cartmell

Postby DeusTrismegistus on Sat Jun 14, 2008 10:39 am

Fubo wrote:
nianfong wrote:Posted by: GrahamBonaparte Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 7:26am

In response to:

"When judo was formed, Kano took all the kill aspects of jujitsu out to make it a sport (safe) so in effect watered it down, the contests that took place were for sport, no killing allowed. jujitsu practioners study the whole art not just a portion. it might have been a little different if they were fighting for there lives.
i dont jab at different arts just say what i see, when you turn any art into a sport and train for sport you limit what you do to make it safe and so we see many styles that are a meer shadow of there former glory ie check out half the taiji practioners who have no concept of the fighting art."



Lol! I have a dislocated foot, torn off nails, bad shoulder and neck injury and heavily bruised body from Judo competition that says otherwise.

It's easy to feel invincible, powerful and deadly with all the "deadly" techniques when you don't have to prove it against a fully resisting opponent.


Yea and people get hurt playing football all the time too that doesn't mean it has deadly techniques in it and is secretly a martial art.
I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a

bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle. -- Winston Churchill
User avatar
DeusTrismegistus
Wuji
 
Posts: 3702
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 5:55 am

Re: Kano, Judo and Tim Cartmell

Postby Bodywork on Sat Jun 14, 2008 11:24 am

Yea and people get hurt playing football all the time too that doesn't mean it has deadly techniques in it and is secretly a martial art.

Judo is sport/ ma oriented. Football is not. I am quite sure the lessons learned from his shiai were far more relevant than something gleaned from the grid iron.
Good Judo and BJJ are both excellent platforms to build a fighter from. They are all external but good stuff none-the-less.
On other thought. Many of the waza that were eliminated from the sport were still practiced for years at the Kodokan. And many of the classical jujutsu waza can be placed within any judo Keiko. They are cousins.
Bodywork

 

Re: Kano, Judo and Tim Cartmell

Postby Bodywork on Sat Jun 14, 2008 11:30 am

Fubo wrote:
Bodywork wrote:I think people tend to overplay their hands to make their point.
Kano recuited experienced jujutsu men to create the kodokan. Who then begin to do systematic randori to perfect their skills.


Kano studied various forms of traditional Jujutsu and took out the "deadly" techniques and retained the techniques that could be practiced against fully resisting partners, and formalized them with principals he believed to be superior... "HE" created the Kodokan! And "HE" formalized the systematic randori of Kodokan Judo!

The "deadly" techniques were retained in some of the Katas so they could still be practiced and remembered.

HE did not do it alone and from what I recall from reading in several sources never claimed he did. What HE did do was that HE formulated the idea and direction of where HE wanted it to go to reclaim the arts of jujutsu- which were dieing out in peacetime Japan and the waning of the warrior class- and to make them safer to practice and be preserved in the education system. He also invented the (Dan-I) rank by belt system. Both he and others developed the waza to fulfill his vision. You will be hard pressed to locate and get and agreement that all of the waza -this or that-were an invention of Kano's. thats absurd. Many of Judo's waza are not Kanos ot anyone elses. They are a combination of classical waza and talented men's revisions of them. Add to that the waza that were new waza created by talented students. Mifune’s invention of the triangle choke being one example.
I'm not detracting from his excellent vison and idea. Just simply acknowledging the men and the arts that he built from, and the giants who were around him.
Last edited by Bodywork on Sat Jun 14, 2008 11:37 am, edited 2 times in total.
Bodywork

 

Next

Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests