Flowing Combat 2.0

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: Flowing Combat 2.0

Postby Chris McKinley on Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:49 pm

Ha! Somebody gets it. "Are you not entertained?" I think next we should get mullets, tie bandanas around our biceps, wear sleeveless muscle shirts, and throw chairs at each other.
Chris McKinley

 

Re: Flowing Combat 2.0

Postby Patrick on Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:35 am

My question is - because it has even the CM. approval - what makes this material so combaty?
Why do you (CM) - who in his own humbleness can walk through almost anybody without changing his bpm - approve of this material so
easily?
Not really interested in criticizing the material per se, but rather an astonishment from my side. Bjj, mma etc. [used mere as a hyperbole] are not combaty enough but this is?
Last edited by Patrick on Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.dhyana-fitness.at- The philosophy and practice of a healthy life
User avatar
Patrick
Wuji
 
Posts: 2336
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2009 3:52 am

Re: Flowing Combat 2.0

Postby Michael Babin on Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:47 am

I'm not sure this is an argument I want to take part in; but since I'm crabby from too much noise and mess from the construction going on outside my door all week...

Lineage can mean a great deal from the point of view of getting authentic forms and methods [if stylistic and cultural "authenticity" is important to you] and it can mean diddly-squat in terms of automatically being as good as your own teacher in that lineage, much less the Grand Top Banana that came before him or her or it.

The youtube clip of the two-person drill is no better and no worse than what one sees passed off, out-of-context, as being a useful training drill. What is demonstrated can be useful for any beginner who is studying two-person work as found in many of the internal systems. Sadly, the same methods can also be suicidal in a fight if that's all you can do. In the end, any two-person work is better than just doing solo forms and standing qigong but that's like saying that it's better to stand your ground and die when you are a peasant with a pitchfork whereas your opponent is mean and ugly, has armor, a horse, better weapons and a heap of experience as a soldier instead of as a farmer. {Sorry for the archaic example, substitute weapons-of-mass destruction or drone mounted machine guns if that turns your crank]

Copyright infringement is stealing, rationalize it all you like and most people these days do, but as Frankie Howard used to say in "Up Pompeii" -- "It's wicked to mock the afflicted!" so I won't. However, if you happen to be one of the "afflicted" keep in mind that selling someone's copyrighted material and keeping all the profits also crosses the line into being a really serious criminal act as opposed to just being someone whose ethics are slimy. If that's the case here, the copyright owner should try to do something about it instead of having third parties making insinuations on the internet.

My 2¢

P.S. Reading threads like this is entertaining and I'm not sure it should be locked as has been suggested; but it's also the kind of guilty pleasure you get from watching the couple next door have a loud argument in the summer time when the windows are open and it's too hot to bother getting up to close yours when she starts screaming "You left the lid up again, you heartless bastard, and don't think that I know you were flirting with my sister again... that bitch!"
My Website [with a link to my Youtube Channel] https://sites.google.com/view/mbtaiji/home
Michael Babin
Wuji
 
Posts: 726
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 7:26 am
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Re: Flowing Combat 2.0

Postby GaryR on Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:07 am

kreese wrote:So did you or did you not ...


No, in fact I went out of my way to help. Marcus and I had our arrangement, and that is business between him and I. Not some defamatory internet troll.

kreese wrote:The rest is opinion ...


kreese wrote: people that can't claim lineage are derisive of it, otherwise you either don't care or or it is very important to you, but in terms of looking for good teachers you look for a verifiable transmission of skills.


You misread my statement. I stated that I "don't actually care" about lineage. I am not derisive of it. If you have it, great!! It can definitely be an element of success and skill. On the other hand, as Chris mention it might not matter at all.


kreese wrote: many one-hit wonders are there whose students are just as clueless as anyone else's students. But if generation after generation there are at least a couple guys that get it and maybe even take it a step further, you know that there is something there that's alive, growing, evolving, etc.


To grow and evolve one must evaluate what they are doing and why. Test the information, not stagnate it in mystical Qi based concepts. There should be more than a "couple guys" at the end of a generation. If the lineage is as "pure" as you would like, It should be transmitting the best possible skill in the world in the most effective way.

Why are there not legions of fighters coming from these lineages? Where are they? Almost nowhere, why? Because instead of function and combat viability, people like you bury their heads into a chinese family tree they can't read, while you watch your buddies do light fixed step push hands in pink silk pajamas. In your spare time you pretend to "diagnose" people for invisible force deficiencies. It's pathetic, and it's snake-oil.

kreese wrote: requires a long time, it is not the the result of flitting about here and there and deciding that because your personal expression is different from what you were taught, that all of it is silly, even though you are basically resting on the laurels of tradition to support your own personal expression, which of course everyone has the right to share.


Evolution does require time, and effort. Personal expression and re-doing the curriculum completely are different things. Much of the material DOES rest on the "laurels". Why else would I name the arts on the front page? The Neijia material IMO are among the best in the world for stand-up fighting. Nobody "owns" these arts in that way, as you say we have the right to share. It just seems that those who try and evolve are dragged down by the lineage queens adhering to their strict ideas? How many Tai Chi studios have teachers who can fight? Why would I not do something else with it?

kreese wrote: really made no claims about lineage, either yours or mine, I just include some facts to help you understand where I'm coming from, you are again free to have your own opinion,....


I have made no lineage claims either, so I am not sure why it was an issue for you. Maybe it wasn't, I see where you are coming from, I just think you are ignorant.

kreese wrote: are an aspiring lawyer because you argue like one, you sidestep morality and talk business. Well business has ethics too, you know. It's not all about what you can get away with legally. You show basically no human emotion, more the attitude of a psychopath.


I am sorry you have a problem with the entire legal profession. Everyone hates us, until they need us... In a perfect world we wouldn't need lawyers, but we are not in a perfect world. No human emotion? I'll try and use more emoticons next time, ??? ::) :o :-* . I am a technical a writer as a product of my education. In person I am warm and friendly; 90 percent of communication is non-verbal anyhow. Add that to one-way telephone game, troll matches online, and it's a bit hard to write in emotion without some unclarity.

Psychopath?? Your personal and professional attacks are getting out of control and are outrageous. You are out of line here, I suggest you consult an attorney before posting more outrageous accusations and personal attacks.
-------

All the garbage aside. If you would like to objectively discuss my material, the presentation of my website, fine, do so.

The sharing of material and ideas is what evolves our arts. I have posted over an hour of video for discussion, and am more than willing to post more. How about you? Why don't you share something via video with the group? (maybe you have, I haven't seen it). Discussing concepts and learning from one another is the goal, not defaming each other third hand and chest-thumping. ( i never did get that private message ).

I have just put several more videos on my youtube site. Have fun tearing those apart to get us back on topic. Constructive critique would be nice, or even if you could replicate the material via video, and then demonstrate why you think I suck? That could be fun!

Anyone else is of course welcome to comment.

http://www.youtube.com/user/FlowingCombat?feature=mhee
Last edited by GaryR on Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:20 am, edited 2 times in total.
GaryR

 

Re: Flowing Combat 2.0

Postby G. Matthew Webb on Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:10 am

[quote="Michael Babin"]. . . However, if you happen to be one of the "afflicted" keep in mind that selling someone's copyrighted material and keeping all the profits also crosses the line into being a really serious criminal act as opposed to just being someone whose ethics are slimy. If that's the case here, the copyright owner should try to do something about it instead of having third parties making insinuations on the internet."

Yes, exactly. Third-party insinuations look silly. I was surprised that insinuation was brought up. It seemed, to me, to come from nowhere. Perhaps the accuser has some private grudge against Gary R or adopted some private grudge from another, as yet, unnamed source. Since most people on this board use fictitious names, I can't remember who is who, and who likes whom, and who are the bastard children, etc.

(I wrote this comment before seeing Gary R's comment to Kreese posted immediately before mine.)
Last edited by G. Matthew Webb on Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
G. Matthew Webb
Anjing
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:22 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA

Re: Flowing Combat 2.0

Postby shawnsegler on Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:11 am

Hehehehe....Mouthboxers...hehehehe!!!!
Last edited by shawnsegler on Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:12 am, 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: Flowing Combat 2.0

Postby GaryR on Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:15 am

Michael Babin wrote:
The youtube clip of the two-person drill is no better and no worse than what one sees passed off, out-of-context, as being a useful training drill. What is demonstrated can be useful for any beginner who is studying two-person work as found in many of the internal systems. Sadly, the same methods can also be suicidal in a fight if that's all you can do.


Mike, I never advocated is was anything but a beginner two person training drill. In fact it is taught just as that, the clip is depicting what is supposed to be cooperative training.

I agree with your statement, hence why contact increments up to the adrenal breaking point, with speed, power, etc. This was a raw beginner.

Best,

Gary
Last edited by GaryR on Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
GaryR

 

Re: Flowing Combat 2.0

Postby Chris McKinley on Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:22 am

paranoidandroid,

My sense of humor may be a little too dry for this context, but holy crap, you people need to lighten the fuck up. I made what was an obviously bombastic and baiting statement just to illustrate the complete waste of time this thread is, unless we're having some fun with it.

My question is - because it has even the CM. approval - what makes this material so combaty?


Does it? Based on what, exactly? I've taken no side in this thing thus far and have made absolutely no comment either way regarding the combative viability of the material in the clip. All I've done is to make fun of the whole exchange because I think it's old hat. You weren't around then, but these very same flame wars with Gary have been done a million times on RSF and the old KFO. It's frankly boring, and this one presents nothing new even as flame wars go.
Chris McKinley

 

Re: Flowing Combat 2.0

Postby BruceP on Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:49 am

3 pages on and only Ralteriia and Bhassler have attempted to directly address the ideas..and Gary doesn't even notice or can't be bothered to give legs to the ideas. This thread is worthless

In the words of J.W. Booth; "useless...useless"
Last edited by BruceP on Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
BruceP
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1953
Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 3:40 pm

Re: Flowing Combat 2.0

Postby GaryR on Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:03 am

Shooter wrote:3 pages on and only Ralteriia and Bhassler have attempted to directly address the ideas..and Gary doesn't even notice or can't be bothered to give legs to the ideas. This thread is worthless

In the words of J.W. Booth; "useless...useless"


I know, I was too busy addressing the personal attacks to be productive with the discussion. The ideas need legs, but I think they will be drowned in this noise...
GaryR

 

Re: Flowing Combat 2.0

Postby BruceP on Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:22 am

Well, this thread is like so many other threads where certain folks who really do get it, get it, and those who don't, won't or can't are left shouting from the balconies.

Ignore the noise. You have an audience of at least a few who wish to discuss the important bits. Fuck everybody else if they can't get past their petty, meaningless peeves that do nothing to advance anybody's understanding of anything.

If what you have to offer reflects the claims you're making, there are plenty of us who will see it.
Last edited by BruceP on Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
BruceP
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1953
Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 3:40 pm

Re: Flowing Combat 2.0

Postby Chris McKinley on Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:29 am

I'll toss one out. The drill illustrates the concept of blending in three dimensions instead of just two. Hint: if you can't do this in a weapons fight, you're gonna die.
Chris McKinley

 

Re: Flowing Combat 2.0

Postby chud on Thu Oct 04, 2012 12:32 pm

In before the lock. ;D
User avatar
chud
Great Old One
 
Posts: 3546
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 7:42 am
Location: Alamo City, Lone Star State

Re: Flowing Combat 2.0

Postby Ralteria on Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:38 pm

Chris McKinley wrote:I'll toss one out. The drill illustrates the concept of blending in three dimensions instead of just two. Hint: if you can't do this in a weapons fight, you're gonna die.



Yeah, including keeping the footwork active which is also tasty. Also, he's setting up to keep the other guy off balance consistently.

And fwiw, the apps are pretty textbook, which isn't really good or bad, but at least shows familiarity with the shapes being used (especially since the drill is free and spontaneous), keeping his frame and what not, which would be necessary when intent is amped up later. If you can't keep it when things are low key, you can't keep it when things are going crazy.
Hold tight your buns, if buns you do hold dear!!!! For time has come to wake and run and not give way to fear!!!!
User avatar
Ralteria
Wuji
 
Posts: 979
Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2009 3:22 pm

Re: Flowing Combat 2.0

Postby ashe on Thu Oct 04, 2012 4:45 pm

Shooter wrote:Don't read it then. Like bad tv...nobody forces you to watch it


:P

or we can hold ourselves to a higher standard and not roll around in the mud with the pigs.
Last edited by ashe on Thu Oct 04, 2012 4:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
discipline, concentration & wisdom
----------------------------------------
http://fallingleaveskungfu.com/
Facebook
Instagram
ashe
Great Old One
 
Posts: 3259
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 1:08 pm
Location: phoenix, az

PreviousNext

Return to Been There Done That

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests