Traditional Chinese Martial Arts?

SunDash · 08-23-2003, 10:47 PM

Are traditional chinese Martial Arts still effective by today's standards? Are styles like Tai Chi, and Shaolin applicable on the streets?
Can they match up to today's mixed martial arts?
Are these still "superior styles"?

I would like your opinions on them please and NO I don't believe anything I see in the movies thanks.

jules · 08-23-2003, 11:41 PM

win chun is basically a modified shao lin style.

Tom Yum · 08-24-2003, 02:05 AM

Some are. Some aren't.

The ones that are effective by today's standards have eliminated flashy moves, utilize economy of motion (shortest distance, simplest attack to target) and can be practiced with decent contact in a live, spontaneous setting.

If two instructors demonstrate techniques and the attacker assumes a stance that isn't found on the street or ring, then you might want to question the way this instructor has chosen to teach self-defense.

If the attacking demo person throws techniques without trying to make contact, then again you want to question its SD teaching.

If the attacking demo person stops moving before he/she is aggressively countered, its a yellow flag.

If the attacking demo throws the same combo again and again or attacks like a robot, its a yellow flag.

I think any martial art systems self-defense realism depends on how the instructor trains and prepares for it. If you do regular conditioning, its a plus. If you can practice self-defense techniques over, lets say a 5 minute time period with continuous action and against an aggressive attacker, its a plus.

jules · 08-24-2003, 03:02 AM

remeber that alot of martial arts in china was swept out due to the cultural revolution. The so called "shao lin" is utter bullshit. Thier monks had to come to korea because they didn't know how to perform rituals and how to say specific chants. Shao lin is no more.

karateka_101 · 08-24-2003, 03:57 AM

Most traditional Chinese Martial Arts have the potential to be effective today. As was already mentioned, it depends mainly on the way it is taught. If you are training strictly tradionally, only doing things like forms, it will probably not be effective. If you are practising a lot of partner work for self-defence, and in the right way, it should be effective.

shasan · 08-24-2003, 04:55 PM

I think that after their evolution and commercialization, the traditional arts have lost the sense of purpose they once had.

The motivation behind creating any of those arts could not have been anything but Martial/Military - i.e. to fight actual opponents who wanted to kill you.

These arts were not created with dreams of dojo franchises in the upper mid-west.

Take Boxe Francais Savate, for example, it was developed in France with the sole purpose of defending oneself in times when personal security wasn't that great in the streets of paris (I believe it was the French revolution.. not sure). For the poor people on the streets who could not afford guns and blades. It was functional when executed properly... passed down from person to person...

SO, I think ANY REAL TRADITIONAL martial arts transplanted unchanged into our time would be effective. But since they were allowed to evolve, they are no longer so.

sercuerdas · 08-25-2003, 04:03 PM

i was watching a show on the discovery channel, it showed the training at the shaolin temple. they have the kids at about five or six sparring in san shauo. so for those who train there for there whole upbringing i would say yeah the can definately fight.

shasan · 08-25-2003, 04:05 PM

yeah those shaolin dudes are crazy conditioned. You have to be to pull the stunts they pull in their 'forms'. Maybe there IS a place for forms after all

pbicmhc · 05-01-2008, 07:35 PM

I think there are two answers here. It all depends on how you want to view it.

One: if the student and/or teacher only practices for health OR the teacher is fraudulent in nature and has no practical knowledge in said art, (which leads to the ignorance of the core "martial base" that is inherent in all styles)
then I would say NO.

Two: if the student and/or teacher learns the complete art, all aspects of it, health and martial, body and mind, and then moves on to practical application of said art in as many different forums as possible, then I say yes.

Of course, all this depends on wether said person is the type that can actually apply said knowledge practically. Some can be technically correct but just seem to lack that spark needed to fully utilize their knowledge.

I have been involved with numerous instructors over the years. Some were good, some not so good. What really told the story was their students capabilities. They can be a true master in all respects but a lousy teacher.
And they can be just a serious practitioner who considers themselves just a beginner, but hell on wheels in applying their knowledge.

So my point is - its not the paintbrush that paints the picture, but the artist.
Dont judge the art until you have seen the masters strokes.

7r14ngL3Ch0k3 · 05-01-2008, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SunDash

Are traditional chinese Martial Arts still effective by today's standards? Are styles like Tai Chi, and Shaolin applicable on the streets?
Can they match up to today's mixed martial arts?
Are these still "superior styles"?

I would like your opinions on them please and NO I don't believe anything I see in the movies thanks.

No

Partially

No

Hell no.

View Poll Results: Are Traditional Chinese Martial Arts still effective today?
Yes! Chinese Martial Arts are still effective today!	8	88.89%
No those are styles of the past.	1	11.11%
Voters: 9. You may not vote on this poll

08-23-2003, 10:47 PM	#1 (permalink)
SunDash Registered User Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Someplace Posts: 12	Traditional Chinese Martial Arts? Are traditional chinese Martial Arts still effective by today's standards? Are styles like Tai Chi, and Shaolin applicable on the streets? Can they match up to today's mixed martial arts? Are these still "superior styles"? I would like your opinions on them please and NO I don't believe anything I see in the movies thanks.

08-24-2003, 03:57 AM	#5 (permalink)
karateka_101 Novice Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Sydney Posts: 26	Most traditional Chinese Martial Arts have the potential to be effective today. As was already mentioned, it depends mainly on the way it is taught. If you are training strictly tradionally, only doing things like forms, it will probably not be effective. If you are practising a lot of partner work for self-defence, and in the right way, it should be effective. __________________ "I will be happy if you understand that the essence of Martial Arts is not the strength, not the art, but that which is hidden deep within yourself." - Grandmaster Gogen Yamaguchi

08-24-2003, 04:55 PM	#6 (permalink)
shasan Registered User Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 223	I think that after their evolution and commercialization, the traditional arts have lost the sense of purpose they once had. The motivation behind creating any of those arts could not have been anything but Martial/Military - i.e. to fight actual opponents who wanted to kill you. These arts were not created with dreams of dojo franchises in the upper mid-west. Take Boxe Francais Savate, for example, it was developed in France with the sole purpose of defending oneself in times when personal security wasn't that great in the streets of paris (I believe it was the French revolution.. not sure). For the poor people on the streets who could not afford guns and blades. It was functional when executed properly... passed down from person to person... SO, I think ANY REAL TRADITIONAL martial arts transplanted unchanged into our time would be effective. But since they were allowed to evolve, they are no longer so. __________________ ------------ I hate it when people quote themselves in their sigs. - shasan.

08-25-2003, 04:05 PM	#8 (permalink)
shasan Registered User Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 223	yeah those shaolin dudes are crazy conditioned. You have to be to pull the stunts they pull in their 'forms'. Maybe there IS a place for forms after all __________________ ------------ I hate it when people quote themselves in their sigs. - shasan.

08-23-2003, 11:41 PM	#2 (permalink)
jules Registered User Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 474	win chun is basically a modified shao lin style.

08-24-2003, 02:05 AM	#3 (permalink)
Tom Yum Registered User Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Here and there. Posts: 11,189	Some are. Some aren't. The ones that are effective by today's standards have eliminated flashy moves, utilize economy of motion (shortest distance, simplest attack to target) and can be practiced with decent contact in a live, spontaneous setting. If two instructors demonstrate techniques and the attacker assumes a stance that isn't found on the street or ring, then you might want to question the way this instructor has chosen to teach self-defense. If the attacking demo person throws techniques without trying to make contact, then again you want to question its SD teaching. If the attacking demo person stops moving before he/she is aggressively countered, its a yellow flag. If the attacking demo throws the same combo again and again or attacks like a robot, its a yellow flag. I think any martial art systems self-defense realism depends on how the instructor trains and prepares for it. If you do regular conditioning, its a plus. If you can practice self-defense techniques over, lets say a 5 minute time period with continuous action and against an aggressive attacker, its a plus.

08-24-2003, 03:02 AM	#4 (permalink)
jules Registered User Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 474	remeber that alot of martial arts in china was swept out due to the cultural revolution. The so called "shao lin" is utter bullshit. Thier monks had to come to korea because they didn't know how to perform rituals and how to say specific chants. Shao lin is no more.

08-25-2003, 04:03 PM	#7 (permalink)
sercuerdas Registered User Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 160	i was watching a show on the discovery channel, it showed the training at the shaolin temple. they have the kids at about five or six sparring in san shauo. so for those who train there for there whole upbringing i would say yeah the can definately fight.

05-01-2008, 07:35 PM	#9 (permalink)
pbicmhc Registered User Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Mansfield, Ohio Posts: 7	Its the person not the art. I think there are two answers here. It all depends on how you want to view it. One: if the student and/or teacher only practices for health OR the teacher is fraudulent in nature and has no practical knowledge in said art, (which leads to the ignorance of the core "martial base" that is inherent in all styles) then I would say NO. Two: if the student and/or teacher learns the complete art, all aspects of it, health and martial, body and mind, and then moves on to practical application of said art in as many different forums as possible, then I say yes. Of course, all this depends on wether said person is the type that can actually apply said knowledge practically. Some can be technically correct but just seem to lack that spark needed to fully utilize their knowledge. I have been involved with numerous instructors over the years. Some were good, some not so good. What really told the story was their students capabilities. They can be a true master in all respects but a lousy teacher. And they can be just a serious practitioner who considers themselves just a beginner, but hell on wheels in applying their knowledge. So my point is - its not the paintbrush that paints the picture, but the artist. Dont judge the art until you have seen the masters strokes. __________________ R. Martin PBICMHC http://home.neo.rr.com/pbicmhc/Index.htm "Greatness comes to those who dare to be great, dare the strain, dare the pain."

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread: