gong fu vs. wushu

[zachsan]

but you're supposed to be learning how to become a hardened street warrior, remember? and you're training in a system that is meant for use on The Streets. it's logical to say that you will use the techniques you've trained in during your big fight. if these techniques put you at legal risk, you should train in something else, simple as that. unless of course you're so bad you can take on a shower room full of inmates with no problem.

you are right that anything involving self-defense is very murky. for instance, if you're a businessman taking your usual route home from work, you're jumped in an alley and you break a guy's arm, you'll be looked at much more favorably by a judge than if you get in a barfight and break a guy's arm. it's about lawyership, the predisposition of the judge, whether or not there are witnesses, and how you're perceived in general (not to mention varying state and local laws). but face it guys, it's pretty easy not to fight. if you got yourself into a fight that you couldn't get out of, there's a strong chance you were just being an asshole somewhere along the line, and most judges know this. so you might find yourself with the burden of proof from the get-go. suffice it to say that legally, it's a very grey area, one with potentially huge consequences for you, and one which i would much rather avoid altogether.

as far as sparring and training against resisting partners goes, there's another thread on this board that offers some interesting information on the subject. and my hands are not lethal weapons, that is exactly the kind of delusion i am trying to get people out of.

- zach

[mortal]

I am not training to become a hardened street warrior. Where did you get that? As a matter of fact the MAIN reason why I train is for physical fitness.

My wing chun class is focused on actual street use. No deadly techniques.

My angle was, wushu is not good for self defense. And its not. That is what I thought was going on.
You think I'm a tough guy for answering your off track questions. "Oh what would you do if someone had a knife?" What would YOU do? Nothing? I would take him out if I had no where to run. For that you have labeled me a thug.

Whatever. Just another internet preacher.

I hope your cardio kickboxing crav maga user friendly for the street class is going well.

[doc]

According to lipeng the xiaohongquan taught today is not the same one that has been taught for the last few hundred years at shaolin temple.

I'd be curious to see what his concept of Shao Hong Chuan is. I've seen the "hand me downs" of the pre 1928 texts on Shao Hong Chuan (through Shi De Qian), and they basically describe what I've been taught by Decheng (and what he's been taught by Shi Su Yuan), with a few very minor changes. What was taught before what was described in the pre 1928 texts is anybody's guess. Also, if you watch Shi Wan Heng do Shao Hong Chuan, it's the same.

Remember, there is a version of Shao Hong Chuan that is taught to foreigners, that is much smaller in length than the original Shao Hong Chuan. It might also be taught to the younger monks nowadays. It basically has about 20 steps, as opposed to the original 60 or so. It has most of the highlights of the original form. It is taught as a prelude to the whole Shao Hong Chuan.

[mortal]

What makes his different is there are many elbows inbetween doing the double punches. Before every double punch there is a high to low elbow then a double punch. Also there is a pulling in and locking chinna move before everypalm strike. It is very coily and snake like. There is also an anti grappling movement that I see a vague notion of in the modern shaohong quan. Basically the one he teaches has more little moves that make the form longer. I find the newer shaohong quan much easier after practicing it the traditional way.
Even continous fist. Lipengs is more flowing and you never stop and posture until the last move. In the other 2 versions you pause after every transition. He said why would you pause if it is continue fist? I had to work out the wushu habits that the other monks taught me. Traditional shaolin has a lot less in common with wushu then its modern counter part. I really do like wushu. But not when it is changing the face of shaolin.

[doc]

Also there is a pulling in and locking chinna move before everypalm strike

That's in Shao Hong Chuan. No difference. It's actually an important component of the form.

Before every double punch there is a high to low elbow then a double punch.

Not exactly sure where you're talking about. There are "double punches" whereby one fist is pointed at the other elbow in ding bu; elbows are out, with no associated elbow strikes. But as far as I can think of it right now, there are no double punches, as, you might see more commonly in Nan Chuan, for example. Unless, you're talking about in the first quarter of the form, where you do pi tui, followed by gong bu (which can be considered a "double punch", though in different directions .

[dogchow108]

Wow, lots of posts since my last time on here¡Kand that wasn¡¦t very long ago at all.

The whole debate about whether to fight due to legal reasons is pretty well known. Really, anyone who¡¦s cared to venture into this topic should know by now the trouble they can get into for proceeding to fight someone, even if it is a weapon-weilding jerk. However, this kinda strays from our earlier point, and really has nothing to do with whether or not martial arts is training to fight. I hope you're not arguing that just because fighting is legally impractical then that means martial arts is not for righting. That¡¦s like saying a sniper is not really training to kill because he can get in troble for using his sniper rifle in a bar fight and thus his training is not really for killing.

Ill say it again for those of you who havent gotten tired of hearing this: martial arts is fight training. It not just fight training, which is what distinguishes it from other types of fight training, but it is a means of acquiring fighting skills that otherwise werent there. There is an art aspect to this, yes, but it should be specifically suited for fight. If you are not training fight aspect of martial arts, then you have been conned into thinking you are doing martial arts. What you are most likely doing is practicing a form over and over again, or some kind of technique but only the visual aspect of it. Other terms I would think to use for this is motion training, posture training, routines, and dancing. This is all nice and good, really but its NOT MARTIAL ARTS. It is a martial-ISH art- an as if, pretend martial art quite precisely like wushu.

Also, to finally address the point of this thread. Literal definitions aside (obviously, wushu is not martial tecnique despite the meaning of its name), the difference between wushu and (if by gong fu you mean) traditional martial arts is that wushu is devoid of fight training whereas martial arts have evolved specifically to train that aspect in ways that other fight training regimens have not. The end goal of an art that is martial is that it should have a unique way of making you better at fighting than you were before traiing in it.

Again, there is an art aspect to this but it should be specifically suited for fight. The old shaolin monks trained in a system that made them badass fighters. They knew this, and used it quite efficiently. Everyone who¡¦s cared to find out should know why the monks are traditionally allowed to eat meat, drink alcohol and at some point had a lot of land alloted to them. Surely, an emperor would not hire a bunch of hippies who will never fight to rescue someone dear to him. if you really think that all martial arts came from shaolin, this should be food for thought for you. I don¡¦t think that they ALL necessarily did, but even those that came from the temple could not have been deviod of fighting- considering the time a lot of these thigns were developed, nobody would have wasted their precious time learning dancing. The fact that many took an interest in the temple means that it had something valuable in it. Again, consider the time- a means of survival would sound very attractive to someone with a problem in that department.

[zachsan]

dogchow -

alright, i think we pretty much agree on these things and are just saying it different ways. but two things:

if i learn how to be a sniper, i'm learning how to kill, whether or not it's legal. and if i learn how to kick ass, i'm learning how to kick ass, whether or not it's legal. but i'm a peaceful guy. i don't need to learn how to kill someone from 700 yards, and i don't need to learn how to kick ass.

what i may need at some point in the future is the ability to defend myself. so, if i would be training to do that, i would want to learn something that would keep me safe, both from the guy in front of me, and from the guys waiting for me in the prison yard, should i mess up. if all i train for is to kick ass, then when the time comes for me to use it, i just might kick ass.

my point is that, while many systems claim to be for real-world application, the application needs to be specified. is it for defending yourself in the real world, keeping in mind real-world considerations like the law; or is it for turning you into a badass in the real world, which in the end could cause more harm than good?

and second, the theoretical difference between wushu and gongfu that you specify is true. wushu is supposed to be about show, and gongfu is supposed to be about combat. but, unless someone specifically refers to their own style as "wushu", it's impossible to say what's what, because just about every style under Heaven has been accused of being wushu at one time or another (the horror!). in other words, the whole issue is a marketing tool. so, in reality, barring a few very minor exceptions (movies and such), gongfu is wushu is gongfu, and each has just about as much application to fighting as the other.

mortal -

you keep on telling me to have fun with all these things. well, for your information, my wushu tae bo cardio krav maga ayurvedic reiki slim-fast training is a blast.

- zach

[mortal]

Dogchow108 Another quality post.

The move before dingbu is the anti grappling move. I know it is included in the modern form. The prior 2 monks I trained with briefly went over this application. Without really showing the technical details of exactly how to execute it. I notice in the modern version people just swing there arm out and back then stop in dingbu. You could tell they really don't understand or care about the actual martial application. In the traditional version you punch towards your opponent then retract your arm on the same line while twisting your shoulder, sinking and turning away. Again very snake like and effective. I don't think moves like this should be left for you to figure out on your own.

The double punch is done just after the front flex kick in gongbu. It is also done from mabu.

In what lipeng considers to be the traditional version elbows are thrown with full body fajing behind them just before both double punches. In the case of mabu it is a double elbow in both directions. With gongbu it is one from the top down elbow.

[Lipster]

Is this the movement you're reffering to?

[zachsan]

on a related (and hopefully not argumentative) note, what does history tell us about the applications? that is, is there any evidence that specific applications were taught to students in the past, or were the students just told to do the forms and expected to figure them out on their own?

this is relevant, because, if the applications have only been taught as recently as the 20th century, the difference is then not really one of contemporary vs. traditional, but of "contemporary show" vs. "contemporary martial" vs. "traditional". i would especially be interested to see what doc or uwe have to say about it.

- zach

[mortal]

That is the move! Now picture throwing an overhand elbow with his left hand and then punching with the same hand.

Wushu has its place but so does traditional style.

I am sure it was all about applications years ago. It was also about iron body. Many people around shaolin deep down have the same attitude as you. If we don't have to fight for real anymore why practice for it?
So instead we will take a frame of what the art once was and just do it fast and empty. That is basically sport wushu. Lipeng asked me one time to do the forms I learned at the other schools. When I was done he said "why do the other monks teach wushu and call it shaolin?" When someone of his high level says that it makes you think you've been mislead. Almost swindled.

A wushu champion from europe started training with us. He is really good with his posturing and his kicks are technically perfect but he as no power. He does a tornado kick and lands on one foot with zero power. Also his movements are very stiff and extended. Wushu is good to know but never think it has anything remotely to do with true self defense or being a bad ass.

[zachsan]

wow, i actually agree with you on most of that. but a few things -

whether or not it was 'all about' applications in ancient china, were they taught? or was it just the forms, qigong and iron palm/body/head/whatever training? i'm still interested to find out about this.

anyway, my attitude isn't that we shouldn't train for fighting. i mean, we shouldn't train with the intention of fighting, but we should understand and develop the combat aspects of the art. also, while it seems like it might be fun, i don't train to look good, either. i train in hung gar, and we kick bags and hit bricks to build power and toughen up our hands a bit. karate-chopping a brick over and over does not look (or feel) pretty, trust me. but i have no intention of karate-chopping anyone's neck, even if i am to find myself in a fight. why do i practice this, then, you might ask? i dunno, maybe i'm a little masochistic. but really i do it because my teacher insists on it, and hell, it's his class.

my attitude is just that we should train hard and smart, whatever we train in. if a fight happens, it happens, and it doesn't really mean much of anything. we should just focus on the training.

also, how did you measure the power of the tornado kick that this guy threw? i ask this because, if it looked good, it must have been fast. and if it was a spinning kick, well, it must have involved the leg, and a spinning motion. there's no way you could do this and have no power. there are subtle variations of this basic technique that will increase your power, yes. but since force is mass times acceleration squared, if this was fast, and had the weight of at least the leg behind it, it was powerful. ask someone who's misjudged distance during a movie filming and actually gotten kicked by accident - it hurts, even if it was meant for show.

my point is that, since the basic movements remain the same, there's really not that much of a difference. i would venture to say that, "in a real fight" (no matter tired i am of that phrase), the advantage of a traditional gongfu exponent over a wushu exponent would be much less significant than, say, an advantage in size (of course this is for argument's sake because it would always come down to the individual). after all, in the fight, you're not doing things exactly as you learned them anyway, and when the focus of the wushu guy shifts from looking good to surviving, i'm sure he can adequately modify his techniques on the fly.

[mortal]

I could tell the power of the kick by the impact of his foot hitting his hand.
Not to brag but the inner crescent kick is my specialty. When I do it it sounds like a cannon.

[zachsan]

not the most scientific way of measuring it, but to be honest i don't really know what a "tornado kick" is (i'm guessing it involves flying and spinning, because, well, i'ts a guess).

anyway, a better showman could make the sound louder by slapping his foot differently, or make it seem more powerful by making a big show of his hand getting knocked back. and if you're a very bad showman, or you've never practiced that trick before, you might slightly move your hand along with the spinning motion of the rest of your body right before the impact, which would make the kick seem much less powerful. both of these would be all but imperceptible to an onlooker. so it still comes down to looking (and in this case, sounding) good.

i would suggest you have him do his tornado kick against a punching bag, and see how far it goes. i'm sure a more martially-oriented master could make the bag move farther than the wushu guy, but even done by a wushu guy, i guarantee you that bag will move.

or get a 7' tall muay thai fighter to hit it, and start running...

- zach

[dogchow108]

*nods*

well i guess that for the most part, that wraps it up for me on that subject.

next post will address shao hong chuen apps.

hey lipster, sorry i ahvent responded to that PM...i did a while back but ur inbox i guess was full. i ahve no clue about the subject, but ive seen people with them. i wouldnt waste my time trying to get a license tho. i dont know about what you asked me, but just to get a drivers license you need like 40 hours or something with an instructor. i can imagine what the other thing would be like.