You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Chinese Martial ArtsDiscuss Chinese style Martial Arts here - Chinese Kempo, Kung Fu, Jeet Kune Do, Pa Kua Chang, San Shou, Tai Chi, Wing Chun, Wushu
actually i belive that the strike is faster than involving in ground fighting so if u wanted to involve u may strike first then complete it in ground fighting . cause i believe that every opponent i meet is the best fighter in the world so i don't underestimate my oppenents and if i tried to involve with him and he was a god striker i'll find strikes to my face so i wouldn't take him in my fighting stance so i belive to open his defences with my strike .
I dont understand some of your english there. When your saying the word involve... what are you actually trying to say? And when did we start talking about ground fighting? (Your MA is focuses highly on ground fighting Im assuming because you tend to always end your things with something about ground fighting)
I dont understand some of your english there. When your saying the word involve... what are you actually trying to say? And when did we start talking about ground fighting? (Your MA is focuses highly on ground fighting Im assuming because you tend to always end your things with something about ground fighting)
will i mean by involving is engaging with him in close distance to use ground fightting . actualluy my martial art focus in equal with Striking and grappling . but i'm better in grabling and not a bad striker actually in my dojo (( my team mates call " the most annoying thing on ground " cause i'm really tough down there and d i may finish the fight in just 5 seconds once we came down " using chin na , and jiu jitsu techniques , aikido techniques and any other grabling techniques and it is hard to have a lock with me to finish me cause as i mentioned i'm really tough down there . but i'm good in striking too .
__________________
knowing is not enough u must apply , willing is not enough u must do .
IT'S NOT SHAME TO FALL THE SHAME IS NOT TO STAND HIGH AGAIN
Styles: wing chun, ninjutsu, aikido, tai chi, jkd body weapon,san shou,
Posts: 6
Home Country:
yer...mmm... well there ant nothing like blowing your own trumpet is there... I think we are being to lose sight of the issue here.. it was about the usage of chi na now we seem to be moving to striking and ground fighting?????
there are a few fact that can not be ignored.
1. you must break down your opponent
2. no throw or lock will work straigh from cold
3. the idea of chi na is to help strike vitle points of the body
while immoblizing your apponent for a split second
i dont care how good you can stirke or use ground work any body can win on any giving day thats life.
sorry for the out bust but i hate Martial artsist with egos or the "BIG i AM" at this attatuide.
it ant about how many styles you know it's understanding the body machanics behind the idea and thats all the martial arts is "AN IDEA" nothing more.
__________________
there are no secret techniques just knowedge that is not shown
Styles: Siu-Lum Hung Kuen, Kwongsai Jook Lum Ji Nam Tong Long P'ai
Posts: 134
Home Country:
Man, some of you read too little, or read too much. Either way, Chin-Na is not a style of Martial Art, it is a catagorizing of technique within an art, which breaks down further into Fun-gun, chaw-guat,bai-hei,dim-yuet,and dim-mak,etc. It contains striking within its methods, and the throwing, grappling, joint manipulation etc is a part of most traditional Martial Arts.
As far as using Chin-Na against a boxer? Of course you can. clinching is part of chin-na. From the clinch, you can then go into your locks-attacking the neck,arms, legs, waist,etc.
I dunno, is it age? But, for the record, I'm fifty, and hell yeah, I'm a grouchy old fart like 47. But I actually think it is not the chronological age, but the age in Martial Arts, meaninig the experience that causes us to get short with some of the posters here, who are not only young in years, but young in experience. Don't get offended. Some of us old farts actually have some wisdom.
Of course, by that time, alzhiemer's has set in, so we're just dottering old fools.
So STFU and change my diaper, dammnit!
Man, some of you read too little, or read too much. Either way, Chin-Na is not a style of Martial Art, it is a catagorizing of technique within an art, which breaks down further into Fun-gun, chaw-guat,bai-hei,dim-yuet,and dim-mak,etc. It contains striking within its methods, and the throwing, grappling, joint manipulation etc is a part of most traditional Martial Arts.
As far as using Chin-Na against a boxer? Of course you can. clinching is part of chin-na. From the clinch, you can then go into your locks-attacking the neck,arms, legs, waist,etc.
I dunno, is it age? But, for the record, I'm fifty, and hell yeah, I'm a grouchy old fart like 47. But I actually think it is not the chronological age, but the age in Martial Arts, meaninig the experience that causes us to get short with some of the posters here, who are not only young in years, but young in experience. Don't get offended. Some of us old farts actually have some wisdom.
Of course, by that time, alzhiemer's has set in, so we're just dottering old fools.
So STFU and change my diaper, dammnit!
It is also age old man, your'e in denial.
However, I have always maintain that Chin na, is within its own. Simply a description of methods along the same lines.
My favorite chin na technique is from a wrist grab and it's calle "old man goes fishing". you end up with the guy flung over your shoulder by his arm like your carrying a big fish.
I'm fairly new to this forum but it appears to me that every post that you (47MartialMan)post is a negative comment. You seem to doubt and question everybody. If someone says they are learning Shaolin Egle Claw why would they lie about it? What would they gain by lying about what style they are learning. Even if they lie, as long as they contribute something that is valuable then who cares.
I'm fairly new to this forum but it appears to me that every post that you (47MartialMan)post is a negative comment. You seem to doubt and question everybody. If someone says they are learning Shaolin Egle Claw why would they lie about it? What would they gain by lying about what style they are learning. Even if they lie, as long as they contribute something that is valuable then who cares.
There is too much things being taken for granted as names are displayed for merit.
Doubt and question is what one should do. I have been a martial artist, and have researched martial arts far too long than to take some words of face value.
Though I am not calling them a liar, I am questioning the authenticity and actual hierarchy of such.
Furthermore, how can a liar contribute anything but deceit?
I'm fairly new to this forum but it appears to me that every post that you (47MartialMan)post is a negative comment. You seem to doubt and question everybody.
Chin Na
it was about the usage of chi na now we seem to be moving to striking and ground fighting?????
Linear Mode
