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
Styles: Western Boxing, Tai Chi, Animal Form Kung Fu, and Wing Chun
Posts: 1,963
Home Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Them's Fighting Words
Anyway, back to the original thread. How is Chin Na different from grappling styles found in MMA. This is not an MMA vs TMA thing, but I have seen MMA fights where they could have easily broken or dislocated limbs but due to MMA ettiquette, they slowed the application of force to gain a submission.
MMA grappling is chin na in a sense. It is large body chin na used for submissions. While chin na from most Chinese systems include a bit more than that, whether good or bad. Most kung fu chin na also includes small joint manipulations, muscle and tendon rips and tears, bone and joint breaks (both spiral and straight), as well as large body chin na. Also, while most kung fu systems do have ground fighting, most chin na is focused on grappling on the feet.
MMA grappling is chin na in a sense. It is large body chin na used for submissions. While chin na from most Chinese systems include a bit more than that, whether good or bad. Most kung fu chin na also includes small joint manipulations, muscle and tendon rips and tears, bone and joint breaks (both spiral and straight), as well as large body chin na. Also, while most kung fu systems do have ground fighting, most chin na is focused on grappling on the feet.
True grappling in my oppinion has takedowns where you shoot in on your opponents legs to take them down, has submission holds, reversals, sprawling, etc.... Thats true grappling. I don't consider chin na grappling just because it has joint locks.
Styles: Western Boxing, Tai Chi, Animal Form Kung Fu, and Wing Chun
Posts: 1,963
Home Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JadeDragon
True grappling in my oppinion has takedowns where you shoot in on your opponents legs to take them down, has submission holds, reversals, sprawling, etc.... Thats true grappling. I don't consider chin na grappling just because it has joint locks.
Chin na is way more than just locks. It incorporates everything that is in "grappling." In your definition grappling is ground fighting only and I don't really agree with that. I'm not saying chin na is supurior..or inferior. I think that depends entirely upon the teacher and training methods.
True grappling in my oppinion has takedowns where you shoot in on your opponents legs to take them down, has submission holds, reversals, sprawling, etc.... Thats true grappling. I don't consider chin na grappling just because it has joint locks.
Leg shots are not the only way to secure a takedown.
Chin na is way more than just locks. It incorporates everything that is in "grappling." In your definition grappling is ground fighting only and I don't really agree with that. I'm not saying chin na is supurior..or inferior. I think that depends entirely upon the teacher and training methods.
If it incorporates everything that is in grappling then where are the leg takedowns such as single leg, double leg, ankle picks, etc....? Chin Na is a siez and controll art. You can controll your apponent through joint locks, seperating the tendon, or bone seperation but to say chin na is grappling is a far stretch IMO. I love chin na techniques and I'm in no way trying to put it down. Just don't agree with you. If you put a chin na specialist up against a grappler/wrestler I'd put my money on the grappler/wrestler.
Location: My location is so secret, I don't even know where I am.
Styles: My style is so deadly that even to read its name would kill you!
Posts: 1,009
Home Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 47MartialMan
It isnt a manner to insult.
I tend to be forthright.
I respond to which it may even offend me, my knowledge, or my opinion.
Therefore, in retrospect of opinion, two opposing, any from the opposite, could take as insult from the other.
I will never insult someone personally (unless out of hunmor) not even stooping so low as to use profanity.
I did not say you meant to be insulting but rather that others may view you as such. What a man is doing and what others percieve him to be doing can be very different things indeed. Since humanity's success as a species is based on our ability to formulate successful social interactions (as opposed to being solitary predators) I refrain from posting views that may offend my fellow humans (regardless of whether I myself consider it an offence). If I do post something I believe may offend, I attach a note to it along the lines of "this is not meant as an offense".
Location: My location is so secret, I don't even know where I am.
Styles: My style is so deadly that even to read its name would kill you!
Posts: 1,009
Home Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JadeDragon
If it incorporates everything that is in grappling then where are the leg takedowns such as single leg, double leg, ankle picks, etc....? Chin Na is a siez and controll art. You can controll your apponent through joint locks, seperating the tendon, or bone seperation but to say chin na is grappling is a far stretch IMO. I love chin na techniques and I'm in no way trying to put it down. Just don't agree with you. If you put a chin na specialist up against a grappler/wrestler I'd put my money on the grappler/wrestler.
Chin Na which means something along the lines of "to sieze" is a grappling style. In so much as it engages in grabbing, holding and controlling opponants via grappling as opposed to striking. A grappling art does not need to incorporate every grappling move in order to be considered a grappling art. To say that Chin Na is not a grappling art because it doesn't train in ground grappling (which is only one area of grappling) is like saying boxing is not a striking art because it doesn't have fly kicks. As for the Chin Na vs Wrestler, that depends on what the rules of contest or combat are and whether or not the Wrestler is the Undertaker from WWE (cus you can't beat the dead man)
I did not say you meant to be insulting but rather that others may view you as such. What a man is doing and what others percieve him to be doing can be very different things indeed. Since humanity's success as a species is based on our ability to formulate successful social interactions (as opposed to being solitary predators) I refrain from posting views that may offend my fellow humans (regardless of whether I myself consider it an offence). If I do post something I believe may offend, I attach a note to it along the lines of "this is not meant as an offense".
Hmmmn, delightfully interesting;
But one's social acceptance is another's offense/insult.....
__________________ What do I know? Since I didn't post my styles or experience, I have no experience, no knowledge, no say.
That post before mine, was that for post counting? How about the one after?
Hey, my post count has the same palaverment tone as anyone elses'
Chin Na which means something along the lines of "to sieze" is a grappling style. In so much as it engages in grabbing, holding and controlling opponants via grappling as opposed to striking. A grappling art does not need to incorporate every grappling move in order to be considered a grappling art. To say that Chin Na is not a grappling art because it doesn't train in ground grappling (which is only one area of grappling) is like saying boxing is not a striking art because it doesn't have fly kicks. As for the Chin Na vs Wrestler, that depends on what the rules of contest or combat are and whether or not the Wrestler is the Undertaker from WWE (cus you can't beat the dead man)
KUDOS! nice point......
__________________ What do I know? Since I didn't post my styles or experience, I have no experience, no knowledge, no say.
That post before mine, was that for post counting? How about the one after?
Hey, my post count has the same palaverment tone as anyone elses'
Only if the social acceptance is framed in such a way as to be patronizing or condescending.
But be it that, the insult still ies within the receiver.
Simply if you were in a country and found something revolting and insulting, can you truly warrant you insult in accordance to that of the presecence of said audience?
__________________ What do I know? Since I didn't post my styles or experience, I have no experience, no knowledge, no say.
That post before mine, was that for post counting? How about the one after?
Hey, my post count has the same palaverment tone as anyone elses'
Location: My location is so secret, I don't even know where I am.
Styles: My style is so deadly that even to read its name would kill you!
Posts: 1,009
Home Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 47MartialMan
But be it that, the insult still ies within the receiver.
Simply if you were in a country and found something revolting and insulting, can you truly warrant you insult in accordance to that of the presecence of said audience?
Now I wish I hadn't changed my philosophy major to a major in history. You argue with reasoning and form far superior to my own. Probably should take my ball and go home but then how would I learn? So I shall try to post a reply.
No I do not believe that in the case of patronizing acceptance that the insult lies only within the reciever. The act of phrasing acceptance in a patronizing manner is an intended insult in and of itself. Even if the reciever did not take it as an insult, does not change the fact that the poster's intent was to insult the reciever.
__________________ The Master said, "I will not be concerned at men's not knowing me, I will be concerned at my own lack of ability."
(Confucius).
"If you're Enlightened and you know it, clap one hand." (Famous Zen saying)
Now I wish I hadn't changed my philosophy major to a major in history. You argue with reasoning and form far superior to my own. Probably should take my ball and go home but then how would I learn? So I shall try to post a reply.
No I do not believe that in the case of patronizing acceptance that the insult lies only within the reciever. The act of phrasing acceptance in a patronizing manner is an intended insult in and of itself. Even if the reciever did not take it as an insult, does not change the fact that the poster's intent was to insult the reciever.
But, when the person giving such insult, is not trying to insult and the receiver takes it as such, rather giver or receiver, the insult is viewed from a different perspective. (beauty in the eye of the beholder)
__________________ What do I know? Since I didn't post my styles or experience, I have no experience, no knowledge, no say.
That post before mine, was that for post counting? How about the one after?
Hey, my post count has the same palaverment tone as anyone elses'
Chin Na
Linear Mode
