Any martial artists here?

[Big-Cat]

Considering this is a forum for a fighting game, it's natural to ask if anyone here practices some kind of martial arts. My interest in them goes back to Tekken 3 when I was about 7 or 8. I always tried imitating the moves from that game and I was pretty good at doing the famous Phoenix stance from that game.

I've had my hand in a few styles throughout the years each with varying time put into them. I started off with Tae Kwon Do at the age of 11 when my dad put my sister and I in it when he joined a new gym. My sister advanced quicker than I did, but I stayed longer up until I was a red belt while she had quit earlier. I stayed in it until I was 16 due to time constraints and I was losing interest. In 2009, at 18, my interest was restored after putting time in Street Fighter so I sought to continue with TKD when I got into college. I first signed up for the Shotokan Karate Club on campus and the prices were remarkably cheap. However, it did not last long as I did not come to care for the sensei's methods or the overly formal atmosphere of the dojo. I checked out the Tae Kwon Do club next only to find out that the club was for tournament training whereas I wanted more practical training instead. So, I wasn't learning anything for a while.

After a bad semester in my sophomore year, I was advised to take a Kinesiology class in order to pad up the GPA a bit. After looking at my options, I decided to check out the Tai Chi class that was offered since I heard of the many health benefits and decided to see what all the hubbub was about. I enjoyed this class immensely as it was very relaxing and just fun in general. I found out it would do nothing for my GPA if I passed, but I enjoyed it so much that I stayed in it. It was a good thing I did as the teacher of the class told us that her shifu was opening up a kung fu studio and even gave us the flyer for it. At the end of the semester, I was sad to see it end, and I had not been this sad to see a class end in such a long time.

Last fall in 2011, I took up on that flyer and met the man who would be my shifu today. During the summer, I did some research on what kind of style I'd like to learn and I decided that I'd learn what I wanted from the first day on. That style was monkey kung fu. How I learned things in these classes felt very natural to me. Overall, going there has to be one of the best things that has ever happened to me. It kept me sane and relieved my stress during what was perhaps my worst semester in my academic career and reading on the philosophies surrounding the martial arts made me see things from a more spiritual side and drop religion for good. That, and I've gotten so much stronger since then, nearly 30 pounds heavier and stockier (though that's me being a late bloomer).

So what about you guys? What are your experiences and how did you get there?

 

[Deleted member]

Preface:

Well, I was never very athletic as a kid since I always prided myself on my drawing skills and intellect (I was a pretentious **** before it was cool, hahaha). I was never fat, since I've got a rather fast metabolism, I just preferred to stay home and read or play vidya as opposed to going outside. I did go and play and had a lot of fun, always been rather friendly, but given the option, I'd choose to stay indoors.

Anyway, my father was very active as a kid, and he always tried to push me to be like him, more athletic more outgoing, more "Manly" if you will. He was an amateur bodybuilder and a ladies man when young, and he even won a couple local competitions. Being the eldest among my siblings, he's always put the most pressure on me to be the best I can, in all respects, and thus, he would always sign me up for different sports when growing up. However, my preference for indoor play always prevented me from ever being passionate about any of them, in fact, I had begun to hate exercise. Well, like everyone else growing up, I came across a lot of Japanese series that featured fights and martial arts and such, like The Power Rangers, Dragonball, and so on, and like everyone else, I was absolutely obsessed with these shows. Fast forward to 9th grade, and eventually my dad decides that the best way to get me inspired about sports is to use my obsession with Japanese **** as a bridge, so he signs me up for Tae Kwon Do.


My First Experience:

At first it was rough since I was generally out of shape and lacked the coordination most other fighters had (not as bad as others as I had done High School Weightlifting for 3 months), but after I earned my Orange belt, things began to get easier, and I began to really like the sport as the payoff from my hard work was evident, not only that, but I could feel like my anime heroes, training hard to become stronger, it was awesome. Not only that, but Tae-Kwon Do was a personal sport, I didn't depend on anyone else but myself for my success and I really liked that, I wasn't really competing with anyone, I was simply trying to make myself a better person, in addition all the Morals and Code and Philosophy in Tae-Kwon Do really stuck me, as it was similar to all the morals that are in most Shounen Manga. Eventually I began to have such a passion for the sport that I began to make progress much faster than all of my companions, as I was putting in extra work in simply because of how much I liked to train, until I finally earned my Black Belt a little after graduating from High School at the age of 18.

It was then that I had also discovered Parkour and began to practice it. At the same time, I signed up for the Muay Thai classes from the MMA teacher that was friends with my Sensei. I was already one of the best fighters in my dojo, and noticed how much rougher the fights in the MT classes were, and thus seeked to improve myself.

It was after my first Sparring match in the Muay Thai group, that I became aware of what a horribly unbalanced fighter I was. I was so used to the defensive long range TKD stances and techniques that I got absolutely destroyed by some of the more amateur fighters, not to mention, most of these guys had a good 40 pounds on me. It was then my Parkour training that led me to resistance training and eventually to weightlifting. At first I didn't know what I was doing so I didn't make much progress, but I did have a goal in mind, it wasn't size like my dad, it was strength. Still I followed some of my dad's advice in regard to what I should do when in the gym and had a semi-balanced mix of Compound and Isolation exercises.

Over time, my online research led me to finding many inspirations which I would follow, such as Brendan Flowers, and the notorious XMArtist Jujimufu. In fact, it was the tricking community that led me down the correct path on what I should be doing in the gym. After leaving my home for a couple months to live with my grandmother in California, I began my first real bulk, I signed up for a gym and began to seriously lift following the Westside method which focused on Heavy Weight+Low Rep Compound movements. I made lots of progress and put on a decent amount of muscle, I got a lot stronger. Sadly, I no longer had a dojo to train in, however, being a Black Belt I knew what I had to focus on as far as my MA training and thus used my accumulated knowledge and the internet to expand my abilities. My style eventually became one that blended the close range risky style of MT, with the speedy long range style of TKD, making me a very well rounded fighter.

[COLLAPSE="Me after my first bulk"]

[/COLLAPSE]

I eventually went back to Florida for a bit before moving to Spain, and managed to hit the gym with an old friend of mine who was the record setter in our State for High School weightlifting, one of my best friends, he set the record for Bench Press at 595lbs. We trained together for the time I was there, and even went back to my old dojo for a bit, eventually getting some Sparring matches with my old Sensei's both were very surprised not only at my appearance, but also my improvement.

Now:

Sadly, now that I'm in Spain I haven't been able to continue training MA. I still go out to the park every once in a while to practice what I know, but my work schedule prevents me from training at a dojo since I work during the afternoons. I still hit the gym though, and have switched my focus to that; simply gaining strength and some size as well. My routines are still Powerlifting focused, however, I've done a lot of research on Bodybuilding over the past 2 years, and plan on following in my dad's footsteps, eventually surpassing him, as he's someone I really admire and thank for having me introduced me to such a wonderful lifestyle.

For me Martial Arts are my life, it's why I don the username "ManlySpirit" as my online identity, it's certainly been a way of identifying myself as a person... No, it's how I found myself actually. There really is a lot to be said for what power is held within the self-discovery and self-improvement in Martial Arts, it really IS just like in my Chinese cartoons. At one point later in my life, I came across a series known as Gurren Lagann, during that which I was going through rough time, not knowing what to do with my life; whether I should do what the world wanted me to, or if I should follow my dreams. That show's preachyness and inspirational quotes about never giving up and always being true to what you believe in, really stuck with me. It gave me direction in what I wanted to do with my life, and that's what Martial Arts are to me, sure they're still a hobby; but also one of the reasons I'm pushing through Uni to get done what I want I must, is to eventually earn the possibility and freedom to pursue my dreams and ambitions without restriction. I am well aware of the world having NO boundaries and very much so plan doing what I desire, I know that with enough will power, anything is possible, and well, as such, Martial Arts continue to be part of that personal identity, I do want to compete some day, but it's not to measure how good I am, but rather out of the simple thrill and enjoyment I get from MA, as it stands now, it's simply something the world can't take away from me no matter how hard it tries.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

I did Tang Soo Do in middle school. Was pretty decent at it, my brother and I were the top of our class, and I even got second place in a tournament against people all possessing belts several higher than myself (not really a big deal, but I was proud of that at the time).

Then I got older, lazy, and just had to quit because I suddenly stopped wanting to go as much. Admittedly, Tang Soo Do probably isn't the most interesting choice, it isn't one you hear about too much.

For what it is worth, which isn't very much, I wish I was in martial arts and interested in it. But you know, exerting energy and stuff.

 

[Big-Cat]

Wow, Manly, you look an awful lot like Tekken's Miguel.

And you're right about self realization. I don't know what is about MA, but I had the same experience. Instead of TTGL, it was The Lion King that helped as I wasn't understanding who I was.

 

[Diddy Kong]

I wanna take up boxing classes, or kick boxing, but I never got the money. Meanwhile, a year after I first really, really noticed my shoulder injury was affecting my training, I still have moments where I feel the pain again. So I can't even lift now (and haven't done it seriously in about a year, and am still feeling my shoulders). And that sucks. Only form of excercise I get now is

Spoiler

sex

.

But seriously, would like to start some regime again soon. And start doing some material arts as well. Just am not sure what route to take. Kick boxing is so... standard. Heard boxing is more physically draining though, so might resort to that if my shoulders want it to.

 

[Big-Cat]

All of them are physically draining, Diddy.

 

[Diddy Kong]

Yeah I know, but heard boxing was more so than kick boxing. But yeah, could be bull****. All I need is my shoulders to work again. Excerise didn't help. Less excerise didn't help. And no excerise didn't help either.

Have been interessted in trying Muay Thai also. But again: never had the money.

 

[Deleted member]

Wow, Manly, you look an awful lot like Tekken's Miguel.

And you're right about self realization. I don't know what is about MA, but I had the same experience. Instead of TTGL, it was The Lion King that helped as I wasn't understanding who I was.

The Spanish Guy, of course... Hahahaha.

@Diddy

You know, Boxing and MT will destroy your shoulders simply because of how much focus of those arts fall on keeping a tight shrug, and most of your punches require shoulder rotation.

You could take a grappling art like Jiu Jutsu, or you could go for TKD, which is mostly legs. Also, all MAs are very physically draining. It's a full body exercise after all, and they require a lot of endurance and stamina.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

I took Tae Kwon Do for years. But it's been a long time since then

 

[Johnknight1]

@ Diddy
Kickboxing is way more draining, because kicks drain more energy, no matter how flexible you are.

I come from a long line of boxers. My uncle, grandfather, great-grandfather, great-great grandfather, great-great-great grandfather, and great-great-great-great grandfather were all boxers. My great-grandfather was a pro boxer for over 25 years. My grandfather split time being a pro boxer and a fashion industry worker for about 10 years. My uncle did boxing, kickboxing, muay thai, and MMA professionally for just under a decade, and was a training assistant at a few gyms in Southern California for another decade.

My uncle and grandfather trained me to have the whole basics of boxing down (that I have largely forgot), and my uncle taught me quite a few muay thai and kickboxing techniques. Apparently, according to my grandfather, I inherited my great-grandfather's strong left jab!

I was gonna do wrestling (along with football and 100% soccer) in high school, but then I got a lot of health issues in high school that prevented me from doing so.

What's funny is, dating back to my great-great grandfather, all of them, plus me, are 6 foot 1 with the same skinny build with fairly lanky arms!

But yeah, I've always wanted to learn BJJ, some more muay thai, and maybe a bit of judo.

 

[Big-Cat]

Unlike you, I don't come from a long line of fighters. The only exception was a distant relative that was a Vegas wrestler.

Like I told you before, I have the same stocky, wide build (but not fat, let's make that clear) as my great grandpa, but I'm more than likely a few inches or so taller (5'10/178 cm) than him thanks to differences in diet.

I only have around four to five months of monkey training before I likely have to leave due to graduating, but I've asked to learn the application behind the techniques before I go. After that, things are very uncertain for me, including what kind of job I'll have. I've thought of picking up Taichi again or possibly something else, but I would still like my personal style to be very flexible in movement.

 

[Kal]

I did some McDojo TKD when I was in middle school. Since then, I've done some BJJ and Muay Thai. When my income increases I will probably return to doing BJJ and Muay Thai, since I found a nice school nearby.

 

[Vermanubis]

I did TKD for a few years before moving on to Kung Fu, specifically a mixture of Northern Mantis, Long Fist and Eagle Claw. Been doing it for three years now. I personally don't consider boxing a "martial art," per se, so much as a sport, but I box, as well.

As far as how I got to each stage... TKD was my initially interest when I was young, but I'd always wanted to do Kung Fu, but never was able to find a place. When I did, I dropped TKD immediately. Kung Fu definitely changed me for the better. It gave me well-defined goals and gave me confidence, both in my ability to defend myself, and to assert control over myself. My Sifu also helped me realize the pragmatism in fighting. He'd make us think critically about what we were doing, and would always keep the curriculum in motion. Some days we'd focus on strikes, some on Chin Na, some on kicks and some on grappling. Boxing I took up just last year as a result of moving to Oregon. I do boxing primarily just for fun. I did compete, but in the area of Oregon I'm in, competing is very difficult due to the remoteness.

It's nice to see another Kung Fu person here though, Kuma. I think I remember us discussing it once. Kung Fu is just wonderful. It's the only MA I've ever seen in all of my years that has such graceful, yet effective continuity. Not to mention, it's also, in my opinion, the most circumspect, in that which, in its millennia of development, it's the most "complete" system.

@Manly: Boxing actually discourages shrugging since it makes you gas out more quickly. All the same though, boxing still isn't good for your shoulders if they're injured.

 

[Kal]

You're aware that "Kung Fu" just refers to Chinese Martial Arts in general (though I believe the actual Chinese phrase refers to any study that requires patience and commitment), right? Kung Fu is not any particular martial art.

I studied Shuai Jiao with John Wang for a bit when I lived in Austin. Pretty fun, but the art lacked a certain pragmatism. I mean, martial arts for self-defense is basically a useless notion in modern times, but this art would actively reject ground-fighting because of "all the other things we lose" (because ground-fighting is just so ****ing good that there's no point in doing a lot of the things you would do in Shuai Jiao). That's not to say that it was a bad art, as I'm sure the sifu could kick some serious ***. It just seems silly to pretend the art is about self-defense and then reject the most practical form of grappling that exists.

I also wonder why you would not call boxing a martial art. Seems as much a martial art as any other.

 

[Big-Cat]

From the looks of his first sentence, he was aware since he mentioned his "kung fu" was a mix of three styles. The word "kung fu" is actually a corruption of "gong fu" which more or less means human achievement. The word "wushu" is used when referring to martial arts in general. It can be a bit confusing at times as the term is also applied to the flashier form demonstrations. My shifu (or is it sifu?) is from China and uses the term for our training though he uses the word in the literal sense.

On the topic of ground fighting, most, if not all, Chinese martial arts were designed to protect oneself against multiple people. As such, ground fighting would probably not be the best option when you're surrounded by a bunch of people wanting to kill you. I'm not saying it's worthless, it's just that it's more for one on one fights.

And I, for one, consider boxing a martial art. I think the association with the sport variation of it may be why some consider it one and some don't. Training for sport and training for self defense (among other things) are two similar, yet very different things after all.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

It's romanized as "sifu," but is pronounced "shifu." That is correct.

The distinction between Kung Fu and wushu is also correct.

Smooth Criminal

 

[Vermanubis]

You're aware that "Kung Fu" just refers to Chinese Martial Arts in general (though I believe the actual Chinese phrase refers to any study that requires patience and commitment), right? Kung Fu is not any particular martial art.

I studied Shuai Jiao with John Wang for a bit when I lived in Austin. Pretty fun, but the art lacked a certain pragmatism. I mean, martial arts for self-defense is basically a useless notion in modern times, but this art would actively reject ground-fighting because of "all the other things we lose" (because ground-fighting is just so ****ing good that there's no point in doing a lot of the things you would do in Shuai Jiao). That's not to say that it was a bad art, as I'm sure the sifu could kick some serious ***. It just seems silly to pretend the art is about self-defense and then reject the most practical form of grappling that exists.

I also wonder why you would not call boxing a martial art. Seems as much a martial art as any other.

Yes, I'm aware. However, there <is> a central philosophy to each style that unites them all under the same family that is Kung Fu. Bruce Lee himself said in his Green Hornet interview, that <Kung Fu> was, in his opinion, the best martial art. And yes, technically it's Wushu in China.

Also, martial arts for self defense are far from useless, I feel. Like anything else, you just need a good teacher with a sense of, as you said, pragmatism, and you need to be circumspect about the techniques which you're being taught. Everything has an application, but in the right scenario. Wing Chun, for example, is something that would be a terrific supplement for when one manages to get close the opponent. In my experience boxing, one of the most common things I've noticed to happen is that when two people get too close, they'll lock arms during attempted punches and struggle to swat the other away. Knowing the angular footwork and trapping cycles of Wing Chun would be very helpful, and <very> practical in such a situation.

As I said to Kuma, one of the unifying principles of Kung Fu is that each family has a distinct continuity of movement, and more often than not, one's not trying to block everything like a superhuman, rather, is responding to every strike in an either directly or indirectly offensive way while covering the most options. This can be seen by check kicks, Wing Chun traps, the various "sao" techniques in Mantis, etc. Kuma also brought up a good point about grappling, in that which grappling's only really useful in a one-on-one situation, in which I feel, sans choice scenarios, one could just opt to run instead of fight. Though, there are Kung Fu systems that incorporate grappling as a subset of Chin Na (Mantis is an example of one).

As far as boxing goes, the reason I don't feel boxing's a martial art is because for something to be a martial art, I feel there has to be a patent philosophy and, well, "art" behind it. Boxing requires discipline, but if boxing's a martial art on those grounds alone, then so are weightlifting and running. I consider boxing a fighting sport, much like wrestling and formalized (UFC) MMA. Make no mistake, I love boxing, but I'd be remiss to say that boxing is as transformative as what I personally recognize as martial arts as opposed to fighting sports. But obviously, this is up for personal definition. The "martial" aspect is unequivocal, but the "art" aspect isn't fully fulfilled in some things to me.

Lastly, I don't think the difference between Sifu and Shifu is romanization so much as dialectic disparity. In Cantonese it's Sifu, whereas in Mandarin it's Shifu.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

Ah.

My mistake, Verm. Interesting to know.

Smooth Criminal

 

[Vermanubis]

I's okay, dood. I'll just have to throw you off of a cliff later.

Really though, I'm glad my Sifu was Sifu and not Shifu, since Shifu, ironically, as Mandarin in my opinion is way more fluid, sounds much more angular.

 

[Big-Cat]

As I said to Kuma, one of the unifying principles of Kung Fu is that each family has a distinct continuity of movement, and more often than not, one's not trying to block everything like a superhuman, rather, is responding to every strike in an either directly or indirectly offensive way while covering the most options. This can be seen by check kicks, Wing Chun traps, the various "sao" techniques in Mantis, etc.

This is also why just about every technique is designed to protect much of your body as possible, reduce the area of exposure, or help get out of stuff. For example, here's Jon Talbain as a reference.

In real life, this could be used as a grab escape if your right arm is grabbed and your quick enough with the opponent's rib cage and face hit. Likewise, Monkey has a technique for a left arm escape where you twist your wrists to you (think of a barrel roll with your hands) and pull back out with a right side kick. Likewise, there are techniques out there that use the opponent's force against them as is the core of Taichi, Judo, and Aikido.

This is actually one of my favorite things to do when I learn a technique is to figure out the applications behind them.

 

[Kal]

Yes, I'm aware. However, there <is> a central philosophy to each style that unites them all under the same family that is Kung Fu. Bruce Lee himself said in his Green Hornet interview, that <Kung Fu> was, in his opinion, the best martial art. And yes, technically it's Wushu in China.

lol Bruce Lee. Anyway, I am not aware of any "central philosophy" that unites all forms of Chinese martial arts. I'd ask for a source I guess, but it just seems like a pretty silly statement to make. There are hundreds of different Chinese martial arts.

Also, martial arts for self defense are far from useless, I feel. Like anything else, you just need a good teacher with a sense of, as you said, pragmatism, and you need to be circumspect about the techniques which you're being taught. Everything has an application, but in the right scenario. Wing Chun, for example, is something that would be a terrific supplement for when one manages to get close the opponent. In my experience boxing, one of the most common things I've noticed to happen is that when two people get too close, they'll lock arms during attempted punches and struggle to swat the other away. Knowing the angular footwork and trapping cycles of Wing Chun would be very helpful, and <very> practical in such a situation.

Right, but nearly 100% of practitioners of martial arts are eventually injured from practicing martial arts. Comparatively, most people never run into a situation where their martial arts will be useful. If you want practical self-defense (especially in the U.S.), you buy a 9mm or pepper spray. You don't spend hundreds of hours drilling scenarios that will likely never come up.

This isn't to say that there is anything wrong with martial arts. I just think you're overvaluing its usefulness by ignoring that "in the right scenario" justifies virtually anything; the scenario has to have some actual likelihood of occurring.

As far as boxing goes, the reason I don't feel boxing's a martial art is because for something to be a martial art, I feel there has to be a patent philosophy and, well, "art" behind it. Boxing requires discipline, but if boxing's a martial art on those grounds alone, then so are weightlifting and running. I consider boxing a fighting sport, much like wrestling and formalized (UFC) MMA. Make no mistake, I love boxing, but I'd be remiss to say that boxing is as transformative as what I personally recognize as martial arts as opposed to fighting sports. But obviously, this is up for personal definition. The "martial" aspect is unequivocal, but the "art" aspect isn't fully fulfilled in some things to me.

This is the sort of silliness I can't stand about "martial artists." No one thinks boxing is a martial art because it requires discipline; woodcrafting requires discipline. But boxing has all of the same characteristics of any martial art in that you train for hand-to-hand combat with a certain set of rules. Boxing also happens to be the most effective or second-most effective form of striking. It's just asinine to pretend it's somehow less of an "art" because there aren't katas or because there isn't pseudoscientific mysticism behind it.

 

[Vermanubis]

lol Bruce Lee. Anyway, I am not aware of any "central philosophy" that unites all forms of Chinese martial arts. I'd ask for a source I guess, but it just seems like a pretty silly statement to make. There are hundreds of different Chinese martial arts.

That's probably because of a lack of experience. Each style of Kung Fu has a very distinct unifying quality in their movements. Wing Chun and Mantis have very similar movements, despite being southern and northern styles respectively. The only difference is that each has a small subset of principles that distinguish them, such as the 12 principles of Mantis--plucking, slapping, hooking, etc. And by similar, I don't mean vestigial--I mean exact movements. All styles branch from Shaolin and one can tell. As for Bruce Lee, I think we can all agree that he was a Kung Fu expert, yes? That being said, he didn't see the need to make the distinction between Wing Chun and Kung Fu in his interview--that was the point being made.

Right, but nearly 100% of practitioners of martial arts are eventually injured from practicing martial arts. Comparatively, most people never run into a situation where their martial arts will be useful. If you want practical self-defense (especially in the U.S.), you buy a 9mm or pepper spray. You don't spend hundreds of hours drilling scenarios that will likely never come up.

What qualifies you to make this statement?

This isn't to say that there is anything wrong with martial arts. I just think you're overvaluing its usefulness by ignoring that "in the right scenario" justifies virtually anything; the scenario has to have some actual likelihood of occurring.

It may justify the bad to those that aren't experienced, but does the principle itself err? There're times and places for kicks, strikes, locks, blocks and grapples. Not everything has a likely application, but that's the artistic aspect of martial arts: knowing when and when not to use what you know and being intelligent about the application of that knowledge.

This is the sort of silliness I can't stand about "martial artists." No one thinks boxing is a martial art because it requires discipline; woodcrafting requires discipline. But boxing has all of the same characteristics of any martial art in that you train for hand-to-hand combat with a certain set of rules. Boxing also happens to be the most effective or second-most effective form of striking. It's just asinine to pretend it's somehow less of an "art" because there aren't katas or because there isn't pseudoscientific mysticism behind it.

You're speaking as if you're the leading expert on Martial Arts, which you're demonstrating quite to the contrary. Consideration of an art has little to do with quixotic mysticism, rather, the completeness of it. And since when do martial arts have rules? They don't. Boxing isn't designed to help people survive; it's designed for sport. Also, who said that Boxing is the best striking art? I'm a competitive boxer and I very much disagree. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that boxing is among the lowest of the striking arts in that it is incredibly limited, self-contained and prescriptive--it's called "the sweet <science> for a reason--the rules make it so there's an almost preordained response to each movement. You're demanding that your opinion is right (in a distinctly unfriendly manner, nonetheless) but you've yet to provide any credentials or practical experience that qualifies you to make these judgments, much less in such a condescending idiom. Couldn't I just as easily say that I can't stand these "modern pragmatists" who undermine the value of extensive martial arts training (not to say that's the case, but couldn't it just as easily be said?)

 

[Falconv1.0]

I took a couple years of karate/learned a decent amount in the fights I've been in. Not claiming to be some kind of bad*** or anything though lol.

On a related note, a lot of martial arts schools are total garbage and teach you all the wrong things. If it involves weird ****ing stances or something along those lines that you somehow never ever see in mma or actual combat in which both parties are intending to kill each other (military combat, for example), it's full of ****. Yes, mma isn't truly "fighting" due to the many rules and whatnot but it's pretty clear that quite a few "styles" out there get **** on by pretty basic grappling techniques.

Edit-Didn't mean to use the word most, changed to "a lot".

 

[Big-Cat]

Those weird stances are not actually meant to be used like a "normal" stance. They usually serve as a transition to go from one technique to another. A good example of this would be the famous horse riding stance. No one in their right mind would use that in a real fight except in very specific situations. Some stances are more for conditioning, as is the horse riding stance.

 

[Vermanubis]

If you don't mind me contributing to that point, what I've come to know as "Ladies' stance" in Long Fist is a transitional stance where one twists their legs so that the hind leg is braced against the calf of the lead leg. This not only allows someone to quickly duck, but explosively elbow and unwind into yet another elbow. In other words, it's meant as an efficient way to duck and simultaneously counterattack. The default stance I've been taught is feet square, with hands open covering the face and ribs.

 

[Mind Trick]

In my experience boxing, one of the most common things I've noticed to happen is that when two people get too close, they'll lock arms during attempted punches and struggle to swat the other away.

I've been taking Muay Thai for about a year now. All those different clinch techniques you learn really help to deal when this situation arises, it's also what drove me off of boxing initially, because I would see this happen so much in matches.

My teacher really encourages people to take boxing classes (and some sort of grappling defence as well, but that has never interested me that much) as well, the emphasize on footwork in boxing really makes you a more complete and stable fighter in my experience.

@Vermanubis, how would you explain (afaik) the absence of a dominating fighter in MMA events with like a hybrid Kung Fu/grappling style? I myself haven't looked to deep into the reasons, just curious on your thoughts on this.

 

[Vermanubis]

That's actually a really terrific question. In my opinion, the lack of Kung Fu fighters is due to a few reasons:

1. Kung Fu is not very common, much less with people who choose to go professional.

2. The Kung Fu schools I've personally seen have been more focused on surviving a situation than straight up beating the **** out of someone. Most of the Kung Fu practitioners I've ever met sought out Kung Fu for a great number of reasons, and few among them ever cited wanting to fight as one of them. I'd take this to mean that Kung Fu is attractive for deeper reasons to those who seek it out amid all the other arts.

3. Kung Fu has no problem with "dirty" fighting, and in fact, prides itself on such. At least in my experience with my school, we're taught willingness to do whatever it takes to stay safe and be able to stay alive. UFC rules sort of preclude a lot of things with which many Kung Fu practitioners have become comfortable with doing. Just to give an idea of <how> limited they'd feel, here's a list of UFC fouls:

Spoiler

Butting with the head
Eye gouging of any kind
Biting
Spitting at an opponent
Hair pulling
Fish hooking
Groin attacks of any kind
Putting a finger into any orifice or any cut or laceration of an opponent
Small joint manipulation
Striking downward using the point of the elbow
Striking to the spine or the back of the head
Kicking to the kidney with a heel
Throat strikes of any kind, including, without limitation, grabbing the trachea
Clawing, pinching or twisting the flesh
Grabbing the clavicle
Kicking the head of a grounded opponent
Kneeing the head of a grounded opponent
Stomping a grounded opponent
Holding the fence
Holding the shorts or gloves of an opponent
Using abusive language in fenced ring/fighting area
Engaging in any unsportsmanlike conduct that causes injury to an opponent
Attacking an opponent on or during the break
Attacking an opponent who is under the care of the referee
Attacking an opponent after the bell has sounded the end of the round
Timidity, including, without limitation, avoiding contact with an opponent, intentionally or consistently dropping the mouthpiece or faking an injury
Throwing opponent out of ring/fighting area
Flagrantly disregarding the instructions of the referee
Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck
Interference by the corner
Applying any foreign substance to the hair or body to gain an advantage

Those are the primary reasons I feel that Kung Fu hasn't been seen in competition. The most I think one will see is Sanda, which is, in my opinion, little more than glorified kickboxing with the Kung Fu label. I'll also point out that I agree that learning how to grapple is paramount, but only in response to a grappler. These rules are what I believe makes things like BJJ seem so good, when in all reality, it's just a potentially good supplement like all the other emphatic martial arts. Armbars, set-ups, triangles, and many takedowns won't work if one is allowed to bite or knee to the head, just to name a right inexhaustive few.

 

[Mind Trick]

Thanks for the reply, these seem like good and logical reasons. The biting example definitely reminds me of some Bruce Lee movie where he did just that to get out of an armbar. However, if you truly believe boxing is an inferior striking art, wouldn't more professional fighters seek out experience in several Kung Fu styles? Or do the rules limit it to such a degree, boxing is a better pick? I can definitely see things like throat striking and small joint manipulation being banned having a major impact on some styles.

Also pretty curious how sparring is handled at your school. No holds barred would be pretty gruelsome if dirty fighting is encouraged

 

[Big-Cat]

The default stance I've been taught is feet square, with hands open covering the face and ribs.

Mine's very different from that one. MKF's stance is light on the feet. This video shows how its done. It's a bit difficult for me to reference in the mirror since I'm much bulkier than the guy in the video, but the stance overall feels very natural and free moving. What's nice about it is that it's a lot easier to walk and transition to other stances like crouching, that ladies stance (based off your description of it).

And you pretty much hit the nail on explaining as to why Chinese martial arts sans Sanda rarely show up in things like UFC. I know it may sound arrogant and eletist (and I've seen my share of TMA vs. MMA debates), but those kind of things aren't a huge priority with kung fu students (or it becomes a smaller one). I remember I picked up all the styles I learned specifically so I could defend myself. Learning to fight for sport was not much of a concern as I wrote in the OP. Outside of sparring, I'll leave the arranged fighting to my fighting games. At least there you're not going to get hurt unless the opponent gets unreasonable salty.

 

[Vermanubis]

Not to say it's inferior in direct comparison to any particular style, but that there's not that much that's special about it. Boxing does what it aims to do without much error. The problem is how limited and isolated it is. A pure boxer traditionally isn't taught to deal with long-range strikes like kicks, grabs, or really anything but punches. As far as professional fighters' style choices, I can't speak for them, obviously, but boxing and grappling are arguably the two most basic and direct styles out there--you don't need to practice for years to get proficient in them, at least, enough to use with respectable competence. Kung Fu, on the other hand, is a comparatively vast system with a lot to learn, and, as you said, the rules are so limiting, that there honestly is no actual <need> to learn anything but boxing and grappling.

For example, a very common technique in Wing Chun called the Biu Gi, which involves a circular diffusion of an attack at some point of leverage such as the base of the tricep, is rendered useless in UFC because it's traditionally followed up with an elbow which is illegal in UFC because an elbow can seriously injure or kill somebody. It's a staple of close-range fighting across a number of styles. Kicks to the groin being illegal renders many leg parries in Kung Fu useless, because the intent is to parry the incoming leg with your leg and counterattack the exposed groin.

As far as sparring, we've actually lost a lot of students because of how we spar. Usually one less person will leave than came in that night.

Mine's very different from that one. MKF's stance is light on the feet. This video shows how its done. It's a bit difficult for me to reference in the mirror since I'm much bulkier than the guy in the video, but the stance overall feels very natural and free moving. What's nice about it is that it's a lot easier to walk and transition to other stances like crouching, that ladies stance (based off your description of it)

I've always loved how Monkey looks! It's reminiscent of what I know as cat stance, which is essentially similar in purpose I can imagine: keep all of the weight on your hind leg so that your front leg remains uncommitted and ready.

 

[Mind Trick]

That makes a lot of sense. I can see some use for parry techniques, but when I watch these techniques demonstrated I always feel like they are wide open if they make a wrong judgement/get baited. Throw in the fact that like you said some of the most lethal techniques are forbidden (downward elbow to the spine comes to mind) and it's just not worth it. I have definitely seen Silva KO an opponent with an elbow though (just the downward version is forbidden in UFC I think), but I'm not too familiar with Wing Chun techniques to know if there is a lot of use for reverse elbows and elbow strikes.

Watching that monkey stance video made me wonder how that stance deals with teeps and low kicks, it seems pretty easy to get off balance but I could be very wrong. I'm also not sure I get how a leg parry would look.

 

[Kal]

That's probably because of a lack of experience.

I ask for a source and you reply that I lack experience in Chinese martial arts, so that's why I'm not aware of some sort of philosophical commonality among every Chinese martial art?

Each style of Kung Fu has a very distinct unifying quality in their movements. Wing Chun and Mantis have very similar movements, despite being southern and northern styles respectively. The only difference is that each has a small subset of principles that distinguish them, such as the 12 principles of Mantis--plucking, slapping, hooking, etc. And by similar, I don't mean vestigial--I mean exact movements. All styles branch from Shaolin and one can tell.

I don't know of any evidence that all forms of Kung Fu are derived from "Shaolin." As far as I know, only a few forms of Chinese martial arts are actually related to Shaolin.

As for Bruce Lee, I think we can all agree that he was a Kung Fu expert, yes?

Absolutely not. Bruce Lee was a good actor and a decent philosopher, but I would not call him an expert. The attitude of Bruce Lee being some sort of master was due to his popularizing martial arts in the west, but in reality the guy has virtually no fight-record.

That being said, he didn't see the need to make the distinction between Wing Chun and Kung Fu in his interview--that was the point being made.

So because Bruce Lee did not make the distinction between Wing Chun and all Chinese martial arts, they all share this "central philosophy?"

What qualifies you to make this statement?

Would you like me to clarify something? Or are you just asking for a qualification so that, if I don't present it (or if I present the wrong one), my opinion is invalidated?

It may justify the bad to those that aren't experienced, but does the principle itself err? There're times and places for kicks, strikes, locks, blocks and grapples. Not everything has a likely application, but that's the artistic aspect of martial arts: knowing when and when not to use what you know and being intelligent about the application of that knowledge.

That's kind of exactly the point I made: it's not all that practical, but that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with learning it. And sure, situations exist where these things are useful, but those situations are just not all that likely to occur.

You're speaking as if you're the leading expert on Martial Arts, which you're demonstrating quite to the contrary.

You dropped an appeal to authority to Bruce Lee. Let's avoid character attacks.

And since when do martial arts have rules? They don't.

All forms of sparring have rules, and those necessarily become part of a martial arts. And all martial arts have certain stylistic standards that are equivalent to rules. All martial arts have some sort of philosophy in that regard, and the parallels between any martial art and boxing are pretty clear.

Boxing isn't designed to help people survive; it's designed for sport.

Does the design the really matter? If it turned out that TKD was only designed to be used at the Olympics, would it suddenly stop being a martial art?

Also, who said that Boxing is the best striking art?

About two decades of UFC say so. Though, judging from your newest posts, I don't think this would be a convincing argument to you.

Anyway, I'm not trying to be condescending, so I'm sorry if I came off that way.

Also, regarding the reasons there aren't a lot of Kung Fu fighters in UFC, I would personally say it's due to the effectiveness of these arts. While I certainly agree that some techniques that are forbidden in UFC might in theory preclude an effective martial art from competing, I would still have to note that actually drilling these dangerous techniques to the point of mastery seems impossible. For that reason, I don't put much credence in the notion that UFC's rules prevent otherwise effective fighters from competing.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

Bruce Lee has no fighting history? Excuse me, but I believe that to be very far from the truth. I recommend looking him up, Kal. Also, I own some of his books, and almost none of it is philosophy. They are filled with very in-depth descriptions of how to do martial arts.

The man was an expert.

 

[Kal]

Please provide me a reference regarding his fighting history. He had some good ideas as far as not "sticking to only one style" and emphasizing physical fitness over spiritual nonsense, but he wasn't the legendary fighter people make him out to be.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

He was good enough that the government made 3 clones in order to take out a wanted mad scientist that was planning to take over the world with men made out of metal.

 

[Vermanubis]

I ask for a source and you reply that I lack experience in Chinese martial arts, so that's why I'm not aware of some sort of philosophical commonality among every Chinese martial art?

You didn't ask for a source that a I saw. Kung Fu is neither formalized nor officiated, so it doesn't have a a succinct list of "rules," so much as an almost taxonomical hierarchy of familial similarities.

I don't know of any evidence that all forms of Kung Fu are derived from "Shaolin." As far as I know, only a few forms of Chinese martial arts are actually related to Shaolin.

Unfortunately, with the cultural revolution and the dissolution of the Shaolin temple, not all extant styles can be definitely traced to Shaolin. But, using a little retroductive reasoning, Shaolin predated The Spring and Autumn Annals by several decades and Shaolin Kung Fu was documented as among the first, if not <the> first actuated style of Kung Fu from mid-700 BC. So yes, it's entirely possible and plausible that all extant styles branched out from Shaolin.

Absolutely not. Bruce Lee was a good actor and a decent philosopher, but I would not call him an expert. The attitude of Bruce Lee being some sort of master was due to his popularizing martial arts in the west, but in reality the guy has virtually no fight-record.

Again, what qualifies you to make this statement? He spent most of his life around Kung Fu and martial arts, so even if he weren't a great fighter, I think it'd be slightly ham-fisted to say he wasn't at least enough of an expert to know the distinction between Kung Fu styles and not see pedantry as necessary.

So because Bruce Lee did not make the distinction between Wing Chun and all Chinese martial arts, they all share this "central philosophy?"

I'm not saying that, however, if you're going to question his competence, then I'll defer to the Kuomintang, who produced an encyclopedic collection of all known Chinese Martial Arts under the blanket of "Wushu," which is, in the Western world, the equivalent of Kung Fu with minor connotative distinctions. This is to demonstrate that there's no need for pedantry when referencing Kung Fu, as all styles are similar enough that they can be visibly identified as having the same fundaments.

Would you like me to clarify something? Or are you just asking for a qualification so that, if I don't present it (or if I present the wrong one), my opinion is invalidated?

The latter. Unfortunately for you, rhetoric won't subtract from the fact that a lack of practical experience and certifiable credentials makes you incapable of making a fully-competent judgment. Not to mention, you aren't making a presentation based on opinions, rather assertions as fact, e.g., boxing <is> the best striking art.

That's kind of exactly the point I made: it's not all that practical, but that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with learning it. And sure, situations exist where these things are useful, but those situations are just not all that likely to occur.

Yet again, what qualifications do you have to make this statement? How could you have knowledge of what's practical and what's not--who gets injured and who doesn't--if you have never had experience? I'm just playing devil's advocate here, because you're making a habit of asserting things as fact when you admittedly have no experience or possible way of knowing what works in a real situation and what doesn't.

Having an opinion is just fine, but I find it to be in better taste to not present them as fact, much less if the individual isn't experienced.

You dropped an appeal to authority to Bruce Lee. Let's avoid character attacks.

How was me calling your alleged expertise into question a character attack? Not to mention, invoking a foul on an appeal to authority is really only valid when the party in question is stating it to lend credence to a proposition. I was using it as a <hopefully> popular reference point which seemed popularly agreeable so that we could proceed based on the premise of his credentials.

All forms of sparring have rules, and those necessarily become part of a martial arts. And all martial arts have certain stylistic standards that are equivalent to rules. All martial arts have some sort of philosophy in that regard, and the parallels between any martial art and boxing are pretty clear.

Glad you clarified. I thought you meant rules as in fouls.

Does the design the really matter? If it turned out that TKD was only designed to be used at the Olympics, would it suddenly stop being a martial art?

About two decades of UFC say so. Though, judging from your newest posts, I don't think this would be a convincing argument to you.

I think that the creation for the purpose of competition would epiphenomenally effect the application of the style. My point in that particular section of my post wasn't to discredit the alleged artistic nature of it, rather, to deny that it's the best striking art. Two decades of UFC is nice, but again, UFC is a sport with a mile-long list of rules that allows things such as boxing and grappling to excel to a point of centralization. Make no mistake, we're discussing boxing here; not simply using punches. Boxing doesn't allow any hits below the belt, any backhands, open-hand strikes or a variety of other things.

In addition, wouldn't an appeal to the UFC be the very same nature of fallacy you accused me of recently? Couldn't I know scoff at you the same you scoffed at me for referencing Bruce Lee? Kal, you gotta get with the program, dood. It's worth noting also that your response to Holder:

Please provide me a reference regarding his fighting history. He had some good ideas as far as not "sticking to only one style" and emphasizing physical fitness over spiritual nonsense, but he wasn't the legendary fighter people make him out to be.

Is seeking to invalidate his opinion based on a lack of presentable credentials on Bruce Lee's part. You're asking for evidence from everyone else, then applying somewhat hackneyed rhetoric in defense of your own opinions when asked similar questions.

Anyway, I'm not trying to be condescending, so I'm sorry if I came off that way.

Also, regarding the reasons there aren't a lot of Kung Fu fighters in UFC, I would personally say it's due to the effectiveness of these arts. While I certainly agree that some techniques that are forbidden in UFC might in theory preclude an effective martial art from competing, I would still have to note that actually drilling these dangerous techniques to the point of mastery seems impossible. For that reason, I don't put much credence in the notion that UFC's rules prevent otherwise effective fighters from competing.

Don't sweat it.

Anyway, there're TKD fighters and Karate fighters in UFC, and they fall under the same umbrella of "impractical" or "inefficacious" styles. So I doubt very gravely that alleged ineffectiveness is a large part, or even a small one, of why Kung Fu has lacked presence in competitive fighting. Also, these "impossible" techniques you speak of are actually really, really simple. I can attest to the fact that, at least the way I've been taught, our attacks and counterattacks are beautifully simple and direct. Compare to my experience in TKD, where everything was convoluted and required a laborious sequence of set-ups.

 

[Kal]

You didn't ask for a source that a I saw. Kung Fu is neither formalized nor officiated, so it doesn't have a a succinct list of "rules," so much as an almost taxonomical hierarchy of familial similarities.

The original post:

I'd ask for a source I guess, but it just seems like a pretty silly statement to make. There are hundreds of different Chinese martial arts.

Which I suppose you could interpret as not explicitly asking for a source, but obviously suggesting that the statement you made is far fetched enough to warrant one.

Unfortunately, with the cultural revolution and the dissolution of the Shaolin temple, not all extant styles can be definitely traced to Shaolin. But, using a little retroductive reasoning, Shaolin predated The Spring and Autumn Annals by several decades and Shaolin Kung Fu was documented as among the first, if not <the> first actuated style of Kung Fu from mid-700 BC. So yes, it's entirely possible and plausible that all extant styles branched out from Shaolin.

I don't see how that follows, and while it's certainly possible and plausible, I think you'd need more evidence than simply "Shaolin is the first school."

Again, what qualifies you to make this statement? He spent most of his life around Kung Fu and martial arts, so even if he weren't a great fighter, I think it'd be slightly ham-fisted to say he wasn't at least enough of an expert to know the distinction between Kung Fu styles and not see pedantry as necessary.

I often interchange the terms BJJ and Martial Arts when I'm speaking, but I don't think it's pedantic to distinguish between the two. And the same applies to the distinction between Wing Chun and Kung Fu. Regardless of whether Bruce Lee was an expert, I doubt his interchanging the terms Wing Chun with Kung Fu was to imply that all Chinese martial arts are interchangeable.

I'm not saying that, however, if you're going to question his competence, then I'll defer to the Kuomintang, who produced an encyclopedic collection of all known Chinese Martial Arts under the blanket of "Wushu," which is, in the Western world, the equivalent of Kung Fu with minor connotative distinctions. This is to demonstrate that there's no need for pedantry when referencing Kung Fu, as all styles are similar enough that they can be visibly identified as having the same fundaments.

I don't see how listing all of the Chinese martial arts under the blanket of "Wushu" any more implies that they all have the same fundamentals than listing both Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu and Muay Thai under the blanket of "Martial Arts" suggests that they have the same fundamentals. Given that there are both Chinese grappling arts and Chinese striking arts, this just seems a peculiar sentiment to me.

The latter. Unfortunately for you, rhetoric won't subtract from the fact that a lack of practical experience and certifiable credentials makes you incapable of making a fully-competent judgment. Not to mention, you aren't making a presentation based on opinions, rather assertions as fact, e.g., boxing <is> the best striking art.

You're just addressing my credentials instead of the actual points I've made. If you feel something I've said is wrong, we can just discuss it.

Yet again, what qualifications do you have to make this statement? How could you have knowledge of what's practical and what's not--who gets injured and who doesn't--if you have never had experience? I'm just playing devil's advocate here, because you're making a habit of asserting things as fact when you admittedly have no experience or possible way of knowing what works in a real situation and what doesn't.

A study done in 2003 by George Washington University found that the chances of being injured in the study of martial arts is close to 100%, estimating that, on average, one would sustain an injury ever 48 practice hours (which they evaluated as even more frequent than Rugby). Comparatively, you have about a .5% chance of being injured in a violent crime every year in America.

If you want to defend yourself, getting a 9mm or pepper spray is a better way to go; people can aim and shoot a firearm in under a second. No form of hand-to-hand combat will defend against that. It's also plainly more cost effective to just use a firearm (or surrender when your life isn't in danger). Even given conservative estimates, most martial arts schools will cost you at least $500 a year. With all this in mind, I don't see how anyone can say, in good conscience, that martial arts are practical.

I think that the creation for the purpose of competition would epiphenomenally effect the application of the style. My point in that particular section of my post wasn't to discredit the alleged artistic nature of it, rather, to deny that it's the best striking art. Two decades of UFC is nice, but again, UFC is a sport with a mile-long list of rules that allows things such as boxing and grappling to excel to a point of centralization. Make no mistake, we're discussing boxing here; not simply using punches. Boxing doesn't allow any hits below the belt, any backhands, open-hand strikes or a variety of other things.

As I said earlier, I don't think these rules really restrict what's useful in combat to the degree you're suggesting. You can't effectively use in combat what you have not drilled, and most of the things UFC bans are quite difficult to drill, even in a sort of "light-contact" context. It also assumes that these things are significantly more common in "real fights."

Also, one should keep in mind that the first few UFCs had almost no rules. In fact, you were only forbidden from biting and eye gouging, though headbutting and fish-hooking were discouraged. This might not influence your opinion, since I don't think there have been many Kung Fu practitioners who have ever competed in UFC. I know Delucia billed himself as a Kung Fu fighter in UFC 2 and he lost to Gracie by arm bar.

In addition, wouldn't an appeal to the UFC be the very same nature of fallacy you accused me of recently? Couldn't I know scoff at you the same you scoffed at me for referencing Bruce Lee?

I am not referencing some person's authority. I am referencing data (the results of UFC) which suggest that people with a boxing background perform better than people with virtually any other striking background (the obvious exception being Muay Thai). You can, of course, disagree with the conclusion based on these data, but it's silly to compare this to an appeal to authority, or to say that the "nature of fallacy" is the same.

Is seeking to invalidate his opinion based on a lack of presentable credentials on Bruce Lee's part.

No, I'm saying I disagree with his opinion and asking for a source. I don't care if he's a Chinese historian or a hobo, because his credentials have nothing to do with it.

You're asking for evidence from everyone else, then applying somewhat hackneyed rhetoric in defense of your own opinions when asked similar questions.

Most of what we have discussed are matters of opinion, and I wouldn't expect any source-siting for that. If you think, for example, that boxing is not a martial art because it lacks a philosophy or something, I would not ask for a source. But when you make statements that are overtly factual (or at least lean into being factual, like the claim that Bruce Lee is a Kung Fu expert), and I disagree with the statement, I ask for a source. I didn't say anything about Holder's qualifications, because they aren't relevant here.

Anyway, there're TKD fighters and Karate fighters in UFC, and they fall under the same umbrella of "impractical" or "inefficacious" styles. So I doubt very gravely that alleged ineffectiveness is a large part, or even a small one, of why Kung Fu has lacked presence in competitive fighting.

This is a good point. As I said earlier, Delucia billed himself as a Kung Fu fighter in UFC2 and lost to Gracie, but I don't know of any other Kung Fu practitioners who have competed in UFC.

Also, these "impossible" techniques you speak of are actually really, really simple. I can attest to the fact that, at least the way I've been taught, our attacks and counterattacks are beautifully simple and direct. Compare to my experience in TKD, where everything was convoluted and required a laborious sequence of set-ups.

I didn't say that the techniques were impossible. I said that drilling techniques that risk causing serious long-term damage is impossible.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

The only documented fights he has been in can be found via yahoo, which took probably less time than it took you to reply asking for me to supply sources. Of course, what can be proven isn't much, I was just disagreeing with the statement that he has virtually no fighting experience.

 

[Kal]

Well, the only fight I am actually aware of that is credible is the one private fight with Wong Jack Man, and pretty much everyone involved has a different account of what happened. It's not that I am too lazy to find a source; it's that I literally cannot find any credible sources regarding Bruce Lee's fight history. Also, Ask Yahoo is like the least credible source ever. >_>

Anyway, I have a tendency to jump the gun when dispelling the Bruce Lee legend. The ridiculous exaggeration that borders on mysticism regarding his expertise sometimes causes me to get ahead of myself. I still try to give the guy credit where it's due. For example, The Big Boss (also called Fists of Fury) was a fun movie. Especially that whole incesty thing with Bruce Lee and his cousin.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

Well the person answering the question on yahoo provided outside sources for each claim. Yahoo really just made it convenient to find all in one place. At any rate, I understand it isn't much to begin with, in fact I anticipated more instances could be found. Anyways, people respect him so much because of the amount of dedication to fitness he had and the extensive amount of knowledge he gathered. I'm no huge Bruce Lee fan or someone who knows much about him, but I have read that the man pretty much always kept busy either exercising, even in leisure, or keeping his mind occupied with reading or writing about martial arts.